THE DOWNFALL OF THE WCL 49

Emilio Gabaglio as ETUC Secretary General signing the European Framework Agreement on Teleworking, Brussels 16/O7/2002. (Foto: ETUC)

While the two International Wood and Construction federations were looking for some kind of merger or cooperation between the WCL and the ICFTU debates had started about some kind of a merger or institutionalized cooperation or the creation of a new World Organisation. It happened that Emilio Gablagio had elaborated a note that served as a kind of discussion paper for the two informal meetings the WCL and the ICFTU Executive Committees have held at the beginning of 2004.

The note was used also as an introduction to the internal WCL debates at the European section held on the 18th of March 2004 about the future cooperation between WCL and ICFTU. However, to status of the Gabaglio note was not clear to the participants. Therefore WCL Deputy Secretary general Jaap Wienen explained the role of the note: “Because there seems to be some confusion on the status of the note Gabaglio note, Jaap Wienen (Deputy Secr. General of WCL) gives some further explanation on the chronological events. Two meetings with the ICFTU took place. During the first meeting, Gabaglio presented his point of view. The political secretariat reflected on these statements, but did not have the mandate to discuss changes. These reflections had some effect on the second note, but it was not possible for the (WCL) secretariat to discuss all possible alternatives. The note is therefore not a reflection of the two political secretariats, and will not be the final document.”

What was not explained, is why Gabaglio was invited at both meetings nor why he prepared the note. Gabaglio had been ETUC Secretary General from 1991 until 2003. Before 1991 he had worked for 17 years at the ICFTU on various positions. Before, in 1969 he was elected National President of ACLI (Italian Workers' Christian Associations). During his presidency of ACLI a conflict raised with the Italian Catholic Hierarchy. Gabaglio organised at the end of August 1970 in Vallombrosa, Italy an ACLI Congress titled “Workers movement, Capitalism and Democracy”  during which was introduced the hypothesis of the 'Socialist ACLI'. Only a year later ACLI was publicly disowned by the Italian Episcopal Conference and the repudiation was later confirmed June 19, 1971 by Pope Paul VI in person. In spite of the almost immediate reverse of Gabaglio and his subsequent self-criticism, ACLI split in two factions. 

"Philip Jennings is the General Secretary of UNI Global Union, an organisation with over 20 million members, representing 900 unions in over 150 countries and with its head office in Nyon. In May 2013 UNI Global Union was at the centre of worldwide press coverage, as the “Bangladesh Safety Accord ”, a legally binding agreement by major US and European clothes manufacturers to raise safety standards in Bangladesh factories, was negotiated in Nyon by both UNI Global union and Industriall." See interview 'Living in Nyon', September 18, 2013. (Foto: Living in Nyon)

As already explained before, ETUC Secretary General Gabaglio was not capable to convince EUROFIET to respect the statutes of the ETUC. According to the ETUC statutes each European member of the WFCW had the right to be a member of EUROFIET but EUROFIET refused and had its own conditions. This arrogant power policy of EUROFIET against the ETUC rules led to the departure of two important WFCW members what of course meant a weakening of the WFCW. Was this what the EUROFIET wanted? May be yes, may be not, but what is sure that for the EUROFIET pluralism was not important, and deliberately wanted to maintain its monopoly in the European social dialogue. This is not only a shame for a democratic organization like EUROFIET (now UNI) but also for its Secretary General Philip Jennings as a citizen from Great Britain, one of the oldest democracies in the world. (See also: The Downfall of the WCL 12 and 13) 

Back to the note of Emilio Gabalglio because in the note are made some interesting statements about the history of WCL and ICFTU.

“1.2. During the Cold War and after the creation of the ICFTU in 1949 (the split within the WFTU), the three main international organisations had each a specific role, according to its nature:

- The ICFTU was dominated by the leading organisations of industrialized countries. Most of them had links with social-democratic parties in Europe, with an AFL-CIO working in the wake of the foreign policy of the United States.

- The IFCTU (which became the WCL in 1968), a Christian organisation whose proposals also took into account spiritual aspects.

- The WFTU, which comprised organisations having links with communist parties.”

In other words: the ICFTU was social democratic and socialist and therefore class struggle oriented. The WCL was social-christian oriented and because of its spiritual values against class-struggle and for social dialogue. The WFTU was part of the communist party strategy and on international level controlled by the Soviet Union as the main communist world power.

Why the AFL-CIO was a member of the ICFTU? The AFL-CIO had its leftist oriented groups but its majority never questioned the free market capitalism, like European ICFTU and also WCL members did. On the contrary, the AFL-CIO was a loyal promotor of the free-market capitalism in the Third World like for example in Latin America where the AFL-CIO dominated ORIT, the regional partner of ICFTU, at a certain moment supported dictatorships and US interventions against leftist political leaders (Dominican republic and Guatemala). Without doubt the AFL-CIO functioned during the Cold War as as the promotor of US interests and its free-market capitalist model.

In the Gabaglio note we read the following about the ETUC:

“1.3 During the 1960's, the European trade unions of the WCL and the ICFTU strengthened their cooperation links. Some debates were then opened in Europe, leading to the creation of the ETUC in 1973. Before reaching a compromise (the idea met with some hesitation and resistance by some WCL organisations, the ECFTU (ICFTU's European regional organisation) became the ETUC, which meant that any WCL organisation could become an affiliate to this new confederation created to act as a counterbalance to the development of the EEC (that later on became the EU). That is why it was impossible to negotiate the creation of a WCL- specific space.”

Gabaglio explains here not only why the ETUC always had been dominated by the ICFTU members but also why trade union pluralism was never on the agenda of the ICFTU. Everybody with some feeling for international policy and strategy could understand that in the long run this anti-pluralism attitude will end in the destruction of the WCL as a minority. Why the WCL did not make this analysis is a mystery. Was it because of lack of leadership, confusion about the road to follow or because European WCL members were losing their spiritual values? May be a little bit of each?

1.3. Weakened during World War II (after breaking off relations with Central and Eastern European organisations and as a consequence of the creation of single confederations in Germany and Austria, under the Anglo-American pressure), the WCL gained ground worldwide , thanks to the creation of regional organisations or coordination offices: CLAT in 1954 in Latin America, BATU in 1963 in Asia, UPTC in 1959, FOPADESC in 1973 and finally the DOAWTU in 1993 in Africa.”

1.4 The “industrialized countries” base decreased after the disaffiliation of:

- The CFDT in 1973 (replaced by the CFTC France)

- The NKV in 1978 (which merged with NVV to create FNV Netherlands)

- Quebec's CSN in 1986.”

The ideological seduction of socialism was not the only factor that played a role but sure it was one of the factors why these 3 trade union federations did leave WCL. Of course it is very ironic that this happened within more or less two decades before the communist model based on socialist values in the Soviet Union, center and Eastern Europe collapsed completely. Also ironic was that the Christian oriented Solidarnosc trade union in Poland together with the Polish Pope John Paul II played a decisive role in the fall of communism. It was the victory of social christian and democratic values on communist values.

Gabaglio shows us in the next paragraph that for the ICFTU trade union pluralism was never important:

“1.6 After the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989, the ICFTU exerted some pressure on the WCL for both organisations to merge, arguing that from that moment on, trade union pluralism at the international level was no longer justified.

I have never had an inside view in the policy kitchen of the ICFTU so I can only guess what kind of ideas existed within the ICFTU. So let me guess. Apparently, the Cold War justified international trade union pluralism (however, for ICFTU trade union pluralism in the Western world was never important, it was tolerated mainly because it existed) but now the communist model had collapsed and free-market capitalism had definitely won, seemingly trade union pluralism had definitively also come to an end.

What happened with this intent of merger? Gabaglio tells us the following:

1.7 After many debates, a proposal was made: the WCL could then become an organisation (foundation...) aimed at fostering the development of trade unionism in developing countries (training, debates, financial aid, and so forth).

1.8 Beyond the fact that the debate was obviously far from being closed (given the wounds opened by ORIT in Latin America during the military dictatorships), the ICFTU's arrogance also played an essential role in the failure of the dialogue process. The proposal on the creation of an organisation focused on the Third World was not accepted. Neither was the idea of an outright merger.”

I had learned to know the arrogance of the ICFTU during my work in Central and Eastern Europe after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Every ICFTU representative on every occasion, was it a national trade union congress, a seminar or a meeting, started with the observation that the ICFTU with its millions of members is the greatest and the most important trade union organisation in the world. It never occurred to these spokesmen that next to the quantity component there is a quality component, that of vision, values and ideas. It was precisely the Polish trade union Solidarnosc that showed to Central and Eastern Europe how important ideas were in the struggle against communism.

THE DOWNFALL OF THE WCL (part 5)

Waiting for our host. From right to left: WCL Vice-President Kristoff Dowgiallo, the translator, WCL secretary general Carlos Custer, Bundes-sekretär Karl Klein, myself and Kaszimirus Uoka from Lithuania.(23 march 1992)

Immediately after our Polish tour for the WCL International Trade Federations, I traveled to Vienna to participate for the first time in a meeting of the WCL Coordination Committee for Central and Eastern Europe (22th of march 1992). Like the meetings of the European section, the meetings of this Committee are informal. As vice president of the WCL for Central and Eastern Europe, Kristoff Dowgiallo was president of the meeting. I had never been before in Vienna. Before the fall of communism Vienna did not belong to the list of cities like Paris, London, Rome and Madrid. Vienna was the end of the world, enclosed between the Iron Curtain. Thanks to my work for WCL, I saw over the years Vienna changing into a vibrant European city.

The meeting was organized by Karl Klein, Confederal Secretary of the Christian Group FCG within the Austrian confederation ÖGB. Within the ÖGB the FCG is a significant minority. The Socialists have the majority in the confederation. Within the trade union of the private employees GPA (trade and banking sector), the Christian Group is a large minority. In the trade union of Public Servants GÖD the Christian group has the majority. The ÖGB is the only European confederation, in which trade union pluralism has been organized in a formal way. I believe that this model should have been the minimum basic model for organizing the ETUC and recently the ITUC. It is my conviction that without this model, that guarantees formal pluralism within unity, the WCL should not have merged with the ICFTU.

I was picked up from the airport by the official driver of Karl Klein. We drove to a meeting of Secretaries of the GPA where Karl Klein introduced me as the new Confederal Secretary of the WCL and Executive Secretary of the World Federation of Clerical Workers. Over the years, I learned to know Karl as a gentleman, sometimes more a diplomat than a trade unionist but nevertheless always very sensitive to the trade union movement. In 2003 he became chairman of the FCG and vice-chairman of the ÖGB. He died much to young at the end of 2007 on the age of 59.

The Prime Minister (lef centre) next to Karl Klein, held a kind of round table discussion with all the guests. In front of him Carlos Custer. On the right of Carlos you see Milan Katuninec, an important Slovakian trade union leader and professor on the University of Trnva. In front right Michel Rizzi from ACLI, Italy a member of WCL. In spite of many efforts it was not possible to get involved ACLI in the WCL activities in former Communist Europe.

With his invitation to the Coordination Committee to meet in Vienna, Karl Klein made it clear that he and the FCG wanted to play a role in the WCL regarding Central and Eastern Europe. Understandable, since the fall of Communism, geopolitics were changing fast and Vienna as the capital of Austria came to lie in the middle of Europe but now surrounded by countries looking for democracy and capitalist economy. At that time the participants in the meeting were still mainly Western European members deliberating on the future policy of the WCL in Central and Eastern Europe. Winning new WCL members was obviously our most important task . As new members arrived, the Coordination Committee grew into a platform where WCL unions from East and West learned to know each other.

At a certain moment, the Committee succeeded in arranging a regular annual budget with contributions from a number of Western European members. In addition, many confederations and International Trade Federations succeded in organizing activities from its own resources for new members in Central and Eastern Europe. The Belgium ACV and the Dutch CNV set up their own special fund for Central and Eastern Europe. Their international departments supported the activities in Central and Eastern Europe with knowhow and money. Despite its limitations, the WCL could therefore be very active in Central and Eastern Europe with special missions, seminars to be held in different former communist country like Rumania, Poland, Hungry, Ukraine, Lithuania and so on.

To forge closer ties between East and West and the new members to get acquainted with the European trade union movement and the ETUC, meetings of the Coordination Committee were later held prior to that of the European section in Brussels which in turn convened before the General Board meeting of the ETUC. That way within the WCL a dialogue at European level developed slowly but surely. It was an open dialogue because nobody had experience with the transition from communism to democracy and capitalism and nobody had any idea what the future would bring.

Richard Paiha was not so much a manager of his union, as well as somebody who, if necessary, did the job himself. He was a man with a great sense of social duty. Here you see him working on a typewriter finishing a text for the annual seminar that he and Toni Liedlbauer organized for leaders of trade unions in the services sector in Central and Eastern Europe. This picture was taken during the seminar held in Poprad, Slovakia in 1998.

For the next day Karl Klein had organized, together with the FCG Liaison Office for Central and Eastern Europe, a meeting with the Prime Minister of Czechoslovakia in Bratislava. Also were invited leaders of the new Christian-oriented unions in the former communist countries. Bratislava is an hour's drive from Vienna in Slovakia, the eastern part of then still undivided Czechoslovakia. At the end of the year of 1992, Czechoslovakia split peacefully in two countries: the Czech Republic and Slovakia. From January 1, 1993 Bratislava was the capital of Slovakia and Prague the capital of the Czech Republic.

WCL general secretary Carlos Custer and vice-president Krzistoff Dowgiallo were also present. It was a meeting with on one side the formal protocol associated with the reception by a major high political host and on the other hand an almost informal meeting on which ideas on the future of the trade union movement and Europe were exchanged freely. It was an inspiring round table discussion, an example of what I hoped would be the future of a united Europe.

To me, West Germany had already given the example by the reunification of East and West Germany into one country (1990). However, at that moment such a development into a united Europe was not yet foreseen. In the case of the reunification of Germany, Great Britain with Prime Minister Thatcher even feared a united Germany while France was looking for some kind of accommodation. This attitude to Germany is best demonstrated by a much quoted pronunciation of the French writer Francois Mauriac: “ I love Germany so much, that I am glad that there are 2 Germanies to love.” For French President Mitterand the price for the unification of Germany was the agreement of Germany on the introduction of the Euro currency as a way to get some French control on the growing economic weight of Germany in the European Union.

Finally, I would like to note that, despite this initiative of Karl Klein, the FCG did after all not play a major role in the Coordination Committee. Repeatedly Karl Klein promised to strengthen ties with the WCL but in practice little or nothing happened. On the other side, the Christian Group of the GPA union under the guidance of Central Secretary Richard Paiha was from the outset very active in Central and Eastern Europe. For example Paiha organized together with his right hand and GPA Secretary for Trade Toni Liedlbauer every year a seminar for leaders of democratic and independent unions in the services sectors (trade and financial services) in different countries of Central and Eastern Europe, he participated in missions (for example to Croatia and Albania) and supported projects both financially and materially. Richard himself was personally very involved in this. He died in 2011 at the age of 72 years.

To be continued

The above story is a personal testimony of what happened at the end of the last century and the beginning of the new millennium in the international trade union movement, in particular in CLAT and the WCL.

THE DOWNFALL OF THE WCL (part 4)

Visit to Gdansk during the seminar in Sopot.From right to left: Dan Mogadescu from Cartel alfa, WCL Vice-President Kristoff Dowgiallo, Tadek Oruba from Belgium ACV and Mihael also from Cartel alfa.

During the WCL Congress in Caracas (1989) I heard for the first time I was a candidate to become confederal secretary. The newly elected general secretary Carlos Custer even said he was counting on me. Some time later Jaap Kos, president of the WCL international trade federation WFCW (World Federation of Clerical Workers which is now WOW), invited me for an interview with him and two Austrian boardmembers. The WFCW wanted me to be their executive secretary. To convince the WCL they had decided to pay an additional contribution to the WCL. Some time later CNV chairman Henk Hofstede called me, asking if I wanted to work in Vienna instead of Brussels. There were plans to open a WCL liaison office in Vienna which is near to the former European communist countries and Russia. For me this was okay but finally it became nevertheless Brussels.

Finally in November 1991 in Gdansk, the decision was taken on my appointment as confederal secretary. Starting in Brussels in January 1992, it appeared that I was the successor of Emiel Vervliet, WCL confederal secretary and also executive secretary of the WFCW. An article by him in the Flemish journal 'Maatschappelijke Gids', in which he made ​​a plea for a merger between WCL and ICFTU, went too far for secretary general Carlos Custer. Much later I learned that opinions about my appointment at the WCL were divided. That was of course unfortunate but it did not affect my work.

It became a flying take-off. My first encounter with new union leaders from the former communist European countries and Russia was at a seminar organized by Solidarnosc in Sopot, Gdansk (29 February to 4 March 1992). There I met the Polish WCL Vice-President Kristoff Dowgiałło. I spoke with many new democratic leaders such as a delegation from Lithuania headed by Aldona Balsienne, chairman Olexander Iwanchenko of the UkrainianVOST, the miners' leader Victor Utkin from Russia and a delegation of Cartel alfa. The Romanian federation Cartel alfa had already joined the WCL prior to my arrival to the WCL.

The WCL European Section meeting presided by Vice-President Kristoff Dowgiallo. On the left Secretary General Carlos Custer. On the right Confederal Secretary Roger Denis.

So the WCL had a nice position for take-off. My WCL mission began with the support of two major trade confederations in former communist Europe, both known for their battles for an independent, free and democratic trade union movement. At the seminar in Sopot it became clear that for these new leaders Solidarnosc was an example that deserved to be followed. Therefore probably the WCL also would have a certain appeal to these new leaders. Moreover, I thought, the ideas on man and society of the WCL were in line with those of the new leaders. After the failure of communism they were looking for a renewal of their society and state, based on human and spiritual values others than communism. The WCL could offer these coming from its Christian and humanistic background that it cherishes since its foundation in 1929.

Just a few weeks after the seminar in Sopot I went along on tour in Poland with Leo Dusoleil, President of the World Federation of Industrial Workers Federation WFIW, and Roel Schepen of the CNV Wood and Construction Trade Union, to visit the Solidarnosc unions with the aim to affiliate them to the International Trade Federations (ITF's) of the WCL (14 they - March 21, 1992). Our interpreter was Tadek Oruba a Belgium trade unionist of Polish descent. During our visit to the miners union in Katowice we laid flowers at the monument to fallen miners in the fight against communism. In Krakow we visited the metal union. In Nova Huta we had a conversation with the President of the textile union. In Wroclav we spoke with board members of the energy and chemical union and so on.

Unfortunately, despite our efforts, no Solidarnosc trade union ever joined the WCL International Trade Federations. I know the WCL Textile Federation and the Building and Wood Federation have long taken pains to  the Solidarnosc textile and construction union to make join them but it never happened. It stayed with vague promises and commitments during visits to Ghent and Brussels. Despite the enormous efforts of the European Miners with many seminars and missions organized and financed, also the miners union of Solidarnosc never became a member of the WFIW.

Katowice. WFIW President Leo Dusoleil, surrounded by 4 board members of the Solidarnosc Miners Union and Tadek Oruba, ready to put flowers before the monument commemorating the miners who have fallen during strikes and opposition to the communist dictatorship

I never could figure out why the unions of Solidarnosc did not join the WCL International Trade Federations. It could not be money. The financial contributions were low, like those of Solidarnosc self to the WCL. In addition, there was an agreement to invest the contributions in seminars and other activities in the country itself. May be the ITF's were not so credible anymore because some ACV and CNV unions no longer were a member of an WCL International Trade Federation? They had joined the ICFTU oriented ITF's. Anyway, the many times I've asked, such as Solidarnosc President Krakliewski, Andrej Adamčik from international affairs and some regional presidents of Solidarnosc, I was assured that Solidarnosc was committed to the WCL but otherwise it remained quiet.

On the contrary, the Romanian trade federation Cartel alfa had the policy to their members to join as much as possible the WCL International Trade Federations, in many cases successfully. Therefore the relations between Cartel alfa and WCL became stronger than those between Solidarnosc and the WCL. I felt sorry, not only because the WCL became less stronger internationally than I had hoped but also because personally I felt involved in the fate of Poland and in particular that of Solidanosc.

Between the seminar in Sopot and the Polish tour I took part in a meeting of the European Section of the WCL for the first time on March 7, 1992. The European section meeting was a kind of informal meeting of all Western European trade union confederations of the WCL where European issues were discussed and views exchanged. In fact it was a meeting of the WCL fraction in the ETUC but it could never be named like that. The informal nature of the European Section meeting was strongly emphasized. It gave me the impression that we were doing something, we actually were not allowed to do because of the unity within ETUC (European Trade Union Confederation). Apparently, the international trade union movement became infected with a kind of enlightened Leninism (Lenin is the creator of the ban on factionalism in the Russian Communist Party, that later became known by the name of Democratic Centralism used by all communist parties). WCL members could never present themselves as a a group in the ETUC. The WCL had lost therefore its identity on European level. The question was if it could be maintained on international level. That is what still had to be figured out.

to be continued


The above story is a personal testimony of what happened at the end of the last century and the beginning of the new millennium in the international trade union movement, in particular in CLAT and the WCL.