THE DOWNFALL OF THE WCL 44 ( about Leo Tindemans)

From left to right: Leo Tindemans (Minister President of Belgium and President of the Christian Democratic People's Part EPP), Heiner Geissler (Secretary general of the German Christian democratic Party CDU) and Helmut Kohl (President of the CDU) during the first Congress of the EPP in Brussels in 1978.

Leo Tindemans recently deceased on December 26 at the age of 92. He has been twice Belgian prime minister (1974-1978). In the European elections of 1979 he received the highest number of preferential votes ever reached in the history of Belgium. From 1976 to 1986 he was chairman of the Christian Democratic European People's Party EPP. For ten years he was also a member of the European Parliament (1989 -1999).

What the Belgian and European Christian democratic politician Leo Tindemans has to do with the history of the WCL? Nothing really, but that's precisely the problem. Before the WCL Congress in Mauritius (1993), I contacted Tindemans - as requested by WCL General Secretary Carlos Custer- to ask him if he wanted to held a speech on the WCL seminar prior to the WCL Congress about the role and significance of the European Union for European workers and for the World in general. Also, the question was whether he wanted to support the WCL in obtaining European funds for the seminar in order to reduce the cost of the Congress.

State Funeral of the Belgian Politician Leo Tindemans on January 3, 2015 in Edegem, a village not far from the city of Antwerp.

I was surprised how easy it was to make an appointment with Tindemans. We had a pleasant conversation which showed that he wanted to cooperate with the WCL. I was glad with this result. This could be the start of the kind of work that by many people of the WCL was expected I would do after I was appointed as Confederal Secretary of WCL, namely to organize political and financial support for the WCL on European level. But when ACV / CSC chairman Willy Peirens, also WCL president, heard about these plans, to my surprise, he wanted to know nothing of further contacts with Tindemans. According to his staff (Peirens himself never talked with me about this) because in the past the ACV/CSC had several conflicts with him.

I believe this was an irrelevant argument because I did not speak Tindemans as a Belgian politician but as a very important European politician of a country that at that time also had the presidency of the European Union. Moreover, since when unions do not want to meet politicians with whom they have conflicts? Such an attitude destroys all possibilities of a social dialogue.

Apparently my arguments did not convince him. The ACV/CSC wanted no more contacts with Belgian politicians who played a role on European level. When later on also cooperation between WCL and EZA (Europäisch Zentrum Arbeitnehmer - European Center for Workers), which offers European subsidies for European seminars for workers, was blocked by the WCL President, it became clear to me that the WCL was cut off from every kind of political and financial support of the European Union. About why I had no idea. In the case of EZA this was very special and certainly remarkable because at that time CNV former General Secretary Arie Hordijk, a staunch ally of the WCL, was elected chairman of the EZA. Moreover, the ACW (the general Christian workers association of which ACV / CSC is the main organization) was a member of EZA and as such represented in the Executive Committee of EZA.

Why then this blockade? Had it something to do with my position at the WCL? Indeed, the ACV/ CSC had voted against my appointment to WCL Confederal Secretary on the WCL Executive Committee meeting in Gdansk, Poland (1991). Or was it possible that the ACV had made (secret) agreements about EZA and Europe with the European Trade Union Confederation (ETUC)? It was well known that the ETUC opposed strongly the EZA, because in their view EZA received European subsidies that belonged to the ETUC. Or was it a political conflict because EZA was founded by Christian Democrats and as such was supported by the European Christian Democratic Party (EPP of which Leo Tindemans was an important member) while the ETUC majority was socialist oriented?Or was it possible that the ACV / CSC was blackmailed by ETUC that once the WCL would dare to interfere in European politics, Willy Peirens would lose his position as one of the directors of the ETUC?

Even more remarkable is that with the arrival of Willy Thys as Secretary General of the WCL, suddenly collaboration with the EZA was possible. Why this radical change in policy? That question was never answered. Maybe that once will be written also this chapter of the WCL history.

THE DOWNFALL OF THE WCL 35 (one of the first steps towards a merger of WCL and ICFTU?)

