Challenges for the TUC
Editorial
The Third Biennial Delegates' Conference of the Trades Union Congress (TUC) ended earlier this month with pledges of renewed commitments to advance the cause of the worker. The new President, Norris Witter won handsomely from two other rivals while as the only candidate for the influential post of General Secretary, former TUC President Lincoln Lewis was confirmed in the position long held by Joseph Pollydore. We congratulate both on their elevation. The immediate tasks ahead for Messrs Lewis and Witter are onerous and will severely test their ability to reconcile some of the excrescent contradictions that beset the movement. Three dimensions of the deliberations of the conference stand out conspicuously. Many speakers at the conference - including the keynote presenter, Dr Clive Thomas, Lewis and immediate past TUC President, Patrick Yarde - protested volubly and eloquently against the ravages of the politicisation of the movement and the political orientation of its constituents on purely labour/worker issues. There were dire warnings that the union movement was being fatally bled by the "obsessive competitive politics of our times, and the divisive role of race-based politics" as Dr Thomas put it. Held in the absence of the largest union in the country, GAWU and the influential, NAACIE it was clear that the TUC once again faces the dilemma that split it so fundamentally in the 80s and spawned FITUG. GAWU has been labelled as a surrogate of the ruling PPP/Civic and though it doesn't like to recognise it, the TUC and some of its primary affiliates like the GPSU are seen as aligned to opposition forces and perpetually and stridently at odds with the government. The TUC will be unable to effectively represent the workers of the country if it doesn't mend once and for all the fractures in the movement. The single most important issue it faces at this time is the division in its ranks and it must confront this. Many of the old grievances harboured by one-time FITUG affiliates linger including the continued existence of paper unions that have no business being represented at TUC level. Ironically, the large number of unions which present-day labour leaders have continuously lamented is a product of an era that sought to trick the system and to thwart proportional representation. In many ways, while a tide of democratic intent has swamped every nook and cranny of this country since 1992, the TUC has astoundingly stayed above the flood and has resisted the inexorable attraction of one person, one vote. While a delicately crafted compromise reunited the movement in 1993, the time is long gone when inscrutable and implausible delegate distribution can determine the destiny of the labour movement. The new executive of the TUC has to awaken to the notion that through its own actions it has been cast as a player stuck in Guyana's political Cold War from the 60s. It must strike out adventurously on its own and there must be a top to bottom shake up of all of its organs and committees. Ultimately its rules must be revamped to reflect accountability and transparency. All of its affiliates must be able to prove the numbers of their members that are paid up and the apportioning of voting delegates must be achieved on the principle of proportionality. This is the same principle on which the new charter for the country was debated by the Constitution Reform Commission and passed to a parliamentary select committee. There is no other way. Free of the shackles of this dilemma and reconciled with GAWU and NAACIE perhaps a more honest debate can then ensue within the TUC as to who is playing politics and where the movement is headed. Secondly, the TUC has to shape its own vision of how workers will fare in the new globalised world that Guyana finds itself in. There must be a new compact devised with employers to break out of the traditional conclaves of dispute and to focus on the bigger picture of competitiveness, equipping and training of human resources and comfortable survival in the global economy. Thirdly, as forcefully argued by Lewis, the movement has fallen far short of being prepared to meet the growing demands of workers, is run on a shoestring budget, is unable to take potent initiatives to enhance workers' rights and is inward looking and paranoid. Union representatives, he said, seem more concerned with perquisites and personal empire building. The growing ranks of the non-unionised no doubt highlights this failure on the part of the movement. These are some of the towering challenges that Messrs Lewis and Witter must begin surmounting as the new millennium approaches.
|