No more double standards on air pollution
FEBRUARY 26, 2026
In the TUC Year of Climate Action, Graham Petersen explains why it’s now time to act.
As each year passes, the need to address the risks caused by climate breakdown becomes more urgent. In the case of air pollution, the existing cocktail of toxic substances, is now made worse by the impacts of climate risks like extreme heat.
The World Health Organisation (WHO) has identified air pollution as the greatest environmental risk to health in the UK. Despite this, the standards to protect workers from these dangers are totally inadequate. 2026 is the TUC Year of Climate Action. We need a campaign that highlights the dangerous levels of pollutants in many workplaces, the poor occupational exposure limits, and the lack of enforcement of even these inadequate standards.
One opportunity to voice these concerns is via the Environmental Audit Committee Inquiry on “Air Pollution in England”. The Trade Union Clean Air Network (TUCAN) has published a submission to the Inquiry (closing date March 3rd 2026), TUCAN Campaigns – Greener Jobs Alliance which explains these double standards.
In summary our main points are:
- Public and Occupational Health – The focus of air pollution research and policy development has been on public health, particularly vulnerable groups like children. While this is vital, it has been done at the expense of largely ignoring the impact on workers. Workers are a particularly vulnerable group, but you would not think so if you delve through local, regional and national climate resilience and air pollution policies. This is even though many workers are at greater risk – exposed to more dangerous substances, higher pollution levels, and for longer periods of time. Worker protection is barely mentioned, if at all. When it is, the standards are not fit for purpose. The HSE Workplace Exposure Limits set limits for Particulate Matter (PM2.5) that are hopelessly out of date. How is it that a worker can be exposed to over 250 times the levels of PM2.5 – respirable dust -compared to a member of the public in an outdoor setting? When compared to the WHO 5 µg/m³ standard the difference is even more stark – the HSE standard is 800 times more than the WHO one.
- Outdoor and Indoor Air – There has been much less research and policy development on indoor air. This is not just the view of TUCAN: it is borne out by the Chief Medical Officer’s Report: “While there has been extensive consideration of, and effective plans for, many aspects of outdoor air pollution, the air we breathe indoors has not been considered as widely. As outdoor pollution has decreased, and is set to decrease further, the relative importance of indoor air pollution increases.”Given that people can spend up to 90% of their time indoors, this takes on even more importance. In the case of workers, this can often mean high exposures in poorly ventilated workplaces.
- Individual and Corporate Responsibilities – The Government is failing to place sufficient duties on businesses. Most air pollution is directly or indirectly linked to economic activity. A study of the latest Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) statistics shows that industrial and commercial direct emissions from industry / energy sectors account for significant levels of the main pollutants – Particulate Matter (PM 2.5 and 10), Ammonia, Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), and Sulphur Dioxide (SO2). Once you include the indirect emissions from the other sectors, for example, road transport and people travelling to work, it is considerably higher. Over two-thirds of the six air pollutants identified in the Defra stats are directly or indirectly work-related. Yet the emphasis in air pollution policy continues to be on individual behaviour with limited references to new business obligations.
Let’s have some air pollution action
Unions and progressive political parties need to forge a campaign that includes:
- Implementation of the WHO Air Quality Guidelines by 2030
- Support for the Clean Air (Human Rights) Bill
- Amendments to health and safety legislation to place a duty on employers to conduct air pollution and climate risk assessments. These assessments to be conducted in conjunction with workers and recognised trade unions
- Amendments to occupational exposure standards to bring them in line with outdoor public health standards
- Provision of the necessary funding and powers for the statutory bodies to monitor and enforce improved air pollution standards.
TUCAN works with the Healthy Air Coalition to make the case for change. We also work with local and regional authorities to support initiatives. For example, in London we are working with the Greater London Authority to include air pollution risk assessments in the Mayor’s Good Work Standard for employers. We provide resources for unions to support union engagement. Please get in touch using the form on the web site if you want further information.
Graham Petersen is a founding member of the Trade Union Clean Air Network (TUCAN). It was set up in 2019 and 15 national trade unions, as well as other organisations, have endorsed its Clean Air Charter. He has written a range of climate change publications for the TUC and for his own trade union, the University and College Union, where he was previously their Environment Co-ordinator. He has also represented Education International, the global union federation of over 30 million workers in the education sector, at UN climate and air quality events.
Left Foot Forward
“Environmental change doesn’t put us all in the same boat. It just worsens the storm you’re in.”
Charities have joined forces to spotlight the deepening connection between climate change, poverty and hunger, warning that environmental action must go hand in hand with social justice.
Food bank charity Trussell has partnered with Friends of the Earth to highlight that a greener future is not only vital for the planet but can also play a decisive role in reducing poverty and the need for food banks. Far from being separate crises, climate breakdown and economic hardship are increasingly intertwined, and require shared solutions.
To better understand this link, Trussell commissioned a report drawing on its own research, national data and the testimonies of people with lived experience of poverty who rely on food banks. The ‘Environmental change, hunger and hardship in the UK’ report examines how environmental challenges are affecting people facing hunger and financial insecurity, and argues that green policies must prioritise those most at risk.
One key finding is that climate change is already driving up the cost of essentials. Rising food prices and soaring energy bills are placing additional strain on households that were already struggling. Environmental shocks, from extreme heat to severe storms and flooding, bring sudden, unexpected costs that low-income families are least able to recover from.
The review concludes that insecure work, substandard housing and gaps in the social security system leave people especially vulnerable to climate-related impacts. For instance, flooding can cause damage to homes, yet those on the lowest incomes are less likely to be able to afford adequate insurance. As climate change increases the frequency and severity of such events, the financial risks multiply, particularly for those already relying on food banks.
The report also finds that the most vulnerable groups, including disabled people, carers and those experiencing mental health challenges, face compounded difficulties as environmental pressures intensify.
People living in poverty who contributed to the study want action that protects the environment and reduces poverty. They call for their voices to be heard in decision-making, for the fair distribution of costs and benefits, and for energy cost support.
In the report’s conclusion, Trussell states: “The move to a greener economy can help end the need for food banks but only if it’s fair. Policymakers must ensure that environmental action tackles poverty, not deepens it.”
Writing about the report in the Big Issue, Helen Barnard of Trussell and Mike Childs of Friends of the Earth note how climate impacts are already being felt. One interviewee described how flooding ruined a child’s bed. Unable to afford a replacement, the family resorted to piling up soft clothes to create somewhere to sleep.
As they write: “Environmental change doesn’t put us all in the same boat. It just worsens the storm you’re in.”
The charities are urging policymakers to make homes more resilient to extreme weather, reducing the damage caused by flooding, damp and heatwaves. They argue that investment in renewable energy, such as solar panels, can cut energy bills, while improving access to green spaces can cool urban areas, boost mental health and strengthen communities.
They call on decision-makers to connect the dots between climate change and poverty, and to commit to a fair transition to a greener economy. That means creating secure green jobs, improving public transport, expanding affordable renewable energy, upgrading housing to be energy efficient, and protecting and enhancing green spaces.
Ending the need for food banks and tackling the climate crisis are often framed as separate challenges. But as these charities argue:
“Ending the need for food banks and tackling the climate crisis are challenges that can have shared solutions. It can be a win-win.”
No comments:
Post a Comment