Open World Conference of Workers

In Defense of Trade Union Independence & Democratic Rights

Intern@tional Information n° 63

January, 27^th 2004

Content

Introduction

Campaign for labour rights, USLAW appeal, letter from Iraq

Campaign for the release of Miron Cozma, Romania.

Pharmaceutics industry is undermining the right to work and is cutting down jobs. India

A tragedy: workers at the Tata company India

Against the raise of application fees at universities, open letter to labour MP’s, Great Britain.

Rally to defend anti-war activists. Information on a strike; United States. Violent showdown against popular demonstration Dominican Republic

Subscription

Introduction

Within a little over a month, on March 15^th 2004, an international labour delegation will go to Geneva, to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) headquarters; it will ask the organisation to assume its responsibilities and thoroughly inquire into the situation of labour rights in Iraq.

This week, in the framework of the international campaign “against the occupation of Iraq and for labour rights”, we are publishing several documents: the appeal of American union coalition “US Labor Against The War”(USLAW) to the international labour movement “Why must we wage this campaign for labour rights in Iraq?”; a letter addressed to the ILC by the Organisation for Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), that launches a campaign to demand separation of the State from religion. It addressed the Iraqi provisional government, and the occupying authorities about the repeal of the Family Code and its replacement by the Islamic law.

Upholding democratic liberties, the most fundamental union liberties, that is also the bedrock on which stands the proposition to set up an international Committee and to multiply the stands for the release of Romanian miners’ Union leader Miron Cozma and of five of his comrades sentenced to jail terms for “actions detrimental to the security of the State”. To quote the appeal, “A blow to one of us is a blow to everyone”.

Support the campaign for labour rights in Iraq; ask others for their support. Support the campaign for the release of Miron Cozma and his comrades, ask others for their support.

Support International Information. Subscribe.

Iraq : Campaign for labor rights in Iraq

USLAW (US Labor Against The War) is appealing to the whole labor movement:

Why must we campaign  in defense of labor rights in Iraq?

Since George W. Bush declared an end to the war in Iraq in April, unemployment among Iraqi workers has reached 70%, facing many families with hunger and dislocation. The U.S. Occupation Authority, moreover has frozen Iraqi wages for most workers at $60 a month, while at the same time eliminating bonuses, profit sharing, and subsidies for food and housing, causing a sharp cut in the income already deficient standard of living of those Iraqi workers still employed.

The Congress has diverted 87 billion dollars from public money at the expense of public services and of employment in the United States to fund the reconstruction of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Not one dollar of these sums will be devoted to raising the wages or benefits of unemployed Iraqi workers. They will go to fatten the big multinationals such as Halliburton or Bechtel and all the others that support the policy of the Bush administration in exchange for billion dollar contracts funded by the taxpayer money.

Shockingly, the U.S. Occupation Authority has continued to enforce a law issued by Saddam Hussein in 1987 prohibiting unions and collective bargaining in the public sector and state enterprises where most Iraqi work.

Why does the U.S. administration keep Saddam Hussein’s anti-labor dispositions, whereas it states it purposed to set up democracy for the Iraqi people?

The U.S. Occupation Authority has issued a new decree, Public Order 39, allowing 100% foreign ownership of Iraqi businesses and the repatriation of profits.

The U.S. Occupation Authority has announced its intention to privatize the factories, refineries, mines and other state enterprises, selling them off to private owner despite the fact that these enterprises belong to the Iraqi people, not to the United States. Privatization of Iraqi workplaces will result in the massive layoff of Iraqi workers, at a time when unemployment is already at crisis level.

Shouldn’t the Iraqi people decide the future or their natural resources and industry?

The combined outcome of those measures will bring about one thing: Iraqi workers will be denied any control over their natural resources; they will have no say about labor rights, jobs, wages, living standards, or any control over the structure their country’s economy of. Is that the pledge to bring democracy that the U.S. claimed when they invaded Iraq?

The right to organize in the union one chooses, to bargain collectively, to ban child labor are recognized in ILO conventions 87, 98 and 138. The United States has the obligation to abide by and implement those conventions.

Regretfully in the United States, we know what downgrading labor rights means.

In our country, the major corporations have been undermining those rights and have organized social regression. It is those same corporations that have now settled in Iraq.

This fight is one and the same as the fight we have waged here, in the United States to secure these rights.

U.S. LABOR AGAINST THE WAR,

P.O. Box, 153 1718 M Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036

Help fund the campaign for Labor rights in Iraq

Last NAME, …………………….

First NAME …………………..

Home address……………………………

Country………………….

