|
|
Dear ILC International Newsletter readers:
Price 0.50 Euros ----- Introduction The Mumbai conference in India "In Defense of Peace, National Sovereignty, and the Independence of the Workers' Movement Faced with World Governance" will take place next January 19 and 20. We will publish a new contribution by Roger Sandri, "Against any co-optation - for class independence." United States: You will find below the second part of the interview conducted by Alan Benjamin with Cynthia McKinney, presidential candidate of the Power to the People coalition, who declares that, "[t]he immediate removal of all the troops from Iraq and the Middle East is needed." France: In preparation for the European Workers Conference, on February 2 and 3 in Paris, we are publishing a contribution from France concerning the international significance of two decrees of the European Court of Justice concerning union rights. Algeria: A. Sidi Said, of the UGTA trade union confederation, and Louisa Hanoune, general secretary of the Workers Party (PT), together have sent the Pakistani trade union confederation, the APTUF, a letter of solidarity with the Pakistani people. Send us your contributions and subscribe to the ILC International Newsletter! ----- Table of Contents ----- Contact Informations internationals *****************************
For class independence, against co-optation A contribution by Roger Sandri Trade unionism is a domain that extends up to the economic and social conditions of capitalism and even socialism. Trade unionism is the terrain in which, in the words of Marx, the autonomous activity of the working class occurs. It is the terrain where the workers fight for their living and working conditions, immediate interests, as well as their future interests and the general class interests.
Trade unionism spread with the more and more complete expropriation of the producers, who now only have their labor power to sell to the capitalists for a wage. In this context, the only way for a worker to defend himself or herself is to gather with other workers to partake in collective resistance, with a final goal: to take back, for the collectivity, the means of production. As Marx and Engels described it, the evolution of trade unionism is linked to the evolution of capitalist society and its political expression, the bourgeoisie. At the beginning of capitalism, the trade unions arose directly from the movements of protest and the local demands. Quickly thereafter the trade unions came apart; this was the unconscious class struggle.
The proclamation of the First International in 1864 marked an important step in the history of the world workers' movement. It remains an uncontestable reference point, because it helped nurture class consciousness, based on the un-stoppable conflict between capitalism and the international working class. The internationalist conception of trade unionism does not ignore national specificities; it takes into account the origins of the peoples and their political traditions. But this changes nothing fundamentally. In the words of Karl Marx, words which remain as valid as ever: "The class struggle is international in its content, but national in its form." In the fight for the definitive emancipation of the proletariat, some workers' organizations have linked their actions to a political party that they have mandated to lead to the conquest of state power.
Despite this different conception of action, there is a common vision concerning the goal, the abolition of the capitalist system of exploitation, the exploitation of man by man. From this is born the absolute rejection of participating in the structures of capitalism and its political expressions. This concept is more relevant than ever today with globalization and the global economy. --- Globalization and the global economy require today the destruction of all the barriers to profit and to the road toward a totalitarian system of a new kind. The nation-states born in the first phase of capitalist expansion have become today obstacles for world capitalism and for the multinational corporations that dominate the world, headed by the U.S. corporations, which are more than ever in the dominant position. Multinationals, as we have written before, have become political entities, substituting the nation-states. Today they are the vanguard of the new imperialism, pushing a form of neo-colonialism against the most vulnerable regions of the world, imposing their economic and financial dominance. There is no more need for expedition troops, religious missionaries: the corruption of the elites is sufficient for imposing these new forms of domination. The structures of globalization and multilateralism aim to give the multinational corporations a good name through "corporate social responsibility," pushing on the political leaders (who are often corrupt), financial facilities and aid of all types so long as they eliminate the structures that block the policies of the multinational corporations. This is a new "opium war." The International Labor Organization, a specialized institution of the U.N. founded in 1919, has incorporated the corporations into its structures, thus de-facto giving them the same status as the members states. According to the tenants of globalization, the nation state has become too small to deal with the big questions and too big to deal with the small ones. In economic terms, the corporations aim to set up regional and transnational formations for their capital and factories. In