Dear Editor,
FITUG was re-established at the instigation of the PPP and gave support to this party’s policy of domination and its anti-working class agenda. Their position that it is the most representative is driven by an agenda, not one that is grounded in universal principles.
The principle that is applied in the most representative national federation emanates from the United Nations and relates to the number of trade union organisations which are members of the federation, not how many workers are members of the federation or individual union.
It is the same principle which guides representation in the United Nations (UN). Thus, it is seen that in as much as India, for instance, has a population of more than a billion and Guyana less than a million, both have one seat and one vote in the UN. The International Labour
Organisation, international and regional trade union federations also follow this principle.
In keeping with this principle the Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC), by virtue of having more unions affiliated to it, is deemed the most representative federation. That FITUG and the PPP have over the years positioned the issue otherwise does not make it acceptable or consistent with the principle that guides representation by international and regional organisations and has shaped laws, which Guyana as a participating member is obliged to respect.
The PPP-aligned FITUG is playing a dangerous game in furtherance of an agenda that poses consequences for time-honoured principles which have served this world well. That body is sending a message to countries in Caricom, the Caribbean Congress of Labour, and other regional bodies that representation ought not to be determined by the principle of the collective, but by the number in a group.
GAWU has boasted, without merit, that theirs is the largest union in the Caribbean. Caribbean unions need to be mindful that with the notion of superiority in numbers it means that this union has the right to dictate to others, or allow laws and time-hounoured principles to be trampled to ensure their position of pre-eminence.
This attitude stems from intolerance and contempt for equality and invites actions that lead to domination, violations and transgressions.
Were countries in the Caribbean like Trinidad and Jamaica whose populations are greater than that of Guyana to demand that at the level of Caricom and workers representation they should dominate, those in the PPP and FITUG would be among the first to scream that the voices of small-population states were being marginalised. It would be recalled it was same excuse used by the PPP not to have Guyana join the West Indian Federation.
And this brings me to the point of refreshing the memories of some of my colleagues in the PPP FITUG. During the life of the PNC government on many occasions when GAWU and NAACIE had their problems with employers, the leaders of the bauxite unions joined them on the picket line, rain or sun, to give the needed solidarity and support.
This year marks six years since 57 workers were dismissed by the Bauxite Company of Guy-ana Incorporated (BCGI) with the support of a government they were friendly with. Not for one day, has anyone from GAWU or NAACIE turned up at the picket line to give solidarity and support to the cause of bauxite workers.
It seems clear that trade unionism for some means to marginalise and dominate others. What is also ironic about FITUG is that they never miss the opportunity to demonise the GTUC and its affiliates, including promoting the violation of the spirit and intent of universal conventions in the furtherance of their agenda. Yet even as vilifications follow on notions that cannot withstand international scrutiny, they claim to be seeking association or ways to engage. We are facing an issue of trust, respect for principles, rights and the rule of law.
This is trust of a group of people to whom these tenets only matter when such are in their interest. For it was GAWU and NAACIE who in 1999 left the GTUC after a 72-hour national strike was called in solidarity with striking workers waging a struggle for increased wages/salary and improved working conditions and who were shot by police on 19th May, at John Fernandes Wharf.
They publicly came out against the Guyana Public Service Union in their struggles to ensure the rights of public servants were upheld, even though a similar incident took place in 1948 with striking sugar workers to whose gravesite this nation makes a yearly pilgrimage.
Yours faithfully,
Lincoln Lewis,
General Secretary,
GTUC
