Last week, I
attended the tenth Congress of the Southern
Initiative on Globalisation and Trade Union Rights (SIGTUR) in
Perth/Australia, 2 to 6 December 2013. SIGTUR is a network of more militant trade
unions from the Global South with a focus on South-South co-operation. In this
post, I will reflect on SIGTUR’s achievements, problems as well as
possibilities for the future on the basis of the exchanges at this Congress. I
will argue that it will only be through joint campaigns against capitalist exploitation that relationships of
solidarity can be established through SIGTUR more widely.
Australian
unions and labour movements from the Global South
Although
geographically located in the Global South, Australia is clearly an
industrialised country unlike the countries of other SIGTUR members. Unsurprisingly,
first differences emerged right at the beginning of the Congress. When the
various delegations introduced themselves, the ITUC-Africa representative made
clear that the capitalist system as such needed to be challenged. CITU from
India identified capitalism and imperialism as the main target, while the KMU
delegate from the Philippines mentioned monopoly capitalism as the main
opponent. In general the unity of the working class was singled out as
essential in the struggle to transform existing structures of exploitation.
By contrast, Ged
Kearney, President of the ACTU, raised concerns about the recent change in
power towards a Conservative government and the related attack on the welfare
state and progress enacted by the previous Labour government. The Australian
social and industrial compact around the welfare state and employment rights
was under attack, she argued. At the global level, workers from different
countries would be pitted against each other and a general increase in insecure
work was noticeable. While the proliferation of free trade agreements
endangered the environment and undermined workers’ rights, corporate power was
globalised. Not capitalism as such, but unfettered capitalism was identified as
the opponent. Decision-making at G20 meetings should be done in consultation
with employers and trade unions, as unregulated free markets would not work.
This resembles very closely the position of many European trade unions and their
emphasis on social partnership with employers to ensure a capitalist system
with a human face, in which economic growth is combined with fairness at work
and throughout wider society.
 |
| Members at the founding meeting of SIGTUR, Photo by Rob Lambert |
Trade unions and
the position vis-à-vis political parties and social movements
Another area of
differences concerned the relationship between trade unions and political
parties and social movements. As the Argentinian CTA delegate outlined, instead
of close connections with a political party, his union has emphasised
co-operation with social movements. Individuals and social movements can even
be directly CTA members without representing sections of the working class.
This was the basis, he argued, on which the successful struggle against the Free
Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA) had been based. These sentiments were echoed
by the delegate from the ITUC-Africa, making clear that unions can no longer be
islands. They need to co-operate with progressive civil society and move from
workplace issues to community concerns as in the successful global campaign for
the rights of domestic workers. CUT from Brazil and the South African Cosatu,
on the other hand, have close relationships to governing political parties with
the PT and the ANC respectively, as had the Australian ACTU until recently with
a Labour government. They would still emphasise their autonomy as trade union.
Especially CUT emphasised its close collaboration with social movements such as
the movement of landless workers (MST) as well as participation in various left
networks, combined with critical positions on government policy, when
necessary. Nevertheless, this strategy is clearly different from the CTA’s
approach.
CITU/India, in
turn, completely rejects co-operation with social movements, as 95 per cent of
them would be funded by transnational corporations (TNCs) or governments and,
therefore, could not be allies in class struggle. The South Korean KCTU,
finally, had actually founded its own party, which even gained 10 per cent in
elections at some stage. However, soon afterwards it split and one of the two
resulting parties split yet further, so that the union decided in the end not
to support any longer a specific political party. Instead, it joined the broad alliance
People’s Power, which is currently the platform for the struggle against the Trans-Pacific
Partnership Agreement (TPPA).
Considering these
differences over who the opponent actually is and whether to co-operate with
political parties and/or social movements in the struggle, how can SIGTUR
actually function as a coherent network?
Common
challenges and joint campaigns
Despite these
differences, it soon became clear at the Congress that the various SIGTUR members
are conscious of the common challenges they face and the need for joint
campaigns to confront them successfully. For example, the damage caused by the
increasingly powerful TNCs are everywhere the same. Chevron, the global energy
TNC, for example, extracts local wealth and undermines trade union and workers’
rights in Australia as it does in developing countries. Local communities
suffer everywhere, as Chevron neither provides jobs with training opportunities
for local people nor establishes sustainable infrastructure. The environment is
frequently damaged too. Equally, the threat to the public sector through
outsourcing and privatisation affects South Korea, where the KCTU is currently
involved in a bitter struggle over the privatisation of the railways (see Korea:
Support railway workers’ right to strike), as it does Australia, where
austerity measures undermine the public provision of services, or India, where
the government intends to privatise the system of food distribution to the
poor.
 |
| Delegates at the SIGTUR Congress in Perth. |
SIGTUR members
agreed that these common challenges required joint responses including global
campaigns against specific TNCs, such as Chevron, Samsung or Suzuki as well as
a joint campaign for the public sector and against privatisation. The current Trans-Pacific
Partnership Agreement (TPPA) negotiations were especially identified as
dangerous. On the one hand, this agreement intends to strengthen TNCs further
allowing them to sue specific governments, should they endanger their profits,
on the other it pushes the privatisation of the public sector, opening it up
precisely to a take-over by these TNCs.
In short, as
clear as the differences over members’ position on capitalism and on
co-operation with parties and social movements were, it was equally clear that
these differences did not prevent in any way joint actions by SIGTUR. Throughout the Congress, Australian trade unionists discussed and worked with their fellow colleagues from other Southern labour movements on an equal footing.
The challenge of
joint activities: What future for SIGTUR?
As it became
clear at the Congress, the main challenge actually is not how to handle
differences between SIGTUR members, but how to move towards joint actions. In
individual discussions with various representatives, doubts were frequently
raised about SIGTUR’s capacities in this respect. A Thai delegate, for example,
told me that he had been at similar Congresses before, but was getting
increasingly frustrated about the lack of progress. The CTA delegate from
Argentina emphasised that SIGTUR was important for his union’s international
activities, but ultimately the ITUC in Latin America was more active and the
cultural similarities made it easier to organise joint campaigns regionally.
Equally, a Cosatu delegate emphasised the lack of SIGTUR action between
Congresses and pointed to the intensive activities by the ITUC-Africa, being a
much more worthwhile international organisation to work with. CUT from Brazil
still values SIGTUR, I was told, but less than in the past. In short, the next
three years will be crucial for SIGTUR. Joint activities will be necessary so
that members continue having faith in the network. Alternatively, SIGTUR and
the idea of South-South co-operation could lose attraction.
 |
| Discussions at the SIGTUR Congress in Perth |
And the potential is there. A new structure with four regional co-ordinators has been established and several targets for joint activities identified. The unique Global South dimension, the fact that SIGTUR members perhaps with the exception of the ACTU are not affected by the ideology of social partnership still puts it in a unique place for class struggle against capitalism. The presence of three trade unionists from Myanmar, where it has just recently become possible to form openly trade unions, and SIGTUR’s signing up to the initiative of Trade unions for energy democracy indicates that it remains cutting edge as an international labour organisation. The decisive task will be to translate this potential into concrete actions so that SIGTUR becomes more known internationally and its more militant outlook can provide a guiding example for others.
Solidarity and the
overcoming of differences is ultimately always the result of struggle. The next three years may be decisive for SIGTUR’s
future as a network. Either members are able to carry out joint initiatives
against capitalist exploitation through SIGTUR, or they may well feel that their efforts are better
spent elsewhere.
9 December 2013
Prof. Andreas Bieler
Professor of Political Economy
University of Nottingham/UK
Personal website: http://andreasbieler.net
Posts
Andreas, finally got round to reading your excellent review of the SIGTUR conference. Don't think this contradicts any of the arguments I made in the piece on COSATU for Globalizations. Do you think SIGTUR will be more active in the next few years? Often at conferences, both academic and otherwise, many plans are made but not always carried through!
ReplyDelete