sociological terms, the technical groups and others want more direct control over the decisions that concern them and aim to reduce governments to smaller entities, easier to control, and to reduce their functions to security and military questions. Referring to the conclusion of the "trilateral" oligarchic group, at the Davos conference, the solution has been specified: a more powerful world state and more decentralized national state, on the basis of the principle of subsidiarity. The globalist strategy consists of erasing all the organized political structures, in favor of a "civil society." But civil society is not a natural fact. It can only exist through political parties and trade unions, the fundamental bases of democracy. Historically speaking, the nation remains the political expression of the state and the organic form of the nation, while remaining the expression of the ruling class in the economic sense of the term. The globalizing structures push for the suppression of all political and social organizations. This a return to pure and hard liberalism, in the name of the triumph of the individual. The development of communication techniques dominated by the ruling superstructures can become a means of communication against individuals. It can also be transformed into an instrument of domination and destruction of any social link, with the introduction of a new form of coercion and domination in the Big Brother style described by George Orwell. Faced with the rapid evolutions facing us, it is necessary to not remain simple observers. Fortunately, for societies the national framework remains the most certain one at this time, the only one founded upon political sovereignty that no force can replace when they propose to us a new form of totalitarianism. --- Global economy, world society, world market are the new Leviathan that aims to crush the forces of resistance; first of all, the trade unions of workers. For the market society, the political framework is a conglomeration of individuals. In all domains, the collective must cede to the individual. The development of capitalism has led to the creation of workers' unionism, born of a violent reaction to the miserable conditions facing the laboring masses. Thus, born from industrial society, the existence of a working class is denied by the capitalists, who see the workers only as a sum of individuals. But these individuals are forced to sell their labor as a commodity in order to survive and through this experience (of belonging to a class distinct from the capitalists) become conscious of reality and also begin to organize collectively. This working class, which holds the fate of humanity in its hands, creates its own organizations. To do so, it takes into account its own national traditions, to create the workers' organization to lead toward definitive emancipation, putting an end to the exploitation of man by man. The social conquests won through the hard workers' struggles in the 19th and 20th centuries, guarantee in the industrialized countries a network of social protection, protecting the workers from cradle to grave. Internationalism, uniting the peoples in the dominated countries and the workers of the world, will contribute in a powerful way to the liberation of the peoples colonized by imperialism. The new working classes of these countries enlarge the ranks of the workers' international. Despite the national traditions and the differences in action, the common denominator to all workers in their hard reality of the existence of exploiters and exploited, generating a permanent class struggle. It is based on this fact that workers' struggles are organized to face the threats represented today by the world market and the forces of globalization, which are its expression. ----- Workers' unionism, the organization of the class par excellence, is naturally opposed to the forces of capital. More than ever, it represents a means of protest against the established world order. World capitalism and its structures are conscious that this resistance is more and more opposed to their projects of social destruction. Collective organizations are an obstacle that must be destroyed at all costs. To avoid reactions of protest, world capitalism, through the vehicle of atomized local organization that are accomplices in the capitalist reaction, aims to transform protest trade unionism into a unionism of accompanying the imperialist policies.
The International Liaison Committee of Workers and Peoples cannot support this orientation. For all the class conscious workers and their organizations, the national and world society remains divided into social classes with antagonistic interests. For us, the class struggle remains the motor force of history. The working class internationally, on the basis of its fundamental principles, has a historic mission to end the reactionary offensive facing us. Agitating among the workers, strengthening the workers' organizations, that is, resisting and rejecting any integration into the apparatuses of capitalist domination and continuing to defend class independence everywhere -- these are our methods. January 1, 2008 ********************************** UNITED STATES
The formation of the Reconstruction Party Organizing Committee and the Cynthia McKinney presidential bid are of extraordinary significance for workers and peoples the world over who have been hoping to see someone come forward in this 2008 presidential election to represent and defend their interests.