I donate to the campaign in support………………..

In my own capacity  □

On behalf of my organization  □

Check to be made payable to CMP entente international 87, rue du Faubourg-Saint-Denis 75010  Paris France

A Letter to the ILC sent by the Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI)

The organisation for the freedom of Women in Iraq launches a campaign to demand the more than ever needed separation of religion from the state.

The Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI), those who advocate separation of the state from church, all the enlightened men and women were sorry to hear yesterday that the shariah is scheduled to be installed.

Actually, in an underhand way, on January 13^th, the Iraqi council of Government adopted, law 137 that abolishes the code that had been instituted back in 1958; the code had several time been altered by the Ba’athist party at the expense of women.

The abolition of that code that had during 50 years secured a number of important rights for women, sparked a burst of anger among the partisans of separation of state from church. They staged a march in the streets of Bagdad.

Address to the provisional government, to the Occupation Authority, by the Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI)

On December 29^th 2003, the provisional government adopted resolution 137 that abolishes the family Code that had been in force since 1959; in its place, it instituted the “shariah” Islamic law.

This is a backward, macho, resolution, that purposes to do away with freedom; it will drive Iraq society back to the stone age.

Women will be robbed of the most basic rights, secured through years of bitter, unfailing struggle. The legal status will set them centuries back.

If the resolution is enforced as law, from now on, Iraqi women will be daily exploited; if they sidestep from the Islamic law and traditions, they will be brutally punished.

Law will make it legal to enforce polygamy, early marriages on underage girls, forced marriages, to force women to wear the hijab; stoning adulterous women to death, whipping, throwing acid in their faces for failing to abide by Islamic laws, domestic violence, segregation, will all be recognised as lawful procedures.

Women will no longer be permitted to go out of their homes unless their husbands give permission or they are accompanied; they will be denied the right to ask for divorce, or to choose their husband, unless their family previously agrees. They will be denied access to numerous professions and will be banned from practising sports, dancing, singing or playing music.

The present law that was already modified by the Ba’athist regime comprises reactionary measures taken from the Shariah law.

This law must be replaced by an advancement law that guarantees rights for women and not by a reactionary chauvinist law that denies those rights.

Support the demand for the repeal of resolution 137 launched by the Organisation of Women’s Freedom in Iraq (OWFI)

Romania: Proposal aiming at organising the international campaign for the release of Miron Cozma mine worker trade union leader

 (ref issues 51, 54 and 60 of ILC International Information)

Dear Sir, Dear Madam,

Dear Friend, dear Brother, dear Sister.

You, among thousand of other activists and union leaders, have endorsed the demand for the release of the Romanian miners’ union leader, Miron Cozma, currently jailed for an 18-year term; you have done so either in your own capacity or on behalf of your organisation.

Miron Cozma’s situation is going from bad to worse as you can read in this file collected by our independent fact-finding Committee that travelled to Romania at the end of December 2003. Indeed, on December 12^th 2003, the Bucharest Appeal Court sentenced Miron Cozma and five of his comrades, miners’ union leaders like him (Romeo Beja, Vasile Casapu, Ionel Ciontu et Constantin Cretan), to further long prison terms. As for Miron Cozma, the sum of added prison terms he has been sentenced to adds up to 78 years!

The testimonies we could gather from union leaders of various trends cannot be doubted: Miron Cozma and his comrades acted within the framework of the mandate they had received from union members, from the miners of the Jiu valley and other mining regions in Romania.

Therefore, the threat is levelled at the most basic union liberties, the most elementary democratic liberties. International Labour Organisation conventions 87 and 98 that guarantee those rights are being violated. That is true not only in Romania but also on the international level, for, it must be reminded here that Miron Cozma was the workers’ delegate of his country during two ILO sessions.

 “When you attack one, you attack all” to quote a well-know slogan of the American labour movement. Today, we say: this attack against Miron Cozma and his comrades is an attack against all, against union freedoms and ILO conventions across the whole world.

That is why, considering that, we make this proposal: let us together set up an International Committee for the release of Miron Cozma and his comrades.

Such a step is meant to prolong and widen the campaign to obtain their release; to publicise it throughout the international labour movement in accordance with its century-old tradition of solidarity, against anti-union repression.

We propose that the committee

• Launches an appeal to relay the appeal far and wide, multiplies stands to be forwarded to the addresses below;
• Calls on ILO Committee for union liberties, according to conventions 87 and 98 and asks that it examine the case of Miron Cozma.
• Reports regularly on all the initiatives in a bulletin that will be sent to all the endorsers; we propose that this report should be the first issue.