One of the key players at the meeting between WCL and ICFTU was obviously the Argentine trade union leader and WCL General Secretary Carlos Custer. After the World Congress of the ITUC in Berlin (May 2014) he went to Rome where he met the pope and visited also old trade union friends like former ETUC Secretary general Emilio Gabaglio, (who played an important role in the merger process ICFTU-WCL). At the moment Carlos Custer is Vice President of the Political Consulting Council of CLATE (Latin American Confederation of Public Employees)  and Secretary International Relations of the Argentine political party "Partido Nacional Instrumento Electoral por la Unidad"

Another important event in the period of Carlos Custer as Secretary General is the meeting between heavy delegations of WCL and ICFTU in the month of January 1995. Below you find a report of the meeting based on the notes I took during the meeting. Approximately ten years (2006) after this meeting the merger of WCL and ICFTU into ITUC (2006) took place. One can wonder if this meeting was the beginning of the long way to the ITUC.

Another important role at the meeting was played by WCL President Willy Peirens, also President of the Belgium trade union confederation ACV-CSC (from 1987 - 1999). He also had important functions within the ETUC and the ILO. "Historically, the ACV-CSC has a close relationship with the Christian Democracy. Recent years that band, however, has become much looser. Among the two social-liberal governments from 1999 to 2007, the ACV -CSC also sought cooperation with socialists and greens. Simultaneously the Christian Democrat CD & V moved more and more to the right." (Wikipedia: Algemeen Christelijk Vakverbond) 

The WCL delegation consisted of WCL President Willy Peirens, also President of the Belgian confederation ACV/CSC, by far the largest funder of the WCL, Secretary General Carlos Custer (Argentine), the 3 Confederal Secretaries Toolsiray Benedin (Mauritius), Jean Hinnekens (Belgium) and myself (Netherlands), French CFTC President Guy Drillaud, Michel Buvy (Belgium) as President of the WCL World Committee of International Trade Union Federations and Beatrice Fouchère (Swiss) as WCL coordinator at the ILO. From the side of the ICFTU were present General Secretary Bill Jordan (Great Britain), Deputy Secretary General Eddy Laurijssen (Belgium), Secretary general Andrew Kailembo (Tanzania) of ICFTU-AFRO, Secretary general Luis Anderson (Panama) from ORIT. Johan Stekelenburg, President of the Dutch confederation FNV could not be present.

This photo of FNV President Johan Stekelenburg (1941-2003) was taken during his speech at a meeting of the Solidarity Association CLAT-Netherlands because of its 25 years of existence in 1994. Due to the merger between the Dutch Catholic and the Social Democratic trade union confederations, the FNV maintained for several years ties with CLAT-Netherlands as a solidarity association with CLAT in Latin America.

For the record it should be mentioned that FNV worked together with the WCL Solidarity Foundation through their department for international cooperation. The reason for this was that the FNV resulted from a merger between the former catholic confederation NKV and the former socialist confederation NVV (1982). As a catholic confederation NKV has been an important member of the WCL. The NKV supported trade union organizations in the Third World countries through the WCL. It was said that this should not be finished because of a the merger. In practice the cooperation went more and more difficult because the FNV department for international cooperation gave little or no credibility to WCL members in the continents.

The WCL-ICFTU meeting had a friendly character. About some points one agreed easy like for example on the World Bank and the IMF. Both delegations agreed that the ILO and/or the Ministers of Labor should be more involved in decisions taken by these global institutions. The G7 meetings should be considered as a lobby target when there are special cases on the agenda that are labor related. The proposal of Germany and Britain to diminish the European Union aid for the so called Lomé countries was rejected. On the contrary WCL and ICFTU agreed to push for more support. It was also decided that together with the European Trade Union Confederation ETUC the European Union must be pressed to give more support to the former Communist countries in Central and Eastern Europe.

The debates became more critical when members of the ICFTU delegation presented complaints about the behavior of regional organizations of WCL. ORIT Secretary General Luis Anderson wanted more respect and a dialogue instead of a confronting attitude of CLAT. Secretary General Anderson refers to problems around CUT in Chile and another new confederation that has been attacked by CLAT. Anderson wonders what WCL and CLAT are doing in Chile.