McKinney: Regarding the more general programmatic planks, we just heard the announcement that unemployment is at two-year high. There is a need for a real jobs program. We need to make resources available to provide jobs to Americans who need them. A massive public works program would rebuild our crumbling infrastructure, with union jobs at a living wage. The funding exists for such a program. It would be provided by slashing the war budget and making the rich pay their fair share of taxes. Labor unions are faced with shrinking numbers; they need a boost in membership. Workers need unions. The construction trades could partner up with universities in the field of construction science, and construction academies run by the unions could provide job training. An extra component would come from Green jobs. We need to manufacture technologies that diminish our carbon footprint. This makes good economic and global-warming sense. We need a new economic and foreign policy that promotes alternative energy technologies for heating and cooling -- like solar and wind power. Then there is the issue of "free trade." We have to put a stop to these "free trade" agreements, and quickly. After 14 years of NAFTA it is absolutely clear that unemployment in the United States has risen as a result of this treaty. We are losing jobs -- especially jobs with living wages and benefits -- to all these "free trade" agreements, be it NAFTA, CAFTA, the Caribbean FTA, the U.S.-Peru FTA, you name it. The American workers are not benefiting from these agreements. Their jobs and communities are being destroyed. Nor are working people in the rest of the world benefiting from these agreements. Quite the contrary: Their working conditions and living standards, which were already bad, are deteriorating exponentially. Only the transnational corporations are benefiting. They are reaping super-profits. This new "globalization" has become a race to the bottom. And now the American workers have joined in this race. Question: Brother Lybon Mabasa, co-founder with Steve Biko of the Black Consciousness Movement in South Africa, wrote an Open Letter to Black activists and organizations in the United States urging the formation of a Reconstruction Party. He described Africa as a "continent, first ravaged by the slave trade and then by colonial occupation, that found the promise of national liberation confiscated and betrayed by horrific so-called 'ethnic' wars and structural adjustment/debt-repayment programs -- all of which were imposed by the U.S. government and by the international institutions of finance capital (IMF, World Bank, WTO, European Union, AGOA, NEPAD)." Mabasa went on to explain that "racism against people of African origin on all continents is a scourge that has not been erased. On the contrary, Black people -- from Brazil, to the Caribbean, to the United States -- are being driven into sub-human conditions, rounded up in prisons, placed on chain gangs, subjected to indiscriminate police violence, and/or heaved onto the scrap-heap of unemployment and homelessness." He then stated that "the children of Africa are looking for a ray of hope" coming from their African American sisters and brothers, particularly in this election year 2008, when the attention of the American people is drawn to the elections and the political process. What can be done to respond to this dire appeal from Africa? McKinney: Africa is a continent rich in resources, a continent upon which civilization as we know it has grown to depend. Because Africans were so resilient in what might have been harsh environments for others, because Black people could be used to satisfy the needs and wants of others, our very survival has had to overcome internal and external threats to our very existence. Our survival as a distinct group worthy of self-determination and not just as the source of other people's gratification depends on our ability to fashion strategies to survive in the face of such hostility. Africa, as Brother Mabasa, has pointed out, is now a devastated continent. Millions of people are dying in the killing fields, or in villages and city streets from HIV/AIDS and pandemics thought to be eradicated long ago. Africa is on the edge of an abyss. I am heartened by election results that have put the people in power in Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Cote d'Ivoire, Ecuador, Haiti, Nicaragua, Spain, and Venezuela. Africans must withstand the outsider meddling, and we have a role to play there to pressure our government to refrain from its interference. Africom is the latest example of such interference that must be resisted at all costs. Ownership of the land in Africa is also something that must be addressed. I ask, how did the people who claim ownership of the land get title to the land? When the white landowners in Zimbabwe, Namibia, South Africa, and across the Continent are able to answer that question honestly, then we can have a discussion about how they will correct their fundamental injustice that endures to this date. Then we want to talk about resource ownership. There is no such thing as a non-blood diamond on the Continent unless the diamond was mined, cut, polished, made into jewelry with other precious metals and gems that were also produced by Africans. Intermediate stops in Tel Aviv, Antwerp, London, New York, or Amsterdam are really not necessary. Africans can do that work and only when they do that work can we say that we've eliminated blood diamonds. And blood oil, and blood coltan, and blood uranium. Let's talk about debt. By the time we add up the military interference, the theft of resources, the murders of authentic leadership, and finally the theft of its human resources and all that intellectual capacity, there is no such thing as African debt to any Western government or multilateral economic institution