Will you please let us know what you think of those propositions. We shall be very grateful for your prompt answer.

Henning Frey, trade unionist Ver.Di Germany

Emmanuel Chalard, power and mining industries union activist, France

Alexei Poltorakov, teachers union activist Ukraine

President of Romania

Palatul Cotroceni

Geniului Bd., n°1

Bucarest (Roumanie)

Fax: 40 21 312 11 79

Mme Rodica Stanoiu

Minister of Justice of Romania

Str. Apolodor 17, sector 1

Bucarest (Roumanie)

Fax: 40 21 315 53 89

Copies à eit.ilc@fr.oleane.com et à free_cozma@yahoo.com

I join the international committee for the release of Miron Cozma

and fellow mine workers arrested

Last NAME, …………………….

First NAME …………………..

Home address……………………………

Country………………….

I donate to the campaign in support………………..

In my own capacity  □

On behalf of my organization  □

India: Jobs and Right to Work destroyed in the Pharmaceutical Industry

We received the following contribution from the All West Bengale Sales Representatives’ Union, which will hold its annual Assembly on the 21-22^nd February at Calcutta.

Our organization, All West Bengal Sales Representatives’ Union, feel honoured to be a part of those who have distanced themselves from producing a great deal of rhetoric without substantive plans of action. In to-day’s situation there is hardly any scope to mystify the quest for alternatives. With the advent of twenty-first century when men are being haunted by the fear of want in the midst of plenty all around – it becomes pertinent to explore the avenues to capture the true transnational spirit of workers’ movements in the context of the onslaughts of capitalist globalization.

GLOBAL PHARMA SCENARIO: The most severe implication of the contemporary globalization is the rapid informalization of workers throughout the world including the developed capitalist countries where millions of jobless people are experiencing a social exclusion. And, this is being done under the garb of ‘Flexibilisation’ of work resulting from technology based economic order.

The Pharmaceutical Industry, where our primary trade union activities are concentrated, is also witnessing a process of consolidation like other branches of commerce and industry. The concentration and centralization of capital spurred by the desire to gain and the fear of competition, leads to the establishment of a monopoly position, which alone guarantees the extraction of maximum profit. The mergers and acquisitions in the industry during the past ten years is a clear indication in these directions. The 400 billion (sales 2002) Pharma Industry worldwide is dominated by mostly US MNCs. To-day’s global drug market is dominated by half a dozen companies – each with a 10% share of global prescription market. The rank and sales of top pharmaceutical companies (2001) are as follows: -

Pfizer (after merger with Pharmacia and Warner Lambert, USA, $ 40.7billion

Glaxo-Smith Kline, Royaume-Uni, $ 26.9billion

Merck, USA, $ 19.7billion

Bristol-Mayers-Squibb, USA, $ 19.2billion

Astra-Zeneca, USA, $ 16.4billion

Aventis, France, $ 15.8billion

Johnson & Johnson, USA, $ 13.8billion

Novartis, Suisse, $ 11.9billion

Wyeth, USA, $ 11.7billion

In order to confront in the market place against the enormous sales, workforce, share of the market, advanced technology, production facilities, financial power and huge R&D budgets – other drug companies have to huddle together for comfort and grow big or face extinction. Moreover, in addition to the tendency for the rate of profit to decline, a tendency which operates under capitalism in all sectors of the economy, drug companies are under pricing pressure, with consequent effect on their margins, some are facing imminent patent expiries and the onset of competition from producers of generic drugs and the consequent reduction in sales and profits. In this circumstance mergers offer a way-out of such difficulties. As ever, workers are always the major victims of these mergers and acquisitions. With the merger of Glaxo and Smith Kline Beecham an estimated 10% of the workforce at all level lost their jobs. Earlier, when Glaxo took over Welcome, 1700 jobs disappeared in the UK alone. And, the merger of Zeneca and Astra produced 6000 redundancies.

In order to protect the business interests of MNCs, the implementation of New Patent Regime as prescribed under TRIPS is scheduled to be effective from 1^st January 2005.

The rapid changes in the Pharmaceutical Industry in INDIA are to be viewed under above global context.

