Combat - JanFeb11

CombatIssue#: 1 Volume#: 32 Voice of the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) January/February, 2011

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page One

REPRESENTATION WITHOUT RECOGNITION? - Notes on challenges to Trade Unions

Perhaps because the history of (Guy-ana’s) POLITICS, ECONOMIC DEVELOP-MENT, EVEN RELIGION AND CRICKET is somehow more known, racy, contro-versial and/or seemingly relevant to the present, THE HISTORY OF OUR TRADE UNION MOVEMENT IS RELATIVELY UN-KNOWN.

Unfortunately, even this summary viewpoint cannot accommodate a sub-stantial fraction of the record of the glo-rious story of Guyana’s trade unions and trade unionists. If it could, with time and space available, it would recount such pioneering and foundational events starting with the post-slavery (1839) sit-uation when freed former African slaves sometimes worked alongside the new contracted/indentured East Indian sugar workers. Later, the first registered trade union, the British Guiana Labour Union (BGLU), created the basis for the earliest examples of inter-racial cohesion of pur-pose and solidarity to represent working class interests. This provided the impe-

tus for the first political anti-colonial mass movement in Guyana. Thanks to the trade union, working-class represen-tation.

Guyana’s trade union history would also reveal efforts to organize river cap-tains and bowmen working the interior rivers (1910), the Berbician efforts to form a structured trade union (1917) for New Amsterdam workers; then other at-tempts to organize from carpenters to Public Servants in that same year, 1917. Readers can read all about it in Ashton Chase’s now seminal work “A History of Trade Unionism in Guyana- 1900-1961”.

Of course the legendary work of Hubert Nathaniel Critchlow was followed by work in other trade unions by upcoming anti-colonial politicians, especially Ched-di Jagan and, later, Forbes Burnham, who earned the poor workers’ support. One earlier point to note right here is that the best of Guyanese political leaders who struggled for independence were all as-

sociated with trade unions!

So up front, we must denounce those bold-faced, anti-working class employ-ers – foreign and local – who EVEN DARE TO THINK AND SUGGEST THE “DE-REC-OGNITION” OF TRADE UNIONS DULY SE-LECTED BY WORKERS- AND REGISTERED TO REPRESENT THESE EMPLOYEES. Let those bigots and charlatans who prey on the working class be warned: Guyana’s Labour Movement is still vigilant, mobil-ised and, YES, UNITED enough to stand up against any violation of Guyanese workers’ Constitutional RIGHTS.

TODAY’S UNIONS- CONTEXT AND CON-CERNS

The past year, 2010, witnessed vari-ous attempts, both subtle and open, to undermine trade union representation in this country. Before we peek into the identities and purposes of those employ-ers, let us, very briefly; locate a context for these “developments”.

Historically – and naturally – Guyana’s trade unions had to operate in a hos-tile pre- and post-colonial environment. The major employer was “King Sugar”, still owned by the British. From the early 1900’s when the BGLU – our first union – and other unions were formed, everything revolved around that giant employer with influence from both Brit-ain and the local Parliament/Legislature. The employers in business, government, social services, and hinterland enter-prises were grounded in foreign exploi-tation. They were never sympathetic to their colonial employees, or to any civil rights. Indeed, there was no “friendly” labour legislation.Therefore, like the new, emergent po-litical movement, the early and even the post-Independence (1966) trade unions were forced to wage relentless battles against employers – from Sugar Barons to Big Business, to Government or its surrogates.

Continued on page ten (10)

From Left to Right: Hubert Nathaniel Critchlow, founder of the first Trade Union in Guyana; Dr Cheddi Jagan, former President of the Republic and former Honorary President of GAWU and workers picketing Guysuco to press their demands on October 18, 2010

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Two

GAWU & Berbice Bridge Company ink

Collective Agreement

On February 17, 201,1 the Guy-ana Agricultural and General Work-ers Union (GAWU) and the Berbice Bridge Company Inc (BBCI) inked a one-year Collective Labour Agree-ment (CLA) covering the Company’s forty (40)-person workforce.

The Agreement paves the way for the workers to receive a five (5) per cent wage hike for last year, and comes on the heels of the Recogni-tion And the Avoidance And Settle-ment of Disputes Agreement which was signed by the two (2) parties last April.

The CLA, which was countersigned by Charles Ogle on behalf of the Chief Labour Officer, was signed by Oma-datt Samaroo on behalf of BBCI and Komal Chand, Seepaul Narine, Har-ridial Ramdihal, Totaram Sooknaan and Sameer Ally on behalf of the Union.