like the IMF. Hands off African resources! This must be part of the platform of a Reconstruction Party. Question: On the subject of immigration, what proposals are you putting forward to address this question? McKinney: The corporations, the mainstream politicians and their mouthpieces in the media have found scapegoats for their failed policies. They tell us the "illegal immigrants" are responsible for the massive loss of jobs in this country. This is a bold-faced lie. What is illegal is the way that U.S. economic policies treat workers in this country and throughout the world. It is impossible to discuss the issue of so-called "illegal immigration" without addressing the reasons millions of people are forced to flee their countries to come to the United States. It's our economic "free trade" policies and our military interventionist policies that destabilize countries the world over and create the massive movements of people escaping their plight in the hope of supporting their families. You have to address the underlying problems behind the immigration boom by implementing policies internationally based on the respect for the sovereignty of the peoples and nations of the world, based on respect for the principles of self-determination and human rights -- that is, policies aimed at promoting genuine cooperation -- not oppression and exploitation. And as you do this, you have to put a halt to policies at home that criminalize the victims or treat them as second-class citizens. These are all union-busting and wage-depressing tactics couched in terms of making the victim appear to be the perpetrator. An amnesty program, such as was instituted in the 1980s, would be a way to deal with this question equitably while the economic conditions producing the massive flight of people from their countries is addressed. Question: What are some of the other questions that need to be tackled? McKinney: There is, of course the question of this "war without end." We need the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops from Iraq and from the rest of the Middle East. This includes all military advisers. It also includes closing all military bases in the region. We must reject this "war on terror," which is only aimed at promoting a failed foreign policy. It's past time to repeal the Patriot Acts, the Secret Evidence Act, and the Military Tribunals Act. But this is not all. We need to bring all of our troops home from Europe, Asia and Africa. We don't need our young women and men in harm's way. We need a Department of Peace instead of a Department of State. This Department would put forward projects for peace all over the world. In the meantime, the Pentagon must oversee the withdrawal of U.S. troops from about 100 countries around the world. Our presence in those countries, through our foreign and military policies, only stokes wars and conflicts. We must pay very close attention now to Pakistan. I recently issued a statement saying, No U.S. Troops in Pakistan! In fact, we need to retool our military to ensure the adequate protection of people's interests at home. We could deploy our Army Corps of Engineers to rebuild infrastructures and communities here and abroad. We could deploy our diplomats to help resolve conflicts through peaceful means. We need to redefine what is meant by national security. We need to put in place a social index so that national security exists when our people feel safe in their communities, when they are free from hunger and poverty, when they are fully literate, when there is health care for all, when they are making a living wage, when they are free from drugs and incarceration. Health care is another major issue. All too often patients cannot receive the treatment they require because the treatment is blocked by the profit motive of the insurance companies. You have to take the insurance companies out of the health-care equation. We in the United States spend far more money than any other country in the world and we get less. Close to 50 million people are uninsured. Countries that have what others pejoratively call "socialized medicine" are better performing. We need a universal, single-payer health-care system in this country. The message I would give to nascent democracies is, Don't follow the U. S. example on many issues! There is a growing divergence between our rhetoric and our practice. And in practice, too many Americans are hurting. For them, the American model has failed in terms of health care, education, and political integrity. We can't even be sure the election results reflect the will of our voters. This started in 2000 and has only gotten worse. The U.S. government cannot put itself in judgment of other countries' elections until it gets its own house in order, and its house is in complete disorder when it comes to election integrity. Those who own and run the new electronic voting machines get the exact results they want. And we need to focus on education, but not with "reforms" like No Child Left Behind that are basically aimed at dismantling public education. We need to instill pride and a desire to learn. We need free higher education for all. India's socialized economy provided free higher education. Now our jobs are being shipped to India. And we need child care for working families who need it. Parents should have the opportunity to have their children taken care of, either through a family subsidy or through public child-care centers in schools. This could also free parents up to go back to school to get retrained. Then we need to address some difficult questions that face our youth in particular. Drugs are more and more prevalent. They are used to block out the harsh realities. Removing those harsh realities and giving youth hope -- with real jobs and a real future -- would go a long way to addressing this scourge in our communities.