THE GENERAL SCENARIO IN THE PHARMA INDUSTRY IN INDYA

In the name of Industrial Reconstructions like(A) Mergers\Mega Mergers-  (Glaxo-Burroughs Welcome-Smith Kline & Beecham – G.S.K.; Parke-Davis-Warner Hindustan-Pharmacia-Pfizer; Sandoz-Hindustan Ciba Geigy – Novartis; Hoechest-Marion-Russel-Rhone-Poulenc – Aventis; John-Wyeth-Cynamide etc.); B) Take-over/Acquisition- (Merind-Tata Pharma; Wockhardt-Merind; Zydus Cadila-Reckon Health Care; Dr. Reddy’s – American Remedies; Ranbaxy-Croslands; Sun Pharma – TDPL; Glaxo-Biddle Sawyer, German Remedies-Zydus, Nicholas Piramal-Rhone-Poulenc etc); C) Brand Acquisition- (Hindustan Lever-Recon Oil; Glenmark-Lyka Lab, Ranbaxy-Guffic; Dr. Reddy’s- Pfimex International. Novartis-Optrex; Dr. Reddy’s-Dolphin, Rhone-Poulenc-Max India, Solvay-Chemech etc.) – what we have actually experienced in these cases and in other cases are: -

a) Closing down of Factories/Offices;

b)  Utilizing the land/premises for real-estate business;

c)  Getting the drugs manufactured through different smaller loan-licensed units at a much reduced labour costs

d)  Retrenchment of employees under the garb of VRS, CRS, FRS;

e)  Forced transfers of MRs resulting in permanent reduction of employment.

f)  Denial of collective bargaining;

g)  Floating unilaterally revised service conditions sans existing DA system, increment etc.;

h)  Forceful redesignation of Sales Promotion Employees – doing the same job to deny collective bargaining rights;

i)  Discriminatory Service Conditions;

j)  Increased work-loads undermining labour codes in a coercive way;

k)  Violation of Agreement;

l)  Tiring out and forcing the Medical Representatives to leave without any compensation;

m)  Franchise and contractualization-even for permanent jobs;

n)  Brand selling generally followed by shedding off of Field Force and closing down marketing operations;

o)  Forcing unethical business means;

p)  De-unionization;(Nicholas Piramal is not scared to declare this even in black and white in their Annual Report.)

q)  Threatening with private security forces;

Thus, the industry is amassing enormous profits at the cost of untold sufferings of the workers and their families by resultant and rampant informalisation of workers in Factories, Offices/Depots, as well as in the Field. The situation is getting worse by the attempts of the establishment to snatch away the hard-earned rights on one hand, and judicial negligence, hyper-activities and anti-worker stand in many cases on the other.

CLOSURE OF PHARMA PSUS

Drug Industry is rightly considered as a welfare industry – where the social causes should have been on priority. In a country where barely 25% of the population can afford alopathic medicinal treatment, at a time when the Drug prices are soaring high and the life-saving drugs are on regular scarcity – the PSUs in Pharma Secetor are being closed down one by one. The Indian Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Ltd – a central PSU with the promise to become a national and continental pride has been virtually closed down without being declared closure! The Bengal Immunity Co. Ltd – a PSU in West Bengal with the capacity to manufacture several Life Saving Serums/Vaccines/Drugs as also Smith Stanistreet & Co in the same state have been silently put to death. The last of the Pharma major PSU – namely- The Hindustan Antibiotics Ltd – is counting its hours.

Can the capacity of these giant PSUs – central as well as state ones – to cater to the needs of millions of common people rationally and economically – can ever be compared and compensated? Now, with the closure of PSUs like IDPL – who had the promises to make India a self-reliant health care system if properly updated and modernized – regular Import of Drugs like Vitamin B6, tetracycline, Oxytetracycline and Folic Acid have started!

UNORGANISED SECTOR – A FEW DROP OF CROCODILE TEARS!

While effectively disorganizing the organized sector a few self-imposed caretaker for the working class are claiming to champion the rights of workers in the unorganized sector! The much talked about ‘Umbrella’ legislation provides no shelter, as it confuses the rights of and to employment with a fiscally unsustainable social security scheme, making a set of empty promises and linking minimum wage to the industry’s ability to pay. The provisions of Pension/PF/Gratuity/Health Care/Maternity benefits etc are being proposed to be privatized and contributory. 

Since in Drugs and Pharmaceuticals – the Small Scale Units account for 40% of the total production – with more than 11000 manufacturing units providing employment to more than 1,70,000 workers directly and since the toiletries, cosmetics and agarbatti industry has more than 15,000 units in the Small Scale Sectors, we have demanded ensuring minimum number of working days, proper monitoring of social security system including minimum wage and enacting a well-knit legal protection without diluting the existing hard earned rights/acts.

CONCLUSION

Without much ado we can concretize our discussion in few pertinent questions: -

1)  Is the ‘Rationalization’ of Workforce in the name of Industrial Reconstruction – the sole prerogative of the employers?

2)  Does the right of association depend on the employers’ mercy?