ICFTU Secretary General Bill Jordan (left) "Mr. Jordan was a member of the General Council of the British TUC, and served on all its major committees, including the Finance and General Purposes Committee, the International Committee, Economic Committee and the European Strategy Committee, which he chaired. He served on the National Economic Development Council and chaired its Engineering Industry Committee, was on ACAS Council and member of Foundation for Manufacturing and Industry." 

ORIT Secretary general Luis Anderson McNeil (middle). " He was the first Panamanian Secretary General of CIOSL/ORIT Inter-American Regional Organization of Labor (ORIT/ILO). He was also appointed Vice Minister and Minister of Labor in the Republic of Panama in 1984, member of the Board of Directors of the Panama Canal Commission from 1983 to 1989 and member of the Board of Directors of the Panama Canal Authority, the entity that oversees the Panama Canal. He contributed to the labor aspects of the Torrijos-Carter Treaty signed in 1977 between Panama and the United States of America." (Wikipedia)

Andrew Kailembo was Secretary general of the African ICFTU organization AFRO. You can find some information on him in a book of  George Gona, Andrwe Mtagwaba Kailembo: The Life and Times of an Africa Trade Unionist, Nairobi, Printpak, 2002, ISBN 9966-25-7.

Andrew Kailembo was Secretary general of the African ICFTU organization AFRO. You can find some information on him in a book of  George Gona, Andrwe Mtagwaba Kailembo: The Life and Times of an Africa Trade Unionist, Nairobi, Printpak, 2002, ISBN 9966-25-7.

Carlos Custer confirmed the very critical position of CLAT towards ORIT but he said also that there should be mutual respect and that he as Secretary General is working on this. “We should do everything possible to come to cooperation and agreements like for example the declaration of all Peruvian and Ecuadorian trade unions against war. In Chile it is not the WCL nor CLAT that decide what happens but the members of the new trade union confederation. Cooperation in Africa should not be a problem because of the fact that one or two trade unions choose for a membership of another international trade union federation.”

Secretary General Kailembo refers to the cooperation between ODSTA and AFRO at the ILO Conference 1994 and on the new EU Lomé Treaty as examples of good relations. On the other side AFRO and members of the Executive Committee of the ICFTU were not pleased with what he called trade union piracy in Ghana and Liberia. Toolsiray Bendin recognizes the problems in Africa and confirms that ODSTA does not want to have problems with ICFTU. The problem is that some trade unions of a confederation are affiliated to ICFTU oriented international trade federations (ITF's) and others to WCL ITF's. But ODSTA does not accept any so called double membership.

The ICFTU delegation remarked that the differences between the regional organizations in Latin America and Africa made it very difficult for the ICFTU to cooperate more with the WCL. But on the other side in view of the growing globalization we have to come to more cooperation, to a common policy and to speak with one voice.

WCL President Willy Peirens confirmed this by saying that “even when one can not agree on a merger with the aim to come to one voice, we should cooperate with the aim to make stronger the international trade union movement. This also requires cooperation at the ground level, open and honest relations together with reliable organizations. WCL does not always check the reactions of its members on regional or national level. Sometimes there are “accidents de parcours”. We should use all our efforts to avoid such accidents. There is no alternative." ICFTU Secretary General Bill Jordan concludes at the end of the meeting that “the international trade unions” need a single voice. The employers are merciless. They want to get rid of all trade unions. We need to unite, so they cannot continue on that way.”

The meeting gave me the impression that the ICFTU wanted to make clear that the regional WCL organizations blocked the cooperation between the WCL and the ICFTU and not the European trade unions (which did not have anymore their own regional WCL organization, a big mistake of the European WCL trade unions taking into account that they were indeed a minority in the European Trade Union Organization ETUC).

On the one hand Carlos Custer as a man of CLAT confirmed the position of CLAT opposite to ORIT, in the eyes of CLAT a trade union instrument in the hands of the North American AFL-CIO and behind it the US Government (it may be not accidental that the AFL-CIO was not present at this meeting). On the other hand, as a good trade union diplomat with a lot of experience in trade union unity country Argentina he confirmed that mutual respect en cooperation must be possible between the two democratic international trade union organizations.