U.S. prosecution of "the drug war" is pitiful. The victims are thrown into prisons, while the wealthy users and the big drug dealers get off scot-free. The rich who own stock in the prison-industrial complex, or the corporations that hire prison labor, are reaping hefty sums while everyone else is impoverished or families are ripped apart by imprisonment. This situation is intolerable and must be turned around! We need money for detoxification, rehabilitation, education -- not incarceration. These are just some platform proposals. The National Organizing Committee for a Reconstruction Party will be discussing these issues in the coming weeks to define more clearly the main demands of our Reconstruction Party organizing campaign. We will then submit these for broader discussion, expansion and improvement to the activists in the Local Organizing Committees for the Reconstruction Party. Building a platform is a process. Question: You are seeking the Green Party's presidential nomination? How do you see the relationship between the Greens and the Reconstruction Party? McKinney: This is a time for coalition politics. I believe we need a coalition -- a peace and justice coalition, a Power to the People coalition -- that can put another voice at the table of American political discussion. We now only have two voices -- which are more and more the same voice. And with 5% of the vote we can get three. The Reconstruction Party is a necessary and central component of this coalition. Winning the 5% of the vote, which we can do through the Green Party ballot, will translate into increased visibility on the issues of concern to the Reconstruction Party activists. Question: How do you answer those who say you might be a spoiler on behalf of the Republicans if you get 5% of the presidential vote in 2008? McKinney: I tell them that more than 40% of the potential voters in this country don't vote because they don't hear a message that motivates them to go out and vote. I want to give them a reason to vote. I also tell them that the real spoilers are the ones who stole the vote in 2000 and 2004 -- or who didn't fight to defend the vote. Question: Is there anything you would like to add? McKinney: I just want to underscore the urgent need to build the Reconstruction Party. There are a whole lot of people waiting for us to do something. The international community also needs us. They are waiting for us to do something. We must move today with deliberate speed to build this Reconstruction Party. ----- Cynthia McKinney has published the whole of this interview on her internet site. To subscribe to the English-language ILC International Newsletter, contact us at <ilcinfo@earthlink.net>. To contact the Reconstruction Party Organizing Committee, write to Kali Akuno at <kaliakuno@gmail.com>. To learn more about Cynthia McKinney's record, visit www.allthingscynthiamckinney.com. To make a donation to her campaign fund, visit www.runcynthiarun.org. You can also send a check or money order to Power to the People Committee, P.O. Box 311759, Atlanta, GA 31153. ************************
February 2-3, 2008, Paris "No to the new European treaty!" The purpose is to bring together, on the basis of an investigation done in each country concerning the policies of the European Union, labor activists of all tendencies who fight in their countries against the offensive to impose on the people a "new" European treaty that takes up and worsens the European "Constitution" that was rejected two years ago by the workers and peoples. The European Workers' Conference will take place in Paris on February 1,2, and 3, 2008. A bulletin is published each month through the form of a special issue of the ILC International Newsletter. The first issue has already appeared. This issue can be received by subscribing to the ILC International Newsletter or writing to entente-europeenne-des-travailleurs@orange.fr.) *************************
All the mask of a social European has just fallen apart: Concerning the decisions of the Court of Justice on December 11 and 18 In a contribution for the European Conference of February 2 and 3, Lothar Hesse, a German trade union leader (see issue 267), explained: "The European Court of Justice issued two decrees on December 11 and 18 that massively attack the right of trade unions to take measures of struggle and to realize strikes. Once again, this demonstrates that the right to strike and the policies of the European Union are irreconcilable." These two decrees of the European Court of Justice are so important, particularly for trade unionists throughout Europe, which it is not superfluous to return to this question. Let us briefly recall the facts. The Viking Case Viking Line is a Finish company of passenger transportation, which owns the Rosella ferry. This ferry had a primarily Finish crew, covered by a collective bargaining contract negotiated by the Finish union of sailors. To lower its labor costs, the Viking company decided to register the Rosella in Estonia, in order to employ Estonian workers, who make less than the Finish workers. "The union of Finish sailors expressed its opposition to such a project and called on