3)  Is there no effective system in the Government machinery to monitor and impliment professional laws and enactments?

4)  In which way a proper health care system can be ensured for the vast majority of our population – especially to those – who live below the poverty line?

Friends, we are aware that this headlong “Rush towards the Abyss” – demands on organized and concerted response by the workers at a broader level – in tune with the global upsurges against the Imperialist capitalism. Miseries and misfortunes do not allow rhetoric shows or procrastination. On the contrary the ray of hope to the suffering millions can only be a planed class based continuous action programmes embracing all section of struggling masses. We assure on behalf of our organization to be a part in every step of enhancement of struggle and unity in every walk of globalization of protests – with sharper focus and thrust – against all sorts of exploitations in the name of Liberalization. We know that the privileges shall have an end, but the people are eternal.

India : What follows is the Story of Tata Workers?

(Excerpts of a pamphlet published in support of the Tata Workers)

0ff Hutatma Chowk, on Mody Street, sits Bombay House, the head office of the Tatas, India's second largest business house. For 127 years, the Tatas have carefully cultivated the image of being the 'cleanest' and most 'respected' industrial bouse in India. The Tata empire's assets have grown from Rs 69 crore in 1948 to Rs 22,750 crore in 1993‑94 and over Rs.50,000 crore in 2003. The official history of the House of Tata is titled "The Creation of Wealth". But who created that wealth? Did the Tatas and their top management spin cloth, make steel, assemble trucks, or build and run power plants? What became of those who did all these jobs? What follows is the story of some of those who created that wealth.

An awakening call about the destruction of livelihoods and lives of workers

0n 3^rd October, 2003, two Tata workers, Anant Dalvi and Akhtar Khan, set themselves on fire at the threshold of Bombay House. Dalvi died later that day while Khan lingered for a week before succumbing ultimately. Dalvi was a peon and Khan was a rigger. They had been sacked from their jobs after having worked for 19 and 17 years respectively at various thermal power sites of the Tata Power Company. These two workers along with 68 of their colleagues had stuck it out together for seven years without an y steady jobs, relentlessly pursuing a court case and their union leaders to help them get their jobs back. Frustrated at every stage of their battle by the courts and the intransigent attitude of the powerful management, and betrayed cruelly by the so‑called union leaders they had trusted to fight for their cause, Dalvi and Khan set themselves ablaze that October afternoon.

An expression of the growing desperation of workers

In one sense, their story is not unique. Tens of thousands of workers in Bombay have suffered the same fate ai the hands of managements and the courts, and hundreds have chosen to end their lives. Loss of jobs, whether by retrenchment, VRS or otherwise, with no hope of finding alternative steady employment ever again, have driven several workers in recent times to suicide (…) 

But in another sense the action of Dalvi and Khan differed from A those other suicides. They did not choose to commit suicide in the hidden anonymity of their homes and add two more figures in a statistic. in the newspapers. Nor were they isolated or mentally unbalanced. Rather, in their lives until October 3, both of them had been leading a collective struggle for the rights of the whole group of 70 retrenched workers. On October 3, they immolated themselves at the most public place possible ‑ outside the headquarters of the Tatas, a landmark of the commercial capital of India. Dalvi and Khan thus stamped forever in public memory their protest. Their act revealed what the Tata empire was built on, what it had done to them and their fellow workers. They brought to center stage two burning issues kept always in the sidelines: how lakhs of workers are thrown out of their jobs, and how big industry routinely relies on the super‑exploitation of workers of the unorganised sector. For that reason the working class movement must treat Dalvi and Khan not as merely suicides but as martyrs.

Events leading up to the martyrdom

At the beginning of October 2003, Dalvi, Khan and the 68 other Tata Power workmen were shocked when they heard that the leader of the union of the Tata Power workers, Kailash Shinde, was about to sign a settlement with the management behind their backs on 311 October, 2003. This agreement is said to grant the 2,064 permanent workers of the company a wage rise of Rs.3,500 per month and gratuity of 21 instead of 15 days' wages per year of completed service; however, there are, apparently explicit and implicit conditions attached. One of those conditions was clearly that the demand for absorbing the 70 workers be dropped (…).

The next day, most of these 70 workmen made their way to Bombay House where they had been told by Shinde that the signing of the settlement was scheduled to take place.

The incident

0n reaching Bombay House, however, they felt something was amiss because there were no garlands or banners; put up, as was the custom to celebrate the signing of a settlement in the past. Upon inquiry, the workers were told that the function of signing was to take place at the Carnac Bunder site instead. The betrayal hit them even harder. It was the proverbial last straw that broke the camel's back. While the workers wondered what to do next, Dalvi and Khan went behind a water tanker parked across the street, poured kerosene on themselves and set themselves on fire. Dalvi continued to stand where he was while Khan rushed in flames to the entrance of Bombay House. The other workers rushed towards Khan and Dalvi and tried to put out the flames not caring that they themselves got badly burnt in the process.

Bombay House stoned by the irate public

When some workers tried to enter Bombay House to get water, the officials and the guards pushed them out and shut the main doors on the dying workers. If a small fire had occurred in Bombay House, the entire fire fighting apparatus therein would have been put in motion in seconds, but here, when two workers were burning alive, the management did nothing to douse the flames or provide water to the dying workers. When the doors were closed on the workers, they tried to break in. Members of the public soon gathered and were so enraged at the attitude of the Tata management that they spontaneously resorted to stoning Bombay House in protest. The management, who did not lift a finger to save the workers' lives, were quick enough to summon the police to disperse the stoning public. Dalvi and Khan were both rushed to St.George's Hospital at V.T. with 90 and 60 per cent burns respectively. Dalvi died the same night while Khan died a week later in Masina Hospital on 11^th 11, October, 2003.

Unity amidst adversity

The colleagues and families of Dalvi and Khan showed unstinting courage and principled class unity in the face of this immense tragedy. The workers stood by the beareaved families like a rock and made all the arrangements. The company attempted to give them a paltry Rs. 10,000 for the hospital expenses but the workers and the beareaved families refused on principle to accept this. Dalvi and Khan's act of sacrifice so moved other workers in the city that a union which otherwise stays away from trade union solidarity actions came forward to foot the entire bill of Khan's week long treatment at Masina Hospital ‑ a whopping Rs. 2 lakh. Other workers and some social organisations also pitched in requesting anonymity (…).

Class Solidarity

One can comprehend such display of class solidarity by Anjali Dalvi when one takes a closer look at the way the 70 workmen stuck it out together through thick and thin. These workers functioned as a united group in the face of long drawn out adversity. Dalvi and Khan, as leaders of the group, played a major role in keeping them together after they all lost their jobs in 1996. They used to visit every worker's house regularly and find out if he needed any help to keep going. If anyone was in difficulty, financial or otherwise, they would mobilise resources to help them out somehow (…).

Conclusions

1.- The self‑immolation of Anant Dalvi and Akhtar Khan was their public protest at the gross exploitation and betrayal they and their fellow workers had faced. It stands as a condemnation of the entire set of policies followed by large employers like the Tatas and the various governments of the day.

2. The Tatas ‑ who cultivate the image of ideal employers ‑ have proved to be quite the opposite. Their profits have been soaring in no small measure thanks to their policy of cutting labour costs by hiring workers on short term contracts and keeping them temporary for years and years, while steadily reducing the size of their permanent workforce (…).

3. The Government, in tune with the recommendations of the World Bank and the demands of large industrial houses and multinationals, is trying to bring about greater and greater 'flexibility' in employment. Its 2^nd Labour Commission has recommended making perfectly legal what is the ground reality: hire and fire policies, and use of contract labour to do the work hitherto done only by permanent labour (…).

We demand that the TPC reinstate the group of 70 workers with full back wages and continuity of service from the date they were first employed on the sites of the TPC We demand an end to the entire practice of using severely exploited unorganised labour by the TPC, and demand that ail such workers be made permanent.

We demand that the TPC give the full back wages of Dalvi and Khan to their respective families plus adequate compensation for being responsible for bringing about their deaths (…). 

We demand that the TPC give suitable, permanent jobs to the widows of Khan and Dalvi with immediate effect  (…).

We oppose the Government's taking away the minimum legal safeguards to the rights of workers, which were won in the first place through years of hard and bitter struggle of the working class.

Milestones

The Blair government is determined to have a bill passed by the end of January on application fees at universities. They would increase from £1 000 a year – about 1 500 euros to £3 000 – 4 500 euros in 2006. The plan contains provisions that could mean that applicants at university would have to run lifelong debts.

It also provides that universities would be permitted to set the amount of application fees themselves, which means that the national framework would be dismantled; this means regionalisation that would drive universities to get money from corporations and from the European Union in order to make up for the cuts in public budget for universities.

In the face of the 150 MP’s who stated they would not pass such a bill, of the unanimous opposition of trade unions who say that this reform is a scheduled catastrophe, the Blair government has decided to stick to its bill and carry it through, going all the way down the path set by the European Union.

