Because of the
lack of a profound analysis, it is not surprising that the
conclusions of the 'Willy Thys paper' brought nothing new. Of course,
there must be an efficient service to the members, more coordination
of activities, a program of activities related to multinational
corporations, activities in the areas of health and safety,
rationalization of the institutional operations and much more. But
quite apart from the fact that the ITF's were already doing this
already for a long time, it is not enough to win new members. Why
should one become a member of the WCL if one could get the same and
even more with the ICFTU and its International Trade Federations?
To stand out in a
credible way, the WCL should dare to present their own vision about
man and society, about employer and worker, about the union and
private enterprise, about government and state, about capital and
labor, about family and so on. Though the WCL had traditionally its
own christian and humanist inspired vision, this was not used
actively anymore. Of course, that vision had to be adapted on the
consequences of the fall of communism and the new developments in the
world, but that did not happen at all.
Instead, the WCL
choosed for non ideological pragmatism and went on the easy road of
rejecting neoliberalism and capitalism as diseases that needed to be
be eradicated, saying that the growing globalisation of production
and marketing was only bad news for the workers like also the
flexibilization of labor and so on. Trade unionism meant more and
more protest in stead of also looking for creative answers on the new
challenges after the fall of communism and the growing industrial
globalisation. The WCL was losing his own voice in the international
concert of trade union voices. It became part of the big
international choir of international trade unionism, without having
an own voice.
At the same time
the WCL was restructured
on the level of the international secretariat under the guidance of
the Secretary General himself. Central and Eastern Europe were not
anymore a priority. The Coordination Committee for Central and
Eastern Europe and the coordination secretariat for Central and Eastern Europe, established
in Bucharest with the help of Cartel alfa, were dismantled. The special budget
developed for activities and missions in Central and Eastern Europe
was stopped and so there came an end to the special financial support
for the new members in central and eastern Europa. This was very painful, because everybody knew that the development of a "new" trade unionism in that part of Europe was for long term, as part of the development into a democratic society and state. What happens today in the Ukraine and the Russian actions on the Krim and in Eastern Ukraine are a demonstration of this.
In spite of the
'Willy Thys' paper on International Trade Action Federations nothing
new happened for international trade action. On the contrary, the Secretary
General wanted even that the ITF's paid extra for services of the WCL secretariat besides the contribution they already were paying to the
WCL. The small amount of money the ITF's received yearly from the ILO
for special activities was not used anymore for their activities but went onto the general WCL budget. Manpower to support
the ITF's was not extended but in stead more limited. All this
together gave fuel to the animosity of the presidents of the ITF's
towards the Secretary General.
Another debate should
have been about how a minority organization like the WCL should
operate on international level especially within the ILO. One of the
possibilities to let hear more loudly the message of the WCL and its
ITF's at the ILO was to look for a lobbyist with a lot of trade
union and (international) political experience while also speaking
fluently different languages and convinced to present the vision and
ideas of the WCL on all levels. The opportunity was there because of
a change of personnel, but in stead, two young trade unionists were
put in the ILO office of the WCL. Therefore, the ICFTU got all the
space to do what they wanted in the ILO.
On the other side, the highest priority - financially and in manpower - was given to the
renewal of the press office. The Secretary General wanted more
attention in the international press for the WCL. This is of course
very difficult because why should journalists be interested in the
WCL that as an international organization cannot organize strikes or
other protests to influence decisions on world level? Moreover, for
international trade union organizations there are other ways to
influence decisions on international level like for instance the ILO
and other UN agencies, like the European Union and its institutions and so on. And another question, is it necessary for the WCL members to read about the WCL in the international press ? What is important for them is to be informed about what is going on in the international field of labor, to get the latest information and if necessary to get access to international institutions.
No comments:
Post a Comment