Some of the thirty (30) clauses in the CLA which were approved by the parties include:- Payment for Sun-days and Public Holidays; Promotion; Meal Allowances; Acting Allowances; Standby Allowance; Annual Leave; Leave Passage Assistance; Sick Leave; Industrial Leave; Maternity Leave; Special Leave; and Medical Discharge. The Union and the Company, on ap-

pending the Agreement expressed their interest in the well-being of the workers and in the development of the company to the mutual ad-vantage of both groups. They noted the need for a respected partnership between the union and the workers on one hand, and the Union and the Company, on the other.

In August, 2009, the majority em-ployees of the Bridge Company sought the approval of the Union to become their representative union. On September 10, 2009, the Union forwarded its application, supported by two-thirds of the Bridge’s employ-ees, to the Trade Union Recognition And Certification Board, seeking to be certified as the employees’ bar-gaining agent.

The Certification Board’s approval was granted on November 30, 2009, but Management of the Bridge pro-crastinated for over four (4) months in having the Recognition Agreement in place.

The Union and the Company would meet again this year to consider a wage hike for 2011 and to consider any adjustment or addition to the fringe benefits of the Collective La-bour Agreement.

GAWU General Secretary Seepaul Narine and other Union representatives receiving the signed agreement from Charles Ogle of the Ministry of Labour

Two burning issues last year (2010) namely the API issue and a wage hike for 2010 between our Union, the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) and the Guyana Sugar Corpora-tion Inc (Guysuco) have been resolved. Two other issues, an adjustment of the wage rate from January 01, 2011 in tan-dem with the five (5) per cent wage in-crease last year and severance payments to workers of Diamond Estate who are made redundant need to be resolved. The workers who are required to work at neighbouring LBI Estate are working under protest hoping their grievance would be soon resolved. The Severance Pay issue affecting about 400 workers has been referred to the High Court for adjudication. The Union among other things, is seeking:-• A declaration that their services at

Diamond, East Bank Demerara with the Defendants in the first quarter of 2010 were rendered redundant, en-titling them to Severance Pay

• A declaration that under the con-tracts of employment between them and the Defendants made at Diamond, East Bank Demerara, in the country of Demerara they are entitled to Severance Pay in the

events that took place in or about the first quarter of 2010.

• An Order directing the Defendants to pay them severance pay prompt-ly, in accordance with their contracts of employment and pursuant to clause 21 of the Collective Agree-ment entered into on 25th October, 2004 between the Defendants and the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU).

The Office of the President (OP) in-formed the Union that it has been en-gaging in discussions with a representa-tive grouping of the aggrieved Diamond workers. The last meeting took place last month (January, 2011). The Union wants the severance pay dispute resolved noting that litigation takes time and is costly. The Union is prepared to support the withdrawal of the suit from the Court if a resolution to the matter is obtained. The Union would continue to support the Diamond Workers to obtain their Severance Pay and there is no doubt from the Union’s perspective that pursu-ant to the Termination of Employment and Severance Pay Act, the workers have a sound case.

Diamond Workers still to get Severance

FITUG in Solidarity with Wisconsin Workers Even as the Republican Governor Scott Walker and his Republican colleagues in the state of Wisconsin, USA passes leg-islation which will weaken or eliminate organized unions and that state’s labour movement, the Federation of Indepen-dent Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG) sends its whole-hearted solidarity to the public employees and other workers who are currently engaged in protests in Wisconsin’s capital. Reportedly, under the guise of “restruc-turing large debt to help eliminate cur-rent budget deficits” the Governor’s leg-islation and plan to introduce additional taxes for State employees now obliged to pay more towards their pensions and health-care programmes. But, most in-sidiously, the Wisconsin State proposes to take away Public Employees Collective Bargaining Rights! This is clearly intend-ed to cripple Wisconsin’s trade unions which represent that State’s govern-ment workers. The union-busting legisla-tion even had the gumption to propose the reinstatement of public-employee unions’ bargaining rights in 2013! This attempted derecognition which heard the Governor declaring that “Col-lective Bargaining is a fiscal issue,” reso-nates with us in FITUG for recent obvi-ous reasons. We stand unreservedly in

solidarity with the workers of Wisconsin who realize that this is an assault on one of their most basic and cherished civic rights. Indeed, FITUG shares the view of some American labour-oriented observ-ers that the Governor’s proposed laws strike at the weakening of all workers democratic organisations in favour of “big money oligarchy”. The State’s public servants have even compromised agreeing to key elements of the Govenor’s Budget measures but are adamant that their right to collective bargaining “is not negotiable”. FITUG wishes to note that the forces that are now attacking the workers in the US are the same forces that have at-tacked and destroyed Iraq, it is the same forces that are supporting the apartheid Israeli regime as it destroys Palestinian homes and expel them from their land, it is the same forces today that are con-tinuing the blockade against Cuba. With that FITUG heartily agrees and en-dorses the struggle of Wisconsin’s pub-lic employees currently on. Wherever in the world trade unions’ right to exist is threatened that is an issue for all trade unions everywhere.