the International Federation of Transport Workers (ITF), which brings together 600 trade unions in this sector, to fight against this. This federation wrote its affiliates to call on them to refuse to negotiate with Viking, leading to the defeat of this outsourcing plan." (Le Monde, December 13) The Viking company then registered a complaint with the English courts and eventually the European Court of Justice took up the case. On December 11, the Court of Justice rejected the arguments of the Finish trade union in the following terms: "The Court recalls that the Treaty relative to the freedom of establishment apply to a collective action engaged by a trade union or a group of trade unions. Š The dispositions concerning the right of establish give rights to a company that can be opposed to a union or a group of unions." The rule of the Treaty mentioned by the European Court Justice is Article 43 of the TCE, reaffirmed without a change in the current Lisbon treaty, which stipulates: "The restrictions on the liberty of establishment of nationals of a member state in the territory of another state is prohibited." The institutions of the European Union can always speak of "fundamental rights." We see now the truth behind this empty formula. The rules of the Treaty on the "freedom of establishment" rule over everything else and, in the present case, allow for the development of measure against union activities. Now let us look at the second decree of the European Court of Justice, which undoubtedly will have an even greater impact on the union movement. The Laval Case The bourgeois publication, Liaisons Sociales, on January 8, summed up the facts as follows: "This affair concerns a Latvian company (called Laval) that brought several dozen workers from Latvia to work at building sites in Sweden, particularly in the town of Vaxholm. The Swedish union of housing workers and public works entered into negotiations with the company to determine the wages of the Latvian workers and to have them be covered by the Swedish collective bargaining contract. Faced with the refusal of the Latvian company, the Swedish union took the measure of a collective action in the form of a blockade of the Vaxholm worksite, then a blockade of all the sites of the company in Sweden. The Swedish union of electrical workers joined in solidarity, with the effect of interrupting the activities of the company." On December 18, the European Court of Justice "judged the blockades in 2004 of the Swedish unions of the Latvian Laval company." (Le Monde, December 20) The title of verdict of the Court of Justice is very clear: "Such a collective action, taking the form of a blockade of worksites, constitutes a restriction of the free providing of services that, in this case, is not justified in relation to the objective of the general interest protecting workers." The rules of the Treaty, upon which the Court of Justice rested its case, is Article 49, prohibiting any restriction of the free providing of services, another article repeated without change in the new Lisbon treaty. Here is the argument of the Court of Justice: "The Swedish law relative to the use of workers specifies the conditions of work relative to the subjects enumerated in directive 96/71/CE, with the exception of the level of the minimum wage. The law is silent concerning wages, thus this decision is traditionally mandated in Sweden to social partners, through the vehicle of collective bargaining." Le Monde commented on this argument: "The judges feel that the Swedish system generates a legal insecurity: a foreign boss does not know in advance how much he must pay his workers; this decision is subject to a previous negotiation at the worksite." The consequences in Sweden Le Monde summarized the reach of the consequences that the EU Court of Justice's decision had in Sweden: "If one listens to some comments, European judges would have tolled the death knell of the Swedish model, that system that Europe is scrutinizing over and over again for inspiration. Since the Vaxholm case erupted in the Spring of 2004, it has practically occupied the front of the political stage of the realm ... Since Sweden joined the EU in 1995, social partners have devoted the largest amount of energy on that case. So the final chapter is painful Š Swedish labor laws will have to be altered. It is still too early to know how. But the judgment is announced right when Swedish unions and employers are discussion new general agreements to regulate labor market and collective agreements." Faced with this situation, Lars Ohly, chairman of the Left Party declares: "Sweden must leave the E.U." Is this conclusion valid only for Sweden? Sending shock waves across to entire Europe Everyone is trying to downplay the importance of the EU Court of Justice's decision. It is that already quoted newspaper, Le Monde, that claims: "The EU court's judgment does not concern those countries that have minimum wages set by law like France, or by a comprehensive collective agreement. It therefore has nothing in common with the validation of the country of origin to the effect that a provider of service should be submitted to