The Labour Party members and the union activists who, on last December 13^th set up a committee against Maastricht and to reclaim the Party, sent us the open letter they are sending to the MP’s.

NATIONAL COMMITTEE OF LABOUR PARTY MEMBERS AND AFFILIATED TRADE UNIONISTS TO RECLAIM THE PARTY, TO REPEAL THE MAASTRICHT TREATY, TO SAY NO TO EUROPEAN DIRECTIVES

OPEN LETTER TO LABOUR MPs

Say NO to any increase in university fees, variable or not!

Say NO to this disastrous plan!

We, the undersigned, members of the "National Committee of Labour Party members and affiliated trade unionists to reclaim the party, to repeal the Maastricht Treaty, to say no to European Directives", are addressing this open letter to our Labour MPs because we think that the time has now come to say that it is everyone's responsibility to oppose the measures imposed by the European treaties, the Brussels directives and the Maastricht criteria, by rejecting the government's proposals on tuition fees which are derived directly from EU diktats.

As Labour members of Parliament, with the imminent vote on tuition fees you face a great responsibility, both individually and collectively.

The future of public higher education is at stake.

At the recent summit of the European heads of state and government, the participants -  including the New Labour delegation - reaffirmed their commitment to enforce all the measures imposed by Brussels and leading to the privatisation of all public services.

Less than a week after the summit, the IMF's annual report on Britain gave a warning against an "increase in public sector costs".

The IMF said: "A wider application of user fees to fund public services (including university fees, road charges and levies on the use of health services would help both in achieving fiscal savings and in reducing inefficiencies."

The IMF's recommendations on university fees are fully in line with EU directives.

It is these measures that the Government is now asking you to endorse.

We hereby express our full support for those MPs who have declared their opposition to what we consider to be a disastrous plan.

Now, as parliamentary representatives of working people, you must say NO to top-up fees.

The higher education trade unions unanimously oppose these measures.

The Association of Teachers and Lecturers has said: "The proposed top-up fees are yet another step along the road to a two-tier education system based on the financial position of students or their parents. This will be counter-productive to the government's plans to bring 50% of young people into further education and will do nothing to enhance Britain's academic standing worldwide."

The Association of University Teachers has said that the fees "would dissuade those from poor-to-middle income backgrounds from entering higher education. We're desperately disappointed that the Government has ignored the nation over variable top-up fees".

NATFHE has said that "if the principle of variable fees is established, the door would be open to the eventual part-privatisation of universities - with disastrous effects upon education and working-class opportunities. The door will be open for future governments to reduce public spending on higher education, increasing the burden on those students who can incur debts. We should call this what it is - the first step to part-privatisation of higher education."

And that is exactly what the European Union is recommending when it says "the private sector may have to assume greater responsibility".

The National Union of Students has said: "This bill is a disaster for the future of higher education. The new plans for variable top-up fees will create a market in higher education. Students from poorer backgrounds will be put off going to more expensive courses."

All this is absolutely true.

The Labour Party was founded a century ago to give political and parliamentary representation to the working class organised in the trade unions.

Is it possible that Labour MPs elected by British workers could vote for such measures and ignore the voice of the trade unions and the vast opposition of the population and the youth?

At the next election, we want a majority of Labour MPs to be returned to the Commons on the basis of the Labour Party's founding values.

This is why we call on you to oppose this proposal.

If the measures are adopted, they would mark the creation of a true market in higher education. Universities would ultimately demand the right to increase the amount of fees on a variable basis across the board (different fees for different universities, for different courses within each university, etc.) or turn increasingly to big corporations for funding.

This would fit in perfectly with the priorities formulated and recommended in the European Commission Communication dated 5 February 2003, entitled "The role of the universities in the Europe of knowledge", which says: "Co-operation between universities and industry needs to be intensified at national and regional level, as well as geared more effectively towards innovation, the start-up of new companies and, more generally, the transfer and dissemination of knowledge."

This would mean the death of public higher education.

Say NO to this "reform".

The introduction of variable fees would result in the privatisation and break-up of the national academic framework, by introducing variations between universities leading to the regionalisation of the universities and the dismantling of the national framework for addressing pay and working conditions for university staff.

This "reform" has been drafted within the framework of and with respect for the European institutions imposed and shaped by the Maastricht-Amsterdam Treaties, and is intended to privatise-regionalise the universities as part of the ongoing implementation of the Lisbon agenda.

The Labour Party and the trades unions which it represents has always supported the principle of universities which are not identified through their geographical location or regional affiliation but rather through their reputation for academic excellence, for specialisation in particular subjects, research, etc.

As Labour MPs you have a responsibility to defend public higher education as part of the fundamental democracy which the Labour Party and the trade unions have fought to advance.

You must say a clear NO to this disastrous plan!

Fighting to reclaim the party hijacked by New Labour, fighting to defend the trade union-party link which established the party as the parliamentary representation of working people, we urge you to oppose these measures which will bar the way to higher education for thousands of young people and which will pave the way to privatisation.

You must say a clear NO to any increase in university fees, whether variable or not.

We are calling on all party members, affiliated trade unionists and Labour voters to endorse this appeal.

Longshore Union to Shut Down Port on March 20 to Protest War on Iraq

The ILWU (dockers’) union is determined to freeze the San Francisco port on March 20^th to protest the war in Iraq.

 “We hope this action by U.S. longshore workers will help put an end to the needless slaughter in Iraq”

Dear Sisters and Brothers:

The San Francisco longshore union voted at our last membership meeting to hold a “stop work” meeting on March 20^th to protest the war in Iraq. We will demand an end to the war, an end to the occupation and the immediate withdrawal of all U.S. troops now!

This is not a “strike”. We are implementing a provision within our contract that permits us to stop work once a month for a “stop work” meeting. We are trying to organize t all ports on the U.S. West Coast to take the same action as Local 10. If they decided to follow our lead, it will send a powerful working class message to the warmongers in Washington that we don’t support imperial wars like the one in Iraq.

 We used this same tactic successfully in 1999 to shut down West Coast ports to demand freedom for framed black political prisoner Mumia Abu-Jamal. Longshoremen in Los Angeles last month used their “stop work” meeting to mobilize support for the striking grocery workers in Southern California.

We hope this action by U.S. longshore workers will help put an end to the needless slaughter in Iraq.

In solidarity

Jack Heyman ILWU Local 10

All out on February 6th to defend the Oakland 25 antiwar protesters Demand the charges be dropped! Defend the right to protest!

On April 7, 2003, the Oakland Police Dept. opened fire on a peaceful antiwar picket line in the port of Oakland protesting the war profiteers shipping military cargo. The demonstration was called by Direct Action to Stop the War. Dozens of demonstrators and 9 longshore workers, members of ILWU Local 10 (who were honoring the picket line) were seriously injured by the indiscriminate police use of so-called “no-lethal” weaponry, including wooden dowels, rubber bullets, concussion grenades, and “bean bag” projectiles. 25 were also arrested including Jack Heyman, Local 10 business agent, who was dragged from his car, roughed up and then arrested for the “crime” of trying to warn his members of the violent police attacks. They’re now facing bogus criminal charges for exercising their democratic right to demonstrate.

All out on February 6th to defend the Oakland 25 antiwar protesters

Demand the charges be dropped!

Defend the right to protest!

Meet at twelve noon in front of the Court of Justice 7 Washington Road, Oakland

Committee to defend ILWU Local 10 Business Agent Jack Heyman

Dominican Republic : Popular demonstrations are viciously repressed

Tuesday November 2003, a general 24h.-strike called by the co-ordination of people’s and union organisations was staged in Santo Domingo

Shops were shuttered, transports stood still, which largely contributed to the success of this march in the face of a vicious backlash by the power in place.

Over 1 000 people who had taken part in preparing the strike were arrested before Tuesday November 11^th, among them many leaders of the co-ordination.

Despite the fierce repression, the people stood their ground, remained mobilised and marched in numerous cities across the country, especially in Santo Domingo, the capital, but also in Azua where PRD headquarters were set on fire.

The marchers were brutally repressed by the army and by the police as well, on the orders of President Mejia (Member of the Dominican Revolutionary Party – that is anything but revolutionary). 27 000 troops and policemen, fully armed, were mobilised to silence any murmur of social protest.

The upshot is bleak: eight deaths and scores of casualties due to bullet wounds.

What do the Dominican people demand?

• Lower prices for food, fuel and medicines,
• An end to power cuts,
• The denunciation of IMF directives, and the end of debt payment
• The improvement of hospital and university infrastructures.

Up to now, Santo Domingo was hailed as a role model by capitalist exploiters for “the social peace that prevailed there”. What social peace indeed! Exploitation of people, barbarous repression against workers and people can no longer conceal the reality: the people are mired in hopeless poverty in a country where the powers that be are in the pay of exploiters. Dominican workers and people are determined to fight back.

 (Excerpts from “Free Tribune” of the Caribbean N° 25 review of the association of workers and peoples of the Caribbean published in three languages.)

Back to Home                       Back to ILC Newsletter Index