Long Live Trade Unions in Wisconsin USA!

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Three

A regional seminar on Accompanying Measures for Caribbean Sugar-Produc-ing Countries was organized by the Eu-ropean Commission in Montego Bay, Ja-maica from January 20 to 22, 2011. The Accompanying Measures is a form of financial assistance from the European Union (EU) to the 18 ACP sugar-produc-ing countries to alleviate the impact of the EU’s 36 per cent price cut during the years (2006 – 5 per cent; 2008 – 9 per cent; and 2009 – 22 per cent) for sugar sold by the ACP countries to Europe.

In order to access the assistance coun-tries were required to submit multi-annual adaptation strategies (MAAS), better known as Sugar National Ac-tion Plans. Guyana submitted its plan in March, 2006, seeking €440,232,980 or US$620,789,649 towards a series of projects which were aimed, at among other things, increasing production and improving productivity in the sugar in-dustry, since Guyana, unlike the majority of Caribbean sugar-producing nations, has a comparative advantage in the pro-duction of sugar. For the years 2006 to 2013, the EU allocated the sum of €2.04B towards the Accompanying Measures.

The Seminar provided the opportunity for participants to discuss and share ex-periences on the progress of the sugar reforms, implementation of the accom-panying measures and lessons learnt as well as sharing thoughts on how the ac-companying measures should be imple-mented in the ensuing years.

Participants to the seminar were drawn

from nine ACP countries: Barbados, Belize, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Fiji, Guyana, Jamaica, St Kitts and Nevis, and Trinidad and Tobago. There were also of-ficials from the European Commission, the European External Action Service, and the European Union Delegations in ACP countries. GAWU’s General Secre-tary, Cde Seepaul Narine, and Guysuco’s CEO, Paul Bhim, comprised Guyana’s del-egation.

The presentation topics included: the EU Sugar Reform and its consequences for ACP countries; the Trade Environ-ment facing Caricom Sugar Producers, Technical and Policy Developments in the Sugar Sector and Enhancing Sector Sustainability through Renewable En-ergy Development. Ambassador Dr Pat-ric I Gomes, Chairman of ACP/LDC Sugar Group, and Mr Aad Biesebroek, Director General, Development Instrument of the European Union, co-chaired the sessions of the seminar. With respect to Guyana’s support from the European Union arising from the price cut, out of an allocation of €75.09M for the years 2006 to 2009, the Govern-ment of Guyana, in the form of budget-ary support, received €58,034,364. The disbursements were as follows:-

Year Allocated Sum Received

2006 €5.6M €3,437,0002007 €27.0M €21,561,4282008 €24.37M €19,408,2362009 €18.12M €13,627,700Total €75.09M €58,034,364

GAWU attends EU Seminar Guyana suffered a penalty of €6M for the late submission of Guy-suco’s 2008 - 2017 Business Plan, and the remaining €11M was not disbursed due to Guysuco’s failure to achieve its production targets in 2008 and 2009. For 2010, Guyana was allocated €15M ,which will be disbursed this year (2011). The EU Ambassador to Guyana is reported to have said, on February 09, 2011, that Guyana has three remaining tranches (2011 to 2013) totalling €90M. He explained that, should Guyana fulfill the agreed param-eters the full sum with respect to 2010 and the ensuing years to 2013 would be disbursed to Guyana. Of the €58M received, the Govern-ment has released €8M or US$12M to the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (Guysuco) for construction of the Packaging Plant at Enmore ,which has been designed to pro-duce 40,000 tonnes of packaged

sugar per annum. The Plant was sched-uled to become operational in February

this year, but is now expected to become operational in April, according to a Guy-suco source.

GAWU has been that insisting the total EU disbursements to the Government of Guyana arising from the Action Plan must be fully allocated to the Corpora-tion. Hence, outstanding to the Corpora-tion for the years 2006 – 2009 is the sum of €50M or US$69M.

Guysuco badly requires all the Ac-companying Measures’ funding for its capitalization programme to make the industry competitive and sustainable as a result of the 36 per cent price slash. The Corporation’s Turnaround Plan, re-leased in April, 2009 and accepted by the Government of Guyana revealed that the sum of G$11B is required for capital works between 2009 and 2012. The industry has targeted itself to pro-duce 400,000 tonnes by 2013, a produc-tion level which needs to be sustained to make the industry viable once again and become a sound business venture.

INFORMATION CORNER | INFORMATION CORNER | INFORMATION CORNER The Termination of Employment

and Severance Pay Act In this edition we continue to outline the various aspects of the the Termination of Employment and Severance Pay Act.