the law of the country which he comes from and not to the law of the country where he works. That principle was the core of the original draft Bolkestein directive on free circulation of services; in France, it had fanned the flames of the dispute over the "Polish plumber" during the 2005 referendum before being written off." Can this statement be taken at its face value? As we shall see, this is by no means a Swedish only issue. The very core of the Bolkestein Directive Ears are still ringing with all that was said in 2006 when the directive on "services" was finally adopted by EU institutions. At that time, all the media had affirmed that the Bolkestein directive had "lost its sting" in comparison with the Bolkestein initial version. On November 15th 2006, German Social-Democrat MP, Evelyn Gebbhardt, who reported on the text to the European Parliament had even affirmed: "It was worth while toiling along these recent years. The text has nothing in common with the Bolkestein directive." Especially, the main argument was that, in case workers were outsourced to another country, their rights would be protected by implementation of directive 96/71/CE relevant to outsourcing workers in the framework of service provision. But actual facts are with us. In its judgment, the Court of Justice clearly explains: "The Court observes that directive 97/71/CE does not permit the hosting Member State to subordinate the realization of the provision of service on its territory to the compliance with working and employment conditions that are beyond the bounds of imperative rules of minimal protection." That is a far cry from the mere question of knowing whether there is a legal minimum wage or not. Much more essentially, the Court of Justice brings down the so-called guarantees afforded by directive 96/71/CE on outsourcing workers, since it establishes that minimal prescriptions are in fact a maximum that should not be exceeded in any case. In the present case, the Court of Justice challenged the fact that the Latvian firm was compelled to endorse a collective agreement and to negotiate wages. But, next, in any other country, another judgment by the Court of Justice may concern any other aspect of labor laws and consider that it exceeds what is prescribed as a minimum by the directive on outsourcing workers. The EU Court of Justice's decision exactly shows what the European Union is all about At the time when the ETUC was convinced that the Swedish union was going to win before the Court, it did not conceal the importance of the decision that was to be taken by the Court of Justice. Thus, on January 31st 2006 the ETUC declared: "The conclusion of the Laval (Vaxholm) case, currently being examined by the European Court of Justice, is crucially important for the European trade union movement and the welfare of workers across the EU. Should the Latvian building firm win, the right of social partners to pass collective agreements and preserve labor norms will irreparably be compromised." On the same day, ETUC general Secretary John Monks said: "This is a highly significant political case, for, if European trade unions lose, workers are quite likely to oppose free circulation, single market and even the EU itself." John Monks who warmly embraced the European constitution and the new Lisbon Treaty well showed what was at stake with the future judgment and feared it might bring about rejection of the European Union. And, on the eve of the judgment by the Court of Justice nearly two years later, the steering committee of the ETUC, that met on November 15th , confirmed the importance of those cases for the trade union movement but also for commonly held social values. On the eve of the Reform Treaty, it is of the utmost importance to acknowledge clearly and unambiguously the right of trade unions to preserve and defend the rights of workers by the negotiation of collective agreements and the organization of strike actions in case of conflict so to counter balance employers' economic power. But after the EU Court of Justice's decision, the ETUC suddenly sang to another tune and merely expressed "disappointment," and attempted to play down its importance; it expressed fears that "this case might have consequences on the Swedish system of collective agreement." As if it was just a Swedish occurrence whereas all the previous ETUC statements recognized it had a far larger dimension! The ten questions on principles asked by lawyers On December 5, 2005, a law firm, on the requirement of Swedish unions, written wrote a memorandum that fully justified them. Beyond the argumentative points condemning the Laval Company, the lawyers' memorandum ended on a list of which they coined "ten points of principles." Here they are. - Will the EU Court of Justice recognize negotiating and striking as