It seemed that WCL President Willy Peirens, as leader of one of the strongest European trade union confederations and a in one of the smaller economies of Europe, wanted to go very far into cooperation with the ICFTU. He used even the words “merger” and “no alternative” during his interventions. As a strong confederation in a small country ACV/CSC looked always for good relations with the strong trade union confederations in the neighboring countries which besides being member of the ETUC were also member of the ICFTU like the Dutch FNV, the German DGB and French trade union confederation CFDT (a former Christian trade union confederation that had left already a while ago WCL). Moreover some years ago some strong trade unions of ACV/CSC had left the WCL international Trade Union Federations and had become a member of ICFTU oriented International Trade Federations. Besides all this the ACV-CSC is a strong competitor of the also strong Belgium socialist oriented confederation ABVV-FGTB which is a also an important member of the ICFTU. 

At that time I believed that ACV/CSC did not look for a merger with the ICFTU because of respecting the positions of the WCL regional organizations CLAT and ODSTA and others, and not in the least because ACV / CSC could play a bigger role on the international stage with the WCL than without.  

THE DOWNFALL OF THE WCL (PART XXII)

Carlos Custer at the Asamblea de los Trabajadores y el Pueblo de America Latina, held in Panama City in November 1978 (photo: Petrus)

I started to get more and more pleasure in my work. As befits a righteous Dutchman, I started my professional life overseas from 1971 onwards. First as a student in Colombia and later as UN employee in Mexico and Costa Rica, and from 1982 as director of the solidarity association CLAT-Netherlands. But now as WCL confederal secretary I was happy to contribute my part in the history of the reunification of Europe. I was allowed to participate in putting right what had gone wrong after the Second World War in Europe. I saw the future of Europe, in spite of all the differences and conflicts, with a lot of optimism. Besides global citizen with a Latin slant, thanks to Latin America, I began to feel me more and more European.

I considered it an honor to be able to help a little bit the Poles, Lithuanians, Hungarians, Romanians and so on, to become part of the European community. Because after all, despite all our differences, we have the same Greek, Roman and Judeo-Christian roots. Whether you're looking around in an Anglican or a Russian Orthodox church, the images and rites are always recognizable. You see that for ages the same story is told all over Europe, the Christian story of creation of men, the fall, the birth and death of Christ, etc. The story that tells where we come from and where we are going.

Personalities at the opening of the Asamblea de los Trabajadores y el Pueblo in Panama City, November 1978. In the centre, looking right into the lens, is WCL Secretary Jan Kulakowski (1930-2011). As a boy he was participating in the resistance during German occupation of Poland. In 1946 he came with his mother as a refugee to Belgium. Kulakowski was WCL Secretary General from 1976 until 1989. In that period, the Polish trade union Solidarnosc became a member of the WCL (1986). In 1989 Kulakowski was succeeded by Carlos Custer as WCL Secretary General. On the far left CLAT Secretary General Emilio Maspero. On the far right WCL Deputy Secretary General. (Photo Petrus)

Working at WCL was also enjoyable because it was not a bureaucratized organization. Not the forms, rules or hierarchy determined what needed to be done but what was needed for its members near or far away. All our members were equally important, whether they lived somewhere in a distant and poor country or into a nearby rich country. In daily work, there was a spirit of equality and solidarity, where everyone's individuality was respected.

Some members of the WCL staff during the WCL Congress in Mauritius, November 1993. From left to right: Luc Vermeersch (translator), Jan Cleuren (translator), Greta Geselle (head of the administration department), Hilde van Lankcer (translator), Marleen Mens (secretary/assistant for Central and Eastern Europe), Rita Van Onckelen (secretary/assistant Secretary General) and Adrienne Lievens (head of the accounting department)

General Secretary Carlos Custer (of Argentine origin) was well suited for this. As an experienced union leader (he had already been once confederal secretary of the WCL) he knew his strengths and his weaknesses. He had a great sense of (trade union) relations, was an excellent diplomat and knew how to deal with people, also with those who were hostile to the WCL. His weaknesses were organization and finance, but he himself made no secret of this. I therefore gladly complied with his request to help him in these areas. Moreover, the WCL had skilled, well-trained, loyal and experienced staff who were willing to serve the cause, though of course you had not to overdo it. After all, these predominantly female employees had their families for which they had to care.

THE BUDAPEST DECLARATION

Forum held during the seminar and presided by Imre Palkovics, President of Worker's Councils. On his left Bogdan Hossu, President of Cartel Alfa.Behind him Milan Katuninec, President of the Slowakian trade union confederation NKOS (now KOS). On the right the Polish and the Albanian delegation.

Back to the field. Together with the Hungarian Federation of Worker's Councils (Munkastanacsok), who had meanwhile decided to join the WCL, we organized a seminar the end of March 1993 in Budapest with the significant title "World Confederation of Labour for New Trade Unionism after Communism." With this title the line between past and future was indicated clearly. Communism had failed and was therefore abolished, but what had to come in place? It were not our Western unions to determine the future. That should be done by the new unions with their recently elected leaders. A seminar was the best way to start this process of decision making.

Ignaas Lindemans of the ACV Research department and one of the speakers at the seminar.

The seminar was concluded with " The Declaration of Budapest" , a set of guidelines with which the WCL could go forward for the next years.

1. A legal framework should be created for the industrial trade union action. The first priorities here are representativity, autonomy, redistribution of the former ( state ) trade union assets and the role of the social partners.

2. Social dialogue, bipartite and / or tripartite should be encouraged. In this way can be monitored adequately the economic and social developments. The problem is that employers are still not organized in most countries, and that the government is the largest employer in some countries ( In Communist States everybody is an employee of the state ) .

3. The launch of collective bargaining by company, sector or national .

4. There needs to be built up a social security system . This means that there has to be made a compulsory and supplementary insurance system. In addition, unemployment benefits, the protection of the minimum wage and social rights are considered indispensable . The whole system should be managed by those who contribute to it, so largely employees and employers.

5 . Adapting national legislation to the international and European conventions and standards. This includes the ILO conventions , the European Social Charter and the European Charter of Social Security.

to be continued

THE DOWNFALL OF THE WCL (PART 18)

Santiago Pereira, Secretary General of the Chilean Confederation CCT affiliated to CLAT in his office in 1991, one year after Pinochet left Government.

Left and right in Latin America continued to fight against each other, with or without weapons, but always with the involvement of the U.S.. In Chile, by domestic opponents, the army and with the help of the U.S. , the democratically elected leftist President Allende of the United People Coalition was overthrown (1973). The result was years of repression under the dictatorship of General Pinochet. The example of the Chilean putch was followed by generals in Brazil and Argentina. The unions in those countries were controlled by the dictatorship. Trade unionists were murdered. The supposed rise of the left crashed into violence and oppression of the Latin American armies. Restoration of the rule of law would then take decades.

After the Sandinist revolution the Nicaraguan Confederation of Workers CTN resited the severe attacks of the Sandinista Government. In 1988 he was together with 3 CTN members and other protestors arrested in Nandaime. Because of international pressure he was freed after a short time in prison. (Photo 1983)

CLAT tried to survive among all this violence as a democratic , humanistic, social – Christian oriented trade union movement, but it was not easy . Again that was the case in1979 after the victory of the Sandinistas in Nicaragua . Like in Cuba, after the victory of the revolution, Marxist oriented Sandinistas started to make life difficult for democratic trade unions. CLAT had not only to keep fighting against conservative, employer oriented regimes but also against left-wing regimes who believed in dictatorship as an answer to injustice, exploitation and poverty . Thanks to support from Europe including the WCL but also European NGO's , CLAT managed to survive, but always distrusted by both sides. 

The fall of Communism made a temporary end to the radical, revolutionary Marxism as a viable alternative to development and social justice, but it brought at the same time the victory of American neoliberalism . CLAT General Secretary Emilio Maspero did not hesitate and declared war to neoliberalism. He analyzed that neoliberalism together with the proposal to create an American Free Trade Zone, would degrade Latin America into a large supermarket in which the U.S. can buy what it needs and the workers will stay poor.

This photograph has been taken in 1982 during a visit to CLAT Netherlands (a solidarity organization with CLAT). From left to right: Kees van Kortenhof (coordinator of CLAT Netherlands), Carlos Custer (Confederal Secretary of WCL), Emilio Maspero (Secretary General of CLAT), Ernesto Molano (Secretary General of the World Federation of Industrial Workers WFIW/WCL) Wouter van Dam (President of CLAT Netherlands) and Juan Marcano, Secretary General of the Venzuelan CGT, affiliated to CLAT.

Also according to Maspero the answer to this challenge or provocation of the U.S. was a kind of Latin American Union along the lines of the European Union. Unfortunately, in every day Latin America this is more a dream than a practical possibility. A project of such magnitude requires at least a minimum of common understanding, political and financial stability, economic growth and governments that can assert its power to all corners of the country. Already only the lack of mutual trust makes it difficult to come to a common market, let alone into a Union with open borders and common directives like in the EU. And we're not even talking about the U.S., which from a hegemonic position can play with the political and economic interests of each and every country.

The result was that one cooperation pact - the Andean Pact in 1969 – was followed by another – Mercosur in 1991 - without the first pact having given a significant result. In 1994 another new attempt was made to create a common Latin American market with a common economic policy. The Andean Community and Mercosur merged into the Union of South American Nations, an organization modeled as the European Union. Unfortunately Emilio Maspero could not witness this anymore. He died on the 31 of May 2000. Was this what Emilio Maspero had dreamed of and finally Latin America give a common response to the challenges of the U.S.?

It was precisely the Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez who spoiled the game with his Bolivarian Socialism, a variation on the Marti Socialism of Fidel Castro. Balanced policy to achieve a common Latin American market and economy, was replaced by anti-American rhetoric. Chavez used his petrodollars to set up his own alliances. Once again the result was regional political instability and confusion. Again the Latin American institutions were not strong enough to resolve the disagreements in concert. As a true caudillo Chavez made his own one-man show. With his death in 2013 this all came to an end. Since then it has become calm in Latin America and little heard from a possible common Latin American policy, common market and directives.

Photograph taken at the UTAL, San Antonio de los Altos, Venezuela during a mission of three members of the Dutch parliament to Venezuela, Guatemala, Nicaragua and Haïti organized by CLAT-Netherlands. From above left clockwise: Harry Aarts of the Christian Democratic Party, Aad Nuis of the Democrats 66, Harry van den Bergh of the Social Democratic Party, José Merced Gonzalez of CLAT and the translator.

The intellectual and organizational capacities of Maspero in this new Latin American political crisis were sorely missed . What should be the attitude of CLAT facing the Venezuelan government of Chavez ? For or against Chavez, in both cases it would become difficult. To be against Chavez and his supporters meant surely difficulties for CLAT, with its headquarters and training and educational center UTAL still in Venezuela . Supporting Chavez would mean CLAT to choose against its own principles in favor of an authoritarian Marxist nationalist leadership in which the trade union is subjected to state and government. Whatever the new leadership of CLAT would choose, difficulties would be there.

To make things even more difficult, in the meantime the merger between WCL and ICFTU was announced which meant CLAT would loose its international support. Was this the reason that CLAT decided so surprisingly quick to merge with the ORIT? But on what common ground they are standing? The European trade unions united in the ETUC have at least the European Union as a common project with the aim to defend and extend the welfare state in times of globalization. Will there be in the near future an Inter-American Union with the dollar as a common currency (you don't believe the US will change its dollar for an inter-american currency like the Germans changed the Deutsche Mark into the Euro)? Will there be an Inter-American Parliament and an Inter-American Government like the European Parliament and the European Commission? Will there be common borders (the Rio Grande will disappear), a common market (an inter-american supermarket), a common foreign policy, and finally a social Latin America?

As far as I know such a common interregional project does not yet exist in the Americas. On the contrary, the US is still exporting its neoliberal, free market model to Latin America and the rest of the world. It's true, this model has given wealth to a large middle class, which reaches to the skilled workers in the US. Do Latin Americans now think that this model can also be applied in their continent? But probably it is already very important that the Latin and North American trade unions together stand for democracy and the civil society as the only way to live together. It seems that these are very interesting topics for debates between the North American and the Latin American unions. But may be there have been also other reasons for CLAT to merge with ORIT?

To be continued