Grounds and manner of TerminationThe Act prescribes two types of termination:-1. for cause2. with notice - this includes redundancy

A contract of employment may be termi-nated - 1. by mutual consent2. for good and sufficient cause3. by notice given to the other party4. on the grounds of redundancy

“For good and sufficient cause” is common-ly called summary dismissal and is without notice or payment of severance allowance, and is usually for serious misconduct. Where an employee is guilty of an offence that is not serious enough to warrant sum-mary dismissal, he/she may be given a writ-ten warning. If after being given a written warning he/she commits, within the ensuing six months, the same or similar offence, the employer may dismiss the employee without notice. However, if an employer has knowledge of any misconduct, or after investigation of mis-conduct fails to terminate the employee for the said misconduct, the employer cannot thereafter terminate the employee for the said offence. An employee cannot be terminated for unsatisfactory performance unless the em-ployer first gives the employee instructions,

as to how he should perform his duties and a written warning to adhere to the instructions and the employee continues to perform un-satisfactorily. An employee can also be terminated for re-dundancy - the Act lists a number of circum-stances that can cause an employer to make workers redundant. Before making any employee redundant, the employer is required to inform and con-sult, not later than one month from the ex-istence of the circumstances that led to the need for redundancies, the recognised trade union and the Chief Labour Officer of the reasons for the contemplated termination and on measures that could be taken to avert or mitigate the effects of the circumstances. If an employer wishes to terminate an employee’s service but there is no justifi-able cause, he/she can only do so by giving adequate notice and paying all benefits, in-cluding severance allowance. An employee wishing to leave the employment is required also to give the required notice. The notice required could be stipulated in the employment contract or collective la-bour agreement, but if none is stipulated, the Act prescribes a notice period.

The minimum period that could be given is:-1. 2 weeks if employed for less than one

year;2. 1 month if employed for more than one

year. However, either party can pay in lieu of the required notice.Continued in the next edition

The Enmore Packaging Plant

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Four

The 2011 Budget at a Glance - GAWU’s Perspective This GAWU Budget Brief seeks to do two summary things. First, the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) wishes to congratulate Finance Minister Dr Ashni Singh on his relentless annual presentation of the National Estimates of Expenditure and Income, as he, with convic-tion, probably born of both political-economic know-how and political-governmental common sense, seeks every year to review economic performance and project his gov-ernment’s proposals and programmes for success and prog-ress.

GAWU believes that the young Finance Minister is a genu-ine bureaucrat with the country’s well-being at heart, what-ever said criticism his 2011 Budget attract.

Secondly, perhaps more importantly, this review wishes to make strong recommendations against the background of a few economic bread-and-butter relatives.

BUDGET PROMISES AND RECOMMENDATIONS Generally speaking, GAWU endorses, “with cautious opti-mism statement:” the FITUG position as reflected in the fol-lowing “FITUG sees this Budget as one that is concentrated in the right direction, having made provisions for both em-ployers and employees in the process of economic develop-ment.

“The increase in the Income Tax threshold from $35,000 to $40,000 per month is greatly appreciated and timely, since it will alleviate some of the hardships that the workers are now confronted with, coupled with the reduction in the Cor-poration Tax, which will not only create opportunities and greater benefits for the workers, but would contribute to-wards the stimulation of growth in the Private Sector.

“FITUG, as the representative of workers in most of the strategic sectors in both the State and Private Sectors in Guyana, sees the opportunity in this Budget for workers to have more disposable income, so that their aspirations and desires to achieve much social development for themselves could be materalised.”

However, the point must be made here that, despite the highlights of the 2011 Budget which will be presented be-low, the stark realities and challenges in terms of citizens’ daily existence still persist. The hopes reported through Gross Domestic Product (GDP) and Economic Growth hardly translate into sustained ease in people’s daily lives.

Pharmacies, taxis, mini-buses, chicken producers, electric-ity suppliers and gas stations either tell you, or don’t say, why they raise prices. The small man is made to suffer de-spite government’s or the Budget’s best intentions. GAWU suggests that government should give thought to some form of regulation or old time prices control for such items as pharmaceuticals, fuel and specific food items, amongst other commodities.

Whilst appreciative of the 2011 Budget’s raising of the tax-free threshold to $40,000, GAWU is adamant – that mech-anisms and funding could be put in place to increase this to $50,000 per month. Surely, this would be a significant working-class gesture, especially to the government’s own employees.

Is the tax regime fair to the small man? Is the VAT really no burden to workers, who must pay just what rich profession-als pay? Are those private professionals really in the tax net? GAWU recommends that the tax regime should be adjusted to reflect some genuine proportionality in tax contributions.

Finally, any Budget should indicate economic activities and incentives to fuel JOB-CREATION. New employment should be available in both public and private sectors. This also means that both local and foreign investors must be offered incentives to increase, thereby establishing, enterprises which create actual jobs. The 2011 budget is thin on this lat-ter requirement.