fundamental rights? Every one of the points of principle can be taken up and one can conclude: In its decision, the E.U. Court of Justice confirmed that the law of the European Union prevails over the laws of Member States as far as labor laws are concerned, that E.U. Member States may not take measures to prevent social dumping and, again, that the rationale and the principles of inner market mean "harmonizing and bringing wages to the lowest level'. The smoke screen of Social Europe has completely dissolved. For years and years, from euro march to euro demo, the ETUC has constantly harped on "Social Europe" and demanded "better balance" between economic requests and social rights within the European Union. All these claims have just vanished into thin air blown away by the EU Court of Justice's decision. And that is the reason why that decision is passed away as valid only for Sweden whereas it concerns entire Europe. Right after the judgment was passed, Francis Wurtz who chairs the Left group at the European Parliament, declared: "Those two judgments are highly symbolic and strongly indicate the need for a public, unbiased and broad debate, on the content and the stakes of European treaties, especially in the social and democratic areas that are closely linked to it." What now? A "debate" on the content of the European treaties? But both decisions by the EU Court of Justice give the answer. Article 43 on freedom of establishment, article 49 on free provision of services collide head-on with workers' rights. And, among all the EU institutions, the Court of Justice plays its full anti-democratic part: it was not elected by anybody, but decision after decision it erects the entire EU jurisdiction on the ruins of labor laws and social gains that were wrenched throughout Europe. Speaking of Social Europe in the framework of EU institutions is meaningless and deceptive. The chairman of the Swedish Left Party who said "Sweden must leave the E.U." pointed at an solution that is actually raised far more widely across all the European countries. Daniel Shapira ************************
The three priorities of the Workers Party The newspaper, El Moudjaid, (January 7), reported on a television debate in which the general secretary of the Workers Party of Algeria participated. (Excerpts) The revision of the Constitution, which should not be limited to one article, but which should aim to reestablish a balance of powers, in order to strengthen peace and stability, demands the opening of a dialogue bringing together all Algerians, argues the general secretary of the Workers Party (PT), Louisa Hanoune, during a televised discussion in Souraya Bouamama last night. Š The question of peace and national sovereignty constitutes the main priority, in order to preserve the state and the nation. The attachment to national sovereignty and its consolidation is the only path that will allow us to deal with foreign interference in the "era of globalization" that must be resisted through the nationalization or renationalization, insisted the general secretary of the PT, citing the example of Venezuela. The defense of national sovereignty does not at all mean living in isolation, but it implies evaluating economic policies and partnerships. Condemning the policy of privatization of national enterprises, the head of the PT praised the freeze of the privatization of the Popular Algerian Credit (CPA) and of the center of Technical Construction Control (CTC). Š Concerning the phenomenon of the "haragas" (very young Algerians who, at all costs, try to emigrate, often putting their lives into danger), the general secretary of the PT considers that "illegal" immigration is one of the numerous impacts of globalization -- which she labeled at tragedy -- that occurs not only in Algeria, but all over the world.
----- Solidarity with the Pakistani People Following the tragic threats against peace in Pakistan following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, candidate of the PPP for the presidency, the general secretary of the UGTA union confederation in Algeria, A. Sidi Said, and Louisa Hanoune, general secretary of the PT, together addressed the Pakistani trade union confederation, the APTUF, a letter of solidarity with the Pakistani people. Algiers, December 31, 2007 To comrade Rubina Jamil, president of the All Pakistan Trade Union Federation (APTUF) Dear Comrade, We follow with much worry the tragic developments accelerating since December 26 in your country, following the odious assassination of Benazir Bhutto. In these particularly difficult moments, we ask you to pass on our full solidarity with all the members of the APTUF and more generally with all the workers of Pakistan. We learned of the urgent declaration of the APTUF, which the International Liaison Committee of Workers and Peoples distributed. Because, as you know, the Algerian people were bled for a decade, we fully share your position for peace, the unity of the Pakistani nation, and for national sovereignty. The Algerian experience demonstrates to us that these are the conditions for the Pakistani people to be able to resolve through the means of democracy the deep crisis shaking the country. For our part, acting on the terrain of workers' solidarity and the respect for the sovereignty of Pakistan, we are eager to support any possible initiative to help the Pakistani workers to realize their right to live in peace and unity. We hope the year 2008 brings calm to Pakistan,
|
Open World Conference of Workers