 |
| Ross Wilson |
Given
the history of oppression and the continuing hostility from many employers,
this is a remarkable achievement, and reflects the determination of workers to
exercise their new rights to associate, organise and negotiate. Many of them
are young factory workers struggling to improve their wages and conditions of employment
which, for many, are at exploitative levels.
The
International Labour Organisation (ILO) quickly developed a programme to
promote and support the new freedom of association rights which includes an
awareness raising campaign with education and advice for workers, government
officials and employers. However, the core of the programme has been bi-partite
training workshops for the leaders of the new unions and their employers.
The
new union leaders have taken up the opportunity to learn with enthusiasm, from
the first major workshop in July last year attended by almost 300 people. To
date more than 2,000 people have attended ILO workshops, with the two key
leaders from each union being provided with the opportunity to attend the two-day
basic training workshop.
The first real steps as a national movement
The
new leaders took their first real steps as a national movement when they came
together at the Labour Organisation Leaders’ Forum in Yangon at the end of
April. More than 363 registered labour organisations were represented, along
with more than 100 related organisations, at this historic event organised by
the ILO and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation (FES). It was the largest conference
of elected worker representatives in more than 50 years.
Not
surprisingly, there was some suspicion about hidden agendas and tension around
the process for election of the Worker Delegate to the 2013 International
Labour Conference. A substantial
portion of the plenary sessions were spent debating and deciding the rules to
govern the election of the Worker Delegate. It was, at times, a bruising debate
which resulted in the Federation of Trade Unions of Myanmar (FTUM) delegation
leaving at one point, but the conference delegates became increasingly
confident in this process of democratic decision making. Five of the six key
rules for the election process were agreed by consensus with the issue of
whether candidates had to be an existing member of a registered labour
organisation going to a secret ballot of accredited delegates from registered
labour organisations.
The
ballot itself, conducted in the conference hall, was a moving process with many
delegates participating in such a democratic vote for the first time in their
lives. They decided decisively (220 to
101) that only members of registered labour organisations would be eligible to
stand. A further secret ballot was held the following day to elect the Worker
Delegate to the 2013 International Labour Conference.
In
working together to make these key decisions by democratic process the new
union leaders of Myanmar took their first steps as a national movement. This
was undoubtedly the most valuable outcome of the conference. There is a long
way to go in building a national union movement but the 2013 Forum delegates can
feel proud that they agreed the ground rules for, and participated in, a
democratic decision making process.
Only
accredited delegates from registered labour organisations took part in the
ballots, although leaders of other related organisations were able to take part
in the debates. These included the Agriculture and Farmers Federation of
Myanmar (AFFM), FTUM, the 88 Generation, the Labour Rights Defenders and
Promoters Network (LRDP) and Action Labour Rights (ALR).
The
election outcome gave some indication of the strength of the groupings within
this nascent movement. AFFM president Daw Than Than Htay was elected Worker
Delegate with 176 votes, followed by FTUM sponsored candidate U Than Swe with
110 votes, and the secretary of the University Teachers Union, Dr Sai Khaing
Myo Tun, taking the second adviser position with 48 votes with support from a
broader group of unions.
670 enterprise unions
670
enterprise unions will not provide the workers of Myanmar with the collective
strength they need to shift the political economy of Myanmar to a focus on
Decent Work objectives. The ILO education workshops have encouraged the new
union leaders to think critically and strategically about how they might help
to build a union movement which will do that. Overwhelmingly the feedback has
been that they want recognition and respect from their employers for their role
as the voice and negotiators for the workers they represent and they are keen
to learn new knowledge and skills. The keen interest in the April Forum workshops
on organising skills, collective bargaining and workplace health and safety was
an example of this.
There
is also some support among union leaders and employers for a development model
which builds constructive dialogue, including collective bargaining, at
enterprise, industry and national level between the new unions, business and
(where appropriate) government. This would be a model for building value,
profitability and workers’ incomes as a common objective, with union
participation in industry development programmes which are benchmarked to
labour standards, skill development and skill-based pay systems.
The
more likely scenario is that the new industrial relations system in Myanmar
will drift towards a conflict model. The
new law was greeted with a wave of strikes in the industrial estates around
Yangon in 2012, and began to increase again earlier this year as factory
workers, frustrated with their poor wages and working conditions and the lack
of respect from their employers, exercised their right to strike.
At
present most employers have been ignoring the new law and many of them have
been actively hostile with a large number of workers being dismissed for labour
organisation activity. The law has been found to be weak in providing legal
protection against this sort of discrimination and, in particular, has no
effective penalties against employers who have directly challenged the
authority of the Arbitration Council by refusing to comply with its orders
reinstating workers who have been unlawfully dismissed. Union leaders also complain
that employers do not give them the recognition that the law requires and few
genuinely engage in collective bargaining.
Workers Frustration and Anger
Workers are becoming increasingly frustrated and
angry. The risks have been highlighted by cases like the Taw Win Timber products case where the employer’s
refusal to comply with reinstatement orders provoked consequential action by
workers and the arrest of young leaders of the labour organisation.
Despite the urgent need
to strengthen the legal protection for workers and to introduce an enforceable
good faith requirement to ensure collective bargaining can get some traction,
the government has apparently decided to amend the law. In doing
so it is effectively endorsing the status quo which is likely to move
industrial relations towards the conflict model we have seen in other countries
like Cambodia.
Myanmar workers deserve,
and want, better than that. But it will require a deliberate strategy, actively
supported by employers, workers, and their organisations, to build a modern
industrial relations system based on democratic industry/sector structures,
which will lift the skills and pay of workers as an integral part of industry
development.
To do that will be a
major challenge. The ILO core labour standards, as a minimum, should be
implemented in practice as well as in law and the ILO tripartite supervisory
processes will continue to address that. The ILO will also be expanding its
current Freedom of Association Project education and training work to support
the development of social dialogue, including collective bargaining. But
employer and worker organisations, both locally and internationally, will need
to work together to ensure local employers and workers are provided with the
opportunity to understand and support this industrial relations model. And the
reality is that the current laws will need to be amended to actively support
the formation of strong, democratic, well-resourced industry unions.
Debate and decide difficult issues democratically
The experience of the
past 18 months has shown that Myanmar workers are keen to learn about
international labour rights and how they can assist workers to be involved,
through democratic industry-based unions, in the development of their country.
The April Leaders Forum demonstrated that they want to, and can, debate and
decide difficult issues democratically.
The farmers’ unions being
mainly self-employed small farmers have particular issues, such as land security
and modernising their farming practices, but it is important that greater
understanding and unity is built between them and industrial unions.
A process of democratic
discussion is needed so workers and their leaders can decide the model of
industrial relations they prefer. And organisations like the AFFM, the FTUM,
the LRDP and the 88 Generation locally, and the ITUC and Global Union
Federations (GUF) internationally, can play a key role in jointly supporting
such an initiative. The discussion should include a consideration of whether
the government and employers will support law change and the respect for both
the law and labour organisations necessary for the development of a Social
Dialogue model.
The choices are clear
enough. On the current trajectory in Myanmar the conflict model may win by
default. Workers and employers should be given the information and the support
from government and social partners so they can make democratic choices for a
better future.
Download this article as pdf
Ross Wilson established the ILO Freedom of Association Project in Myanmar in 2012-2013, was president of the New Zealand Council of Trade Unions between 1999 and 2007, and is currently executive chair of the Unions Aotearoa International Development Trust (UnionAID).
0 Comments:
Post a Comment