However, here now are a few hopeful PROMISES AND PRO-JECTONS in the 2011 Budget.

THE BUDGET AT A GLANCE

Education • $24.3 billion has been allocated towards the continued

successful implementation of the National Education Strategic Plan 2011

• US$4.2 million Guyana Improving Teacher Education Project, of which $200 million is budgeted for 2011

• The National School Feeding Programme has been allo-cated over $1 billion and will continue to deliver a snack to every student in all nursery schools and grades 1 and 2 of primary schools.

• School Uniform Assistance Programme will continue to be implemented in 2011, and will see every school child provided with one school uniform during the year.

• $1.6 billion has been budgeted for technical vocational education, including the completion of construction works at the vocational centres in Region 3 and 5, and the construction of a student dormitory at Essequibo Technical Institute.

• $2.8 billion has been allocated for the continued main-tenance, rehabilitation, extension and construction of educational facilities countrywide.

Health• $14 billion has been allocated to the health sector.• $1 billion has been budgeted for construction and main-

tenance of health sector buildings and infrastructure nationwide

• $235 million has been budgeted for the completion of the GPHC inpatient facility. Additionally, facilities at En-more Polyclinic, West Demerara Hospital, and Oscar Jo-seph Hospitals will be upgraded.

Housing• $3.6 billion is allocated to the housing sector to facilitate

the development of housing schemes which is expected to result in the allocation of 7,500 house lots and the processing and distribution of 4,000 land titles.

• $700 million will be spent in improving the road network and water distribution systems to benefit approximately 1,500 households.

• Under the Second Low Income Settlement Programme, 148 core houses are expected to be completed.

Water • $1.5 billion has been allocated to the water sector to

achieve its objective of ensuring improved water supply.

• In Linden $75 million is budgeted to improve transmis-sion and distribution systems at Amelia’s Ward and Wis-roc from which over 7,000 residents will benefit.

• Another $103 million is budgeted for provision of water to hinterland communities such as Sand Hills, Wiruni, Calcuni, Kariabo, Kwebanna and Mahdia where over 5000 residents will benefit.

Elderly• Financial support in the form of monthly old age benefit

to over 42,000 of our pensioners• Subsidised water payments were afforded to qualified

pensioners to the tune of $3.6 billion• With effect from February 1, 2011, old age pension is

$7,500 monthly, a 14 per cent increase compared to the $6,600 per month paid previously.

Homeless• The construction of the 300-bed residential centre for

rehabilitation and reintegration at Onverwagt has com-menced and is expected to be completed later this year.

• The Night Shelter has extended its capacity by 60 per-sons to now cater for 250 persons.

• Public Assistance is currently paid at a rate of $4,900 per month, would be increased to $5,500 per month with effect from February 1, 2011.

TARGETS 2011

• The size of Budget 2011 is $161.4 billion, 13.1 per cent higher than last year’s budget, and the largest budget in our country’s history

• With effect from February 1, 2011, old age pension is $7,500 monthly, a 14 per cent increase compared to the $6,600 per month paid previously.

• Public Assistance, s currently paid at a rate of $4,900 per month, would be increased to $5,500 per month with effect from February 1, 2011.

• The income tax threshold will be increased from $420,000 to $480,000 with effect from year of income 2011

• Commercial Companies’ Corporate (except telephone companies) Tax rate has been reduced to 40 per cent from 45 per cent with effect from year of income 2011

• Non-Commercial Companies’ Corporate Tax rate has been reduced to 30 per cent from 35 per cent with ef-fect from year of income 2011

• The economy is projected to continue the grow in 2011 by 4.6 per cent with the non-sugar economy projected to grow by 2.8 per cent

• Sugar production is targeted at 298,879 tonnes, 35.3 per cent above 2010 level of production

• The rice industry is projected to increase its production even further - 379,628 tonnes - which would be the highest ever level of production.

• The manufacturing sector is targeted to grow by 7.7 per cent.

• The information and communication sector is expected to grow by 5 per cent

• The engineering and construction industry is targeted to grow by 4.5 per cent

• The inflation rate is targeted at 4.4 per cent.• The deficit of the non-financial public sector is projected

to decline to $17.3 billion or 3.5 per cent of GDP.

