The Union frequently comments on events or receives news of general interest and these are documented on this page. |
posted 15 Feb 2012 09:09 by Gerry Kangalee
As the countdown to strike action against Petrotrin by the Oilfields Workers’ Trade Union (OWTU) continues, troops of the Trinidad and Tobago Defence Force have set up camp at the Augustus Long Hospital in state-owned Petrotrin’s Pointe-A-Pierre refinery.
Scores of troops offloaded food and other supplies on Wednesday 15th February and occupied change rooms and other rooms at the hospital compound.
The hospital is close to the bond area which those in the know say will be placed under military control so that gas and diesel distribution will be handled by the military.
The OWTU served strike notice on Petrotrin on the morning of February 14th. According to the collective agreement the notice is 96 hours. This suggests that the strike should begin on Saturday 18th 2012.
Hundreds of workers gathered at the Pointe-A Pierre refinery and accompanied the OWTU executive as they served the notice on the company.
The meeting carded by the Minister of Labour with both parties at 6:00 pm on February 14th at the Ministry of Labour in San Fernando took place despite the strike notice being served.
Reports suggest that nothing of significance was achieved at the meeting and parties are expected to meet with the Minister on Thursday 16th February to continue discussions. |
posted 14 Feb 2012 17:37 by Gerry Kangalee
[
updated 14 Feb 2012 17:47
]
Some of the older comrades (excuse me, who you calling Uncle?) would remember an undergarment called a half slip worn by women. We men were never told why it was so called, but if it showed below the hemline of the skirt, intentionally or otherwise, it was considered a sign of immodesty, and any authentic gentleman, like me, would simply say "Excuse me ma'am your slip is showing". Immediate adjustments, followed by a little blush would follow.
Now I know in this age of full frontals by Destra, Janet Jackson, Megan and the pole dancers from "de greens” outside Panorama people might steups and say I am making this up, but it was socially acceptable then to wear full clothing.
All this comes back to me as I read and heard of the latest incident at Newsday's offices. Poor Newsday, where have you been? Did you not hear of the 95.5 reporter who was taken from his house during the State of Emergency and detained for a traffic ticket? Or the reporter/courier from the Express who in spite of having a valid curfew pass was threatened to "move nah!” What about the Ian Alleyne episode at another media house?
Oh you thought that since your newspaper is generally supportive of the Partnerslip that Mr. Bhagoo has diplomatic immunity? Was that the line you took when the young reporter from Central, Rhondor Dowlat, reported on a traffic matter involving some police officers and was cautioned by Newsday management. What happened when she stood her ground? Yuh bus’ she throat! Oh, freedom of the press does not apply to her? Sorry, what was I thinking? I must be slipping too.
So all arms of the Partnerslip are busy disassociating themselves from the raid and calling for an explanation from Inspector Koon Koon! What an eminently wise man! Can you imagine with a name like that what would have happened if this had occurred around November and the calypsonians had some time? This raid was timed to perfection. Nobody goes to Skinner Park (except Chalkdust) with brand new tunes and expects to shine.
Again I may be having one of those back in time half slip/can can/ crinoline moments. (Oh crinolines and can cans pre-dated half slips). But I seem to recall that police men reported to the Commissioner who in turn reported to the Police Service Commission. Now every erstwhile political leader wants an explanation from the Commissioner.
Poor man He can't even laugh "gib gib" like the old folk used to say. Oh let me "slip" this one in…under? Aren’t complaints supposed to go to Gillian Lucky of the Police Complaints Authority? Is Gillian facing constructive dismissal?
Now this whole thing is supposed to have started when two old people fell out. A third who was supposed to referee/arbitrate found of that one of the sponsors of the game had issued a statement without his prior knowledge. Not that it seems to have bothered him too much. After all they declared a state of emergency and told him afterwards. Go easy on the comrade: he must be accustomed to these things. Remember Patrick would not fix his roof!
Anyway my question is: don't these people have grandchildren to drop to school and help with their home lessons? What about home gardening? Or even gossiping? Write some right wing memoirs!
No yuh fighting over a work that has no meaning, an office that slips more than the Partnerslip and at the end of the day most of the population "cheups" about.
So this is the political territory the present administration is riding slipshod over. Even as we write a strike possibly awaits them in the oil sector. Comrade General Secretary of the OWTU keeps slipping in and out of labour. What happens if the strike is indeed called? Will he (having signed the strike notice) continue to operate in the Senate representing the state against whom the strike was called, as the sole stakeholder?
Is this going to be for Errol and Rudy and the other a case of "dey too bright"?
The answers keep slipping me! |
posted 6 Feb 2012 09:36 by Gerry Kangalee
In a previous article “Who fooling who” I debunked the image that the leadership of the MSJ (Movement for Social Justice) is trying to put over to the public, and that is, to create the belief that their group is the legitimate vehicle for working peoples’ hopes and aspirations.
In fact, I could well imagine their response. It would go along these lines. ‘Yes, we were formed in early 2010 to build a mass based party in time to effect the politics of the expected 2012 general election. We did not cater for Manning’s wildness in calling an election two years before time. So we joined the opposition, hammered out an agenda and entered the election to get rid of a corrupt government.”
That being history, they would conclude, all working people are free to join our ‘vanguard party’ for salvation.
Meanwhile, from my perspective, what I am seeing is spin, subterfuge and sinecures for the chosen few. I say few and not two, because the usual triumvirate of McLeod, Abdulah and Belgrave (Teddy) is still operating; with the last mentioned using COSSABOS (Conferences of Shop Stewards and Branch Officers) not as mechanisms to develop tactics to deal with serious outbreaks of class struggle but as lectures/seminars to recruit MSJ members
But that is their style. Lyrics, media posturing, top-down speechifying from self-ordained priests of the working class. Let’s look at this phenomenon from a historical vantage point.
The unions behind the MSJ evolved from a breakaway of the labour federation (NATUC) over some petty personality clash for leadership and they called themselves FITUN. What makes the situation a quagmire is that many of the leaders of the NATUC during this period have proven to be hopeless bureaucrats posing as union leaders but in reality see themselves as businessmen feathering their own nests.
I must admit this is a broad brush view but perception shapes reality. And the perception is that the vast majority of these leaders on both sides of the divide are like insurance agents. Workers must pay dues and eventually they will get an increase dictated by the state which will continue to pauperise them further.
At the same time a Minister of Labour who evolved from the bowels of the class is unable or unwilling after two years to effect an agenda hammered out at the historic COSSABO of April 18th 2010.
Then a five per cent cap is instituted by government on all collective negotiations and the union leaders can only unveil hollow threats to change the tide of affairs. The proposed month of ‘heat’ ended with a walk-about in Sangre Grande. What is the point I am trying to make?
It is that working people must not and cannot believe that there is any Moses or czar who can make you become masters of your destiny. It takes sacrifice, unity and a well thought out vision amongst ourselves that must be carried out, oft-times, by successive generations to become a reality.
Since our union leaders will not open these avenues for theory and practice, but instead bastardise the COSSABOS, victory cannot be secured. In a subsequent article I will touch on what is meant by victory.
My parting summary therefore, is to quote Shakespeare’s Mercutio in Romeo and Juliet, “A plague on both your houses” – the PP government which includes the MSJ and the bankrupt PNM. |
posted 31 Jan 2012 13:23 by Gerry Kangalee
[
updated 31 Jan 2012 13:44
]
Well-known talk show host and public motivational speaker David Muhammad has had his programs on Power 102.1FM suspended until further notice due to what may appear to be outside political influences.
On Friday, January 27th Mr. Muhammad was phoned by the program manager at the station and told that he is suspended pending an investigation into incitement on the air due to the intervention of government interests. This suspension was revoked by the CEO the next day (Saturday 28th) after he confirmed that neither he; the head of the station nor the directors of the radio station knew anything about the matter. Muhammad was back on the radio as normal on Sunday 29th and Monday 30th. The matter of freedom of speech in the media was discussed generically in this period on I95.5FM as well as on Mr. Muhammad's program 'The Black Agenda'.
On Tuesday 31st Mr. Muhammad was told by the CEO that he is now in fact suspended until further notice. The reason given for this suspension was Muhammad's reaction to the first suspension which was actually fabricated, apparently by another manager within the station who has not been suspended.
Mr. Muhammad has expressed that he is more curious now than ever before that there may be ulterior motives influenced by political entities behind this entire process, and to date no explanation has been given as to how the program manager was misled into being given a false instruction as consequential as it was.
The Black Agenda program commentaries shall continue as normal online and be posted on www.youtube.com/blackagendaproject. He is expected to either resume duty soon on the same station or possibly on another radio station by Monday, February 27th, 2012.
Muhammad has been conducting the Black Agenda program since 2002 and has dominated the top spot in the most recent MFO Survey at #1 with a night time audience share of 14%. (Roxanne Muhammad)
|
posted 29 Jan 2012 18:09 by Gerry Kangalee
Recently it was made public that McLeod demitted office to Abdulah but it does not change the price of cocoa. Strange though, it was not mentioned who will occupy Abdulah’s position now that he is elevated to political leader of the MSJ.
Thus a question arises for the leaders of the MSJ. How come certain activists, veterans, stalwarts, solid soldiers in the labour movement are not seen within your party ranks? People who are still alive, willing to serve and are serving their brethren; proven lieutenants in the proletarian army. I will list a number of names from the top of my head, of people who served during the decades of the 60s to the 90s.
With no intent to classify based on age, or seniority in the ranks, I hope my name calling will not offend those mentioned or those left out. In the North there were Jimmy Singh, Cecil Paul, Fano Jimenez, Alva Allen, Kathy Ann Jones, Christopher Abraham, Gentle Gibson, Wesley Felix, Glen Ramjag, Keith Look Loy.
In Central there were: Ramdeo Boodram, Sylvan Wilson, Rae Samuel etc. In the South there were individuals such as Gerry Kangalee, Brendan Moore, Yvonne Massey and Patrick Williams. In the East Wayne Stephens, Man Man Edward, etc.
These individuals were encapsulated by pockets or groups throughout the East/West corridor, in Guayaguayare, Point Fortin, La Brea, San Fernando, Point Lisas, and industrial committees in Pointe a Pierre, Fed Chem, now called Yara, Bermudez, Holiday Foods, TTEC; community groups such as Block Up. Certainly a few hundred tried and tested men and women activists from various sectors of the society with their own newspaper and internal structure.
Over that 30 year period there was CPTU (Council of Progressive Trade Unions) a total national shutdown, SOPO and of course the pervasive influence of George Weekes, Lennox Pierre and a couple others.
It was the period when McLeod as President of the OWTU was challenged in a ‘national’ election and beaten not only at his workplace i.e. rejected by the union staff at Paramount Building – the union’s headquarters, but at Point a Pierre, his former workplace and even throughout Trinidad. Just to complete the anecdote he was declared the winner based on the votes from Tobago where it was alleged he won by some 400 votes to his opponent’s single digit number.
Yes, McLeod and Abdulah were around so they became public figures based on their status in their union but after going through CLS then MOTION and now to morph into MSJ it is pure, unadulterated opportunism for their personal benefit and those given a bligh on various state boards.
But you know something. How would people like Joseph Remy and Vincent Cabrera answer this question? Well let me give my take on the original question: How come certain activists, veterans, stalwarts, solid soldiers in the labour movement are not seen within your party ranks?
In my research and interviews the common denominator is that they were all clear that any group, party or movement has to be built from the bottom-up and not how you all did it. A few ambitious men met in the proverbial backroom, realized that there is a vehicle to jump on as a passenger via electoral politics to enter parliament, quickly formed a party and voila! Manning did the rest in May 2010. History awaits the outcome with pen in one hand and a dustbin in the other. |
posted 29 Jan 2012 12:42 by Gerry Kangalee
 Trinidad and Tobago is a place where mamaguy and promises go hand in hand. To this we must now add the use of smoke and mirrors, which when placed in the hands of an illusionist who is good at his trade can paint a very beautiful picture that everything is all right.
Most of the time the illusionist succeeds in fooling the audience into believing that what they are seeing is reality when in fact it is not. Well, what we have been witnessing in this country for more than forty years now is not reality. The truth is that the political economy of this country was balancing between left and right until it took a right turn following the economic collapse of the 1980s.
Since then successive governments have been carrying out neo-liberal economic policies: some to a greater or lesser extent than the one before. What is not understood by the population and some of the intellectuals on the UWI Campus is that the architects of Trinidad and Tobago's independence had a vision of this country as a capitalist enclave and this was to be achieved in phases.
The first phase was the granting of independence to the natives, with a Constitution which tied them to British norms and laws which impacted on every facet of everyday living. The foundation for the second phase existed in the reality that the economy of the country was controlled by the colonial masters, so that while you had political independence, you did not have economic independence.
This question of economic independence was the central issue facing the Haitian people from the day they ran the French out of Haiti. That has been the issue facing most former colonies.
The illusion continues. Sir Arthur Lewis the economist and Nobel Laureate, in an effort to get around this problem of the barriers to economic independence concluded that small island economies should invite foreign investment as a tool for economic development.
He failed to recognise that the pattern of trade to which these economies were tied placed them in a position where the former colonisers controlled the markets for their products and the leadership of these countries were not interested economic independence as they were in political independence. Dr. Eric Williams being of that ilk, took his advice, tried it and it failed.
The failure of the economic strategy of industrialization by invitation and the consequent 1970 uprising, against the background of the anti-imperialist movement, created opportunities for the country to chart a course of economic independence away from the capitalist model.
Dr. Eric Williams, - quite reluctantly - attempted to do so through the nationalization of certain foreign entities and through the intervention of the state in the economy, on the proviso that the state will hold the nationalized and state-created entities in trust until such time, when it was appropriate to dispose of them. That was a clear indication that the economic strategy of the government of the day was to build capitalism in Trinidad and Tobago.
The anti-colonial/anti-imperialist struggles which occupied the international community at the time and the Black Power uprising forced Dr. Williams to put the plan on hold for the time being. The disposal of entities under the control of the state then fell to the National Alliance for Reconstruction, which came into office on a wave of popular support in1987.
When the PNM won the elections in 1991 Prime Minister Patrick Manning, in making his victory speech, said to Mr. ANR Robinson -the outgoing Prime Minister- that he would continue his policies. And so he did!
A good example of the role of the PNM in this regard was when Mr. Kenneth Valley, who at the time, was a Minister in the Ministry of Finance, reported that the government planned for Trinidad to become a financial hub through the establishment of a stock market where companies local and foreign could invest in all kinds of financial products.
The United National Congress came into office and did their bit as well. But there were structural adjustment conditionalities which the country still has to satisfy. These are the ones which Winston Dookeran is now seeking to satisfy Hence the privatization list which he announced recently.
A major problem faced by small economies is the limited availability of local private financial resources in amounts sufficient for investment in mega-projects. In these circumstances state intervention and foreign direct investment in economic activity becomes critical and necessary.
In the case of foreign direct investment, it exposes the country to the harsh conditionality of neo-liberalism and the illusion that structural adjustment of the economy is the only option open to countries facing economic difficulties. The truth is that small economies like ours are tied hand and foot by trade agreements which even an oil and gas producing country is unable to get out of in times of economic trouble.
So the illusion that we are building a democracy is constantly fed into the minds of the population who believe it to be so; when in fact that type of democracy is largely responsible for the condition in which the society is in today.
We have to fight to build a society in which the state continues to carry out its responsibility to provide the public goods which it currently provides; where the broad masses of working people are not seen as a burden; where health care and education is on the top of the list of prioritized goods to be provided; where the local and foreign private sector recognizes the importance of the role of the state in all aspects of economic activity.
In other words we must begin to destroy the illusion. What we have to fight for in the current international political and economic climate is the creation of an economic model which represents a mixture of what is good on the left and right. Certainly not the type which Friedman wished for and Winston Dookeran would like to see.
For the time being this country must continue along a mixed economic path. What Mr. Dookeran knows but is afraid to admit is the fact that some of the staunchest advocates of capitalism are now willing to sit down and discuss and examine capitalist economics and question whether it is still viable. The truth is that former colonies have toyed with the illusion that capitalism offers the chance for economic development through individual initiative and drive.
As things turn out, throughout the history of the development of capitalist society, those individuals who were successful in accumulating wealth did so on the backs of those who toiled and whatever the toilers were able to get from them came through bitter struggle.
The sad truth is that small economies have not been treated with the dignity and respect they deserved. In the case of this country, whose energy resources are largely in the hands of the trans-national companies, the government could hardly demand that they pay their taxes on time. So much so that the Minister of Finance was forced to announce in his 2011-2012 budget speech that taxes outstanding was in the amount of 13 billion dollars.
We continue to live the illusion that we have democracy because we might succeed in removing a corrupt government every five years but when we achieve that we lapse back into complacency, a state of mind, which it would appear, that we might be recovering from albeit very slowly, because the illusionist is at work day and night.
The tools with which he is working include our oil and gas resources, the drug trade, and the weapon of mass communication which include the religious beliefs of our people. He is at work in every area of the society; even in the workers’ organizations where elements working for the system have succeeded in dividing the movement for years while pretending to be sympathetic to the cause of the workers.
They were always against unity in the movement but recently their strategy has changed. The question is being asked whether leopards can change their spots. We have to begin to understand these elements are also part of the tools of the trade of the illusionist. There is a view in political circles that as long as the basic needs of the electorate (the ordinary people - the working class) are satisfied most of the work of governance is achieved.
An example of this was demonstrated by the Prime Minister on January 24, 2012 in her address to the masses who turned up at the Rienzi Complex when she boasted of the things her government did in the few months that it has been in office. She spoke of new roads that were built, new facilities now available in the health sector, free travel for persons 60 years on PTSC buses and on the boat between Trinidad and Tobago. Obviously the people could have no quarrel with that. But there is a story to be told which is not told and this is where the illusionist is at work.
The government is bent on taking the country down a neo-liberal economic briar patch. In his contribution to the debate in the Senate on January 23, 2012, the Minister of Finance in explaining his government’s policy approach in the CLICO/HCU matter, as an aside, went on to explain his concept of the electorate (the people) as clients of the state.
He included the capitalist in that definition; meaning that there was a point in time when the state had to shoulder the responsibility to provide for the needs of the population; as in the case of the welfare state which provides social services and subsidises a number of benefits. He is of the view that it is now the individual's responsibility to provide for his/her needs. It must follow from that premise that the state’s responsibility to provide public goods will now be passed on to the local private sector and the trans-national corporations.
When you begin to connect the dots, it becomes clearer and clearer that the struggle of the trade unions has to be not only against the 5% cap but also against the privatization of valuable state assets and against the neo-liberal policies of the government. This is the challenge to which the trade union movement must rise. Is the movement capable of rising to the challenge? It can... if the current external and internal obstacles to its full development are removed. Those obstacles are all part and parcel of the tools of the illusionist. |
posted 19 Jan 2012 21:33 by Gerry Kangalee
Some of us may think that the incumbent administration is hapless, clueless and hopeless. I beg to differ. Such colossal blundering, quarterbacked by transparent distractions must take some level of planning.
Darren Sammy scores runs in spite of himself, especially when it makes no difference to the outcome of the game. So too with this present administration. But we will come back to that. The latest distraction over the awarding of silk is a case in point. At the end of the day what does it have to do with the average working class person who runs afoul of the law? It does not tilt the odds in our favour.
The old adage YOU ARE INNOCENT TIL YOUR LAWYER MONEY RUNS OUT still holds.
Are market forces operative here? More silk translates to lower lawyer fees? Does silk make you argue harder for your client? I guess it does if you are advocating at the Clico enquiry where you can call people bi-sexual and say sorry after.
At least the issue shows that in some spheres of existence there might be life after death. The modern generation saw Mr. Public Order Act, almost Prime Minister and O.N.R. leader put in a brief appearance.
Guess he wants the profession to remain "silky smooth". Is it that Karl does not want to sit next to Kamla? There were some rumours about de fella in the 70's you know. Nope, don’t ask. I can barely afford denim. The best I could hope for if I am charged is Subash and I don't know what he is wearing these days.
And he has publicly stated he would not allow any of the sister comrades to comfort me. No conjugation for me. My own lawyer! And to think, in the old days in San Fernando, the pre-Colombian days, so many of his ilk/silk would plead for these "ladies of the night", as they called them then. Now he says such visits may be seen as revival of the trade, according to the media. Well Subash the silk road has to start somewhere!
So where does that leave us? Having blundered on the State of Emergency, Anti-gang legislation, assassination plots and managing state assisted schools, they decide to go where for serious public debate? Into the realm of fashion !
And that class has the temerity to say workers have a Carnival mentality. If so, at least we do not play around in arenas such as the courts, where issues of rights and freedoms are adjudicated. In those scenarios working class people are all too often the biggest losers. Say it'' Ish-n't' so.
But workers have more immediate challenges at hand, don’t we? As soon as Arnold and Gypsy move off with the stage the battle will be re-joined. There is crying need for a new leadership in the labour movement. 2012 has proven that.
When a movement can come out of a state of emergency, hit the road one week after its end unbowed and then have leaders signing a 5% fortified with cola minerals and vitamins, ACCORDING TO A FORMULA NOBODY HAS SEEN, something wrong. New voices, young voices must be heard at branch, executive and federation level. COSSABOS must address immediate issues.
We must see what is happening right before our very eyes and refute leadership that would tell us otherwise WITHIN AND WITHOUT. On every front the old order is passing. Excellent! It must...it is old decadent and destructive!
The new order does not exist in pristine fashion somewhere, waiting to be ushered in silky smoothly when the smoke clears. It must be fought for and created in struggle. No born again political party, greatly trying to prevail will serve us. It is not a question of standing by to read of a new scandal. Rather it is a question of HOW DO WE REMOVE THE SCANDALOUS?
When those issues are addressed we can then go fishing all day |
posted 9 Jan 2012 01:56 by Gerry Kangalee
[
updated 18 Jan 2012 03:46 by Dave Smith
]
This listing is published as a public information service. It may not be a complete listing. In the cases of CCLCS (Cipriani Labour College), NIB (National Insurance Board), RRCB (Registration, Recognition and Certification Board) labour representation is mandated by law.
Nicole Johnson (OWTU) Export Centres Company Ltd.
Ernesto Kesar (OWTU) Lake Asphalt
Andrea Ali (OWTU) NEDCO
Rosa Mae Whittier (OWTU) NEDCO
Alva Allen (BIGWU) NMTS
Peter Burke (OWTU) PETROTRIN
James Lambert (NUGFW) HDC
Christopher Street (NUGFW) CDA
John Julien (CWU) EMA
Bernard James (OWTU) CEPEP
Carlton Gibson (OWTU) NGC
Carlton Gibson (OWTU) National Helicopters
Carlton Gibson (OWTU) NEC
Gregory Marchan (OWTU) NP
Ross Alexander (SWWTU) NEL
Ross Alexander (SWWTU) NFM
Ann Chan Chow (CWU) TTMF
Ann Chan Chow (CWU) NIB
Chandrasain Ramsingh (OWTU) T&TEC
Reginald Crichlow (TTPWU) TTPOST
Teddy Stapleton (OWTU) Standards Bureau
Ermine De Bique (CGWTU) NIB
John Boiselle (OWTU) NIB
Joseph Remy (CWU) CCLCS
Aynsley Matthews (CGWTU) CCLCS
Anand Tiwari (ATGWTU) CCLCS
Nelson Sinnette (SWWTU) CCLCS
Trevor Johnson (BIGWU) CCLCS
Judy Charles (TIWU) RRCB
Bryan St. Louis (CWU) RRCB
Vincent Cabrera (BIGWU) RRCB
|
posted 8 Jan 2012 18:48 by Gerry Kangalee
My friend Gregory Prevatt, a comrade in the struggle and former colleague in the OWTU in his article on this (National Workers Union) Web Site titled – “Toward a Social Partnership Agreement” argued for such an agreement “on the way forward for our country to survive the vagaries of the international economic environment without some negative consequences”.
I wish to laud the comrade’s proposals. However, similar proposals were made to previous T&T Governments; the last being the PNM Government of 1991.
Several Tri-partite talks were held (under the advice of the Caribbean Congress of Labour in Barbados) and withered away without action because of vital issues raised in relation to progressive labour legislation; particularly those relating to removal of obstacles to organizing of workers, recognition of the right of exploited unorganized workers (then 60% of the work force) to seek representation without victimization and a living minimum wage among other issues.
In 1992, a National Consultation on the Economy was held by the Manning Government at Chaguaramas. A comprehensive package of proposals on the Economy was submitted by the NATUC delegation which I led.
All the hard research and work came to nought as both the Government and the Business Class were not prepared to implement proposals, which they felt and said would give trade unions and organized working people (estimated at 90% of the society) political hegemony and economic control over the society.
They were not prepared to implement proposals to facilitate easier organization of unrepresented workers, improve health and safety at the workplace, implement better wages and working conditions and generally improve the economic standards of working people.
Both Government and Business seemed to want to protect their political and economic interest against the possibility of a strong, organized and independent labour movement comprising a large segment of the population.
Comrade Prevatt said that: “A golden opportunity has been missed by this Government in not treating with the issue of developing a process toward a social partnership agreement as a matter of priority.”
The fact is the PP Government unlike other governments never had it so good. They came together with a social compact, except this compact was meant to serve their personal and opportunistic lust for power and gain through their control of the treasury.
Some trade union leaders supported the PP Alliance in the May 2010 elections. FITUN, the self named progressive and independent Federation of Trade Unions and NGO’s hurriedly formed a political party: the Movement for Social Justice (MSJ). They are now an integral part of the PP Government.
A significant part of the Labour Movement is an influential part of the PP Government. Errol McLeod former President General of the OWTU is Minister of Labour and sometimes acts as Prime Minister. David Abdulah, General Secretary of the OWTU and leader of FITUN, is a government senator. Legions of trade unionists are on government boards.
Why then no social compact? Why then were workers marching through the streets of the country against a wage suppression policy? Why was a State of Emergency declared as a means to stifle the workers’ legitimate demands to improve their living standards? Why hasn’t the ILO Domestic Workers Convention been made law? Who really are these trade union leaders in the PP Government representing? Certainly not the workers!
There is also the Fyzabad Accord signed by the parties that form the PP. This is the perfect marriage to forge a social compact. The Fyzabad Accord means nothing to corrupt and opportunist politicians. It was still-born.
However, the reality is that in its place a substandard minimum wage was implemented; a 5% wage suppression policy instituted amounting to 1 2/3% per year; thousands of poor low-wage workers dismissed; some executives and middle workers at state bodies fired and demoted; there are complaints of ethnic favouritism; nepotism and corruption is endemic; a State of Emergency was instituted to stifle workers protests.
There has not been, as promised, any new labour laws. So that if there is any social compact agreement it seems to be between government and business to subvert the labour movement and further pauperize working people.
This Government and its business supporters, like others before, believe that working people don’t deserve the right to improve their living standards and those of their children. They feel that they alone have the right to be wealthy and the majority of working people’s lot is to be poor or to live from week to week, month to month on the margins of poverty.
They want no Social Compact with working people. Their goal is the absolute freedom to provide the minimum for the production of goods and services, the right to obscene profits and availability to ship their profits to their overseas accounts. Such is the Social Compact they have negotiated with the help of a few opportunist and sell-out trade union leaders.
Comrade Prevatt: “We are too small…to survive the vagaries of the international economic environment…” The labour movement has agreed on many occasions to support higher productivity standards and therefore economies of scale to promote competitive advantage in the export market.
But Labour insists that workers must be treated fairly, must be organized in larger numbers to effect improvements in manufacturing and services but must be fairly rewarded from profits. Most of our local business class views the local and Caricom markets as adequate to their profitability goals and continue to exploit cheap unorganized labour at their unsafe and unhealthy industries.
They are profit crazy and use any means to increase profitability by reducing labour and other costs and arbitrarily increasing prices. Our governments on the other hand are more concerned with power, political contributions, the acquisition of wealth and nepotism. Government and business don’t want any Social Compact to interfere with their unfettered “right” to plunder the society; to acquire obscene wealth while dropping some crumbs to working people from time to time.
Comrade Prevatt: “The major stake holders, Labour, Business, Civil Society and Government should engage in discussions towards the formulation of a Social Compact Agreement”. This is quite a laudable proposal but many national discussions were held on this issue with no results and stalemates.
The problem is economic fairness and workers rights. Why? Because both government and employers refuse to give workers any say in national decision making, save and except to bully workers into “increasing” production or getting some trade union leaders to sell out, become corrupted or compromise ala Duke, McLeod, Abdulah and others that will come to light.
The FITUN and MSJ opportunist adventure is a classical example of how Labour is used and abused by the ruling classes by compromising corrupted so called labour leaders. When the working class is properly organized, its leaders held accountable and disciplined when necessary; when we are strong and ready to defend our interests with united and mass actions; only then will a Social Compact Agreement be meaningful for working people. The Fyzabad Accord and the FITUN/MSJ sell out are living examples of our mistakes.
These Social Compact Agreements are an engagement in non-productive and meaningless ole talk. History testifies to this truism, as workers have gained nothing from these Accords. In fact these Conferences have the effect of giving workers a false sense of hope and even more damaging, serve to disarm working people.
We of the working class have learnt over the years that all the benefits we have gained, all the civil and democratic rights we have won have resulted from our sacrifices and struggles.
We have had to shed our tears, sweat and blood all over Trinbago. We are aware that only WHEN WE DARE TO STRUGGLE, WE DARE TO WIN. Governments and Employers strive to weaken and divide us. They fear our collective strength and the power that flows from our numbers; it is OUR UNION, OUR SOLIDARITY AND OUR UNITY THAT MAKE US STRONG.
Comrade Prevatt’s Social Compact proposal must not be dismissed but must be seen in a particular environment: an environment of respect, goodwill, equality and fairness to workers must be present in these discussions. Working people are the producers and wealth creators in society. In addition we are the largest consumers of the goods and services produced which in turn create more demand and more jobs.
Workers and unions cannot engage in formulating a Social Compact in an atmosphere of government hostility, wage suppression, a meagre minimum wage, nepotism, corruption and victimization. The oppressive labour laws that make it very difficult for workers to get representation must be removed.
Most important workers need an equal place on the table of national planning and development. Workers need fairness for the price of their labour. In such an environment of equity for workers, trade unions and working people will participate.
Working people’s history guarantees that our ideas are just, fair and in the national interest. Our proof is enshrined in the history of our country from slavery, to indentureship and to the current period of corrupted and bankrupt post - colonial leaders. We have always stood in defence of the majority against the selfish minority. |
posted 8 Jan 2012 18:32 by Gerry Kangalee
[
updated 8 Jan 2012 18:32
]
|
A golden opportunity has been missed by this Government in not treating with the issue of developing a process toward a social partnership agreement as a matter of priority. However it may not be too late as this step is absolutely necessary regardless of which government is in office.
As a country we are too small, with too limited resources, to survive the vagaries of the international economic environment without some negative consequences.
This country as a matter of urgency must bring the major stakeholders together in multi-partite discussions, where all the issues and interests would be put on the table and ventilated and where the parties would discuss, and agree on the way forward for our country.
I am of the view that this is a more sensible approach to unilateralism. The major stake holders, Labour, Business, Civil Society and Government should engage in discussions towards the formulation of a Social Compact Agreement, using an interest based approach with a neutral and competent facilitator to help parties arrive at an agreement.
Trust would be a major issue between the various stake holders, as over the last few months the collective bargaining process has taken a beating, and is currently at an all time low.
It is time for the parties involved, to settle out-standing negotiations in an amicable way and move towards discussions on the bigger picture.
T&T strategic plan, short, medium, and long term
The Barbados experience can be used as a model. When the economy of that country was experiencing some difficulties in the early 90’s the economy was weak and vulnerable, the devaluation of the currency was the recommendation of the IMF.
The circumstances of the day, forced the major stakeholders, to come together in tripartite discussions, where they were able to agree, and signed-off a protocol, for the implementation of a Prices and Incomes Policy, dated 1993 August 1.
Following this, they were able to arrive at six consecutive Social Partnership Agreements over the last 18 years, the last one being Protocol VI signed 2011 May 2.
Protocol VI addresses practically every aspect of governance in Barbados.
The Social Partnership Sub-Committee continues to have scheduled monthly meetings. At these they review, and discuss issues pertinent to the operations of the protocol agreement, and address issues as required. These meetings are chaired by the Chief Labour Officer.
The full Social Partnership Committee has scheduled quarterly meetings chaired by the Honorable Prime Minister of Barbados. These meetings are more strategic in nature.
This process can be ably facilitated by the International Labour Organisation ( ILO ) or some other competent reputable organisation.
BARBADOS WORKERS’ UNION PRESS STATEMENT – 25 JUNE 2004
“It is obvious that the process calls from time to time for compromise and give and take from the Social Partners. It should not come as any surprise if occasionally any one of the parties takes action with which the others may disagree – sometimes violently.
Social partnership – indeed marital partnership does not intend the surrender of one’s individualism, character, integrity or sense of purpose. It does however require discipline and control of unbridled individual action in the overall interest of the shared vision and programme which the bigger party collectively supports.
Social partnership in Barbados should be seen within such a picture. Any man or woman who expects that there will on longer be friction between and among the parties is living in a fool’s paradise and needs to wake up to reality; for there is none of us who will wish to be so contained and circumscribed by the objectives of the partnership that we would then be unable to strive to achieve the aims of our given institutions.
Indeed it is because the planners recognized that the major objectives of each party could be advanced by joint consultation that we have entered into a partnership where the sovereignty of each member yet remains intact.” |
|