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Five

GAWU observes thirty-five years of Recognition

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) observed, on February 27, 2011, thirty-five (35) years since it gained recognition to become the bargain-ing agent for the then 22,000 field and factory workforce of the sugar industry. The Union displaced the Man Power Citizens’ Associa-tion (MPCA) which was recognized by the Sugar Produc-ers Association in 1939. The workers’ battle for a new Union in the sugar industry started with the formation of the Guiana Industrial Workers Union (GIWU) in 1946. One of the early highpoints in the struggle was in 1948, when five (5) sugar workers were killed and fourteen (14) others injured at Enmore during the famous ‘cut and load’ controversy and the demand for the recogni-tion of GIWU. A split within the leadership of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) in 1955 resulted in a split within the GIWU. Later, that Union became dormant. The name of the ri-val sugar union to the MPCA changed, from the Guiana Industrial Workers Union to the Guiana Sugar Workers Union (GSWU) in 1961, then to the Guyana Agricultural Workers Union (GAWU) in 1962. The Sugar Planters continued to fiercely resist the call for the recognition of a Union of the workers’ choice. The MPCA, which was deemed a company Union just a few years after it was recognised, was at the Planters’ service. It took almost three (3) decades of resistance and hard struggle by workers in the industry to secure the recognition of GAWU, which took place on February 27, 1976. Prior to the formal recognition, a poll that was vigor-ously clamoured for since 1948 was at last conducted by the Ministry of Labour, on December 31, 1975. It saw GAWU securing 21,487 or 97.87 per cent of the votes, the MPCA 376 or 1.71 per cent, and 92 or 0.42 per cent of the 21,955 votes cast were deemed spoilt. The result exposed the British Sugar Planters for their decades-old denial of the workers in the main industry of the land their right to be represented by a Union of their choice. The workers’ intermittent fierce struggle for Union rec-

ognition resulted in the loss of lives, workers’ jobs, loss of wages, illegal police arrests, hiring of scabs, sig-nificant loss in sugar pro-duction through strikes, etc. Such battles for union recognition took place in the absence of a law which would allow workers to be represented by a union of their choice. The first PPP Government, in 1953, attempted to pass an appropriate law in the Legislature. The proposed Bill required that a union having the majority support of workers be recognized by the employer as the work-

ers’ bargaining agent. On recognition, the employer

was required to bargain with the Union. The Bill was not passed, as the British Government suspended the Con-stitution and removed the elected Government after a mere 133 days in Office. Later, another attempt by a new PPP Government, in 1963, to pass the Trade Union Recognition law was thwarted by an organized Opposi-tion allied with the Guyana Trades Union Congress and aided and supported by foreign forces, among others, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) and the American and British Governments, to foment violence and pro-test against the proposed legislation. At last, the law was passed in 1997 by the PPP-Civic Government, which was elected in 1992 after an absence of free and fair elections for 24 years. In the many intricate battles which culminated in GAWU’s recognition, Cheddi Jagan stood out as an out-standing colossus who rendered relentless support in the long and bitter recognition struggle. From the days in 1946 after his return from studies in the United States of America, and especially after the martyrdom of five workers at Enmore, he stood as a true ally in every work-ers’ struggle. He not only stood with the sugar workers, but with all other workers in the promotion of workers’ rights and in improving their working conditions. He used every forum at his disposal, whether local or over-seas, to stand with the masses. From 1947 in the Leg-islature, then the youngest Parliamentarian, he stood alone supporting the sugar workers, defending their interests against the sugar planting hawks and their al-lies in that August body. Cheddi Jagan, as leader of the Political Affairs Committee and the Peoples’ Progressive Party (PPP), as well as head of the PPP Governments in 1953, 1957, 1961 and 1992, remained steadfast in his commitment towards the promotion of the welfare of the working class in Guyana. Since GAWU’s recognition in 1976, workers from many occupations have turned to GAWU as their Union. The Union, today, undoubtedly the largest Union in the Ca-ribbean, represents twenty thousand (20,000) workers. Workers represented are from the Guyana Sugar Cor-

poration (Guysuco), the Sugar Industry Labour Welfare Fund (SILWFC), Plantation Houston Estate, the Demerara Distillers Limited (DDL), Caricom Rice Mills Limited, BEV Processors Inc, Noble House Seafoods, the Demerara Timbers Limited, the Guyana Forestry Commission, the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation, the Mahaica/Mahaicony/Abary Agricultural Development Authority, the National Parks Commission, and the Berbice Bridge Company Inc. To make the Union’s name reflective of its grow-ing membership outside of the sugar industry, at the Union’s 8th Congress, in 1978, the Union’s name was finally changed to the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), but the acronym “GAWU” was retained because it has become a household name in Guyana. A period of 35 years as a recognized Union was dif-ferent from 28 years during which the Union was fight-ing for recognition in the sugar industry. During the last three and a half decades, GAWU had to advance the pay levels of its members, represent improvement of their conditions of work and obtain better fringe benefits. Representation outside of the walls of the employers has not been neglected, since GAWU does not restrict itself to struggle within the sphere of economism. Because of the massive role of sugar in the country’s economy, which accounts for a significant proportion of the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, many politicians attempted to organize the sugar workers away from GAWU. They saw that sugar workers would enhance their political aspirations. Sugar workers, however, aware of GAWU’s commitment and ardent work which result in improvement of their welfare, have not allowed themselves to be fooled, and they remain fully support-ive of GAWU. No efforts are spared in the organiza-tional building of the Union. The functioning of groups and branches of the Union are promoted to empower rank-and-file members in their involvement to address issues, especially at their workplaces. Of utmost impor-tance, the Union ensures that, in every decision taken with regard to pay rise, working conditions, and securing of new fringe benefits, the workers in every bargaining unit of the Union are fully involved through their shop stewards or representatives. Not only were attempts made to woo away GAWU members. Distinctly two attempts had been made to derecognize GAWU in the sugar belt. There was an at-tempt by the Hoyte Administration in 1988. Guysuco suspended its relationship with the Union for about two (2) weeks and starved the Union financially through the non-deduction of union dues. Opposition to the Gov-ernment’s action and the fear of reprisal by the Union’s membership caused Guysuco to restore its relationship with the Union. Over the past two years, the Union has come under increasing attacks as it heightens its struggle to secure appropriate pay for its members in the sugar industry, noting the escalation of the cost of living. A union-sup-ported strike last November was strongly criticized by the Corporation. Suddenly, by letter dated December 16, 2010, Guysuco communicated to the Union that it Continued on page eleven (11)

Representatives of GAWU and the Sugar Planters Assocation signing the Recognition Agreement on February 27, 1976

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Six

INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL

Washington Faces the Arab Revolts: Sacrificing Dictators to Save the State

Introduction To understand the Obama regime’s policy towards Egypt, the Mubarak dictatorship and the popular uprising, it is es-sential to locate it in an historical context. The essential point is that Washington, after several decades of being deeply embedded in the state structures of the Arab dictatorships, from Tunisia through Morocco, Egypt, Yemen, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and the Palestinian Authority, is attempting to re-orient its policies to incorporate and/or graft in liberal-electoral politicians onto the existing power configurations. While most commentators and journalists spill tons of ink about the “dilemmas” of US power, the novelty of the Egyp-tian events and Washington’s day-to-day policy pronounce-ments, there are ample historical precedents which are essential to understand the strategic direction of Obama’s policies.

Historical Background US foreign policy has a long history of installing, financing, arming and backing dictatorial regimes which back its impe-rial policies and interests, as long as they retain control over their people. In the past, Republican and Democratic presidents worked closely for over 30 years with the Trujillo dictatorship in the Dominican Republic; installed the autocratic Diem regime in pre-revolutionary Vietnam in the 1950’s; collaborated with two generations of Somoza family terror regimes in Nica-ragua; financed and promoted the military coup in Cuba in 1952, Brazil in 1964, Chile in 1973, Argentina in 1976, and the subsequent repressive regimes. When popular upheav-als challenged those US-backed dictatorships and a social as well as political revolution appeared likely to succeed, Wash-ington responded with a three track policy: publicly criticiz-ing the human rights’ violations and advocating democratic reforms; privately signalling continued support to the ruler; and thirdly, seeking an elite alternative which could substi-tute for the incumbent and preserve the state apparatus, the economic system, and support US strategic imperial inter-ests. For the US there are no strategic relationships only per-manent imperial interests named “preservation of the cli-ent state”. The dictatorships assume that their relationships with Washington are strategic; hence their shock and dismay when they are sacrificed to save the state apparatus. Fear-ing revolution, Washington has had reluctant client despots who were unwilling to move on, assassinated (Trujillo and Diem). Some were provided sanctuary abroad (Somoza, Ba-tista), others were pressured into power-sharing (Pinochet),

or appointed as visiting scholars to Harvard, Georgetown, or some other “prestigious” ac-ademic posting. The Washington cal-culus on when to re-shuffle the regime is based on an estimate of the capacity of the dictator to weather the political uprising, the strength and loyalty of the armed forces and the availability of a pliable replacement. The risk of waiting too long or of sticking with the dictator, is that the uprising radicalizes; the ensuing change sweeping away both the regime and the state apparatus, turn-

ing a political uprising into a social revolution. Just such a ‘miscalculation’ occurred in 1959 in the run-up to the Cuban revolution, when Washington stood by Batista and was not able to present a viable pro-US alternative coalition linked to the old state apparatus. A similar miscalculation occurred in Nicaragua when President Carter, while criticizing Somoza, stayed the course, and stood passively by as the regime was overthrown and the revolutionary forces destroyed the US and Israeli trained military, secret police and intelligence ap-paratus, going on to nationalize US property and develop an independent foreign policy. Washington moved with greater initiative in Latin America in the 1980’s. It promoted negotiated electoral transitions which replaced dictators with pliable, neo-liberal electoral politicians who pledged to preserve the existing state appa-ratus, defend the privileged foreign and domestic elites, and back US regional and international policies.

Past Lessons and Present Policies: For several reasons, Obama has been extremely hesitant to oust Mubarak, even as the movement grew in number and anti-Washington sentiment deepened. The White House has had many clients around the world – including in Honduras, Mexico, Indonesia, Jordan and Algeria – who believed they had a strategic relationship with Washington, and these would have lost confidence in their future if Mubarak has been dumped. Secondly, the highly influential leading pro-Israel organiza-tions in the US (AIPAC, the Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations) and their army of scribes had mobi-lized Congressional leaders to pressure the White House to continue backing Mubarak, as Israel is the prime beneficiary of a dictator who is at the throat of the Egyptians (and Pales-tinians) and at the feet of the Jewish state. As a result the Obama regime moved slowly, under fear of and pressure from the growing Egyptian popular movement.It searched for an alternative political formula that removed Mubarak, retained and strengthened the political power of the state apparatus, and incorporated a civilian electoral al-ternative as a means of demobilizing and de-radicalizing the vast popular movement. The major obstacle to ousting Mubarak is that a major sec-tor of the state apparatus, especially the 325,000 Central Security Forces and the 60,000 National Guard ranks were directly under the Interior Ministry and Mubarak. Secondly, top Generals in the Army (468,500 members) had buttressed Mubarak for 30 years and have been enriched by their con-

trol over very lucrative companies in a wide range of fields. They would not have supported any civilian ‘coalition’ that called into question their economic privileges and power to set the political parameters of any electoral system. The Su-preme Commander of the Egyptian military is a longtime cli-ent of the US and a willing collaborator with Israel. Obama was resolutely in favour of collaborating with, and ensuring the preservation of, these coercive bodies.But he also needed to convince them to replace Mubarak and allow for a new regime which could defuse the mass movement which is increasingly opposed to US hegemony and subservi-ence to Israel. Obama would do anything necessary to retain the cohesion of the state and avoid any splits which might lead to a mass movement – soldier alliance which could con-vert the uprising into a revolution. Washington opened talks with the most conservative liberal and clerical sectors of the anti-Mubarak movement. At first it tried to convince them to negotiate with Mubarak – a dead end position which was rejected by all sectors of the oppo-sition, top and bottom. Then Obama tried to sell a phony “promise” from Mubarak that he would not run in the elec-tions, due nine months later. The movement and its leaders rejected that proposal also. So Obama raised the rhetoric for ‘immediate changes, but without any substantive measures backing it up. To con-vince Obama of his continued power base, Mubarak sent his formidable thug-lumpen secret police to violently seize the streets from the movement. A test of strength: the Army stood by; the assault raised the ante of a civil war, with radi-cal consequences. Washington and the E.U. pressured the Mubarak regime to back off – for now. But the image of a pro-democracy military was tarnished, as killings and injuries multiplied in the thousands. As the pressure of the movement intensified, Obama was cross-pressured by the pro-Mubarak Israel Lobby and its Congressional entourage on the one hand, and on the other by knowledgeable advisors who called on him to follow past practices and move decisively to sacrifice the regime to save the state while the liberal-clerical electoral option was still on the table. But Obama hesitated and like a wary crustacean, he moved sideways and backwards, believing his own grandiloquent rhetoric was a substitute for action … hoping that sooner or later, the uprising would have ended with Mubarakism with-out Mubarak: a regime able to demobilize the popular move-ments and willing to promote elections which would have resulted in elected officials following the general line of their predecessor. Nevertheless, there are many uncertainties in a political reshuffle: a democratic citizenry 83% unfavourable to Wash-ington will possess the experience of struggle and freedom to call for a realignment of policy, especially to cease being a policeman enforcing the Israeli blockage of Gaza, and provid-ing support for US puppets in North Africa, Lebanon, Yemen, Jordan and Saudi Arabia. Secondly, free elections would open debate and increase pressure for greater social spend-ing, the expropriation of the seventy-billion-dollar empire of the Mubarak clan and the crony capitalists who pillage the economy. The masses will demand a reallocation of public expenditure from the overblown coercive apparatus to pro-ductive, job-generating employment. A limited political opening have may have led to a second round, in which new social and political conflicts would have divided the anti-Mubarak forces, a conflict between the ad-vocates of social democracy and elite backers of neo-liberal electoralism. The anti-dictatorial moment is only the first phase of a prolonged struggle toward definitive emancipa-tion, not only in Egypt but throughout the Arab world. The outcome depends on the degree to which the masses de-velop their own independent organization and leaders.By Professor James Petras

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Seven

INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL | INTERNATIONAL

THE TIME HAS COME TO DO SOMETHING- Fidel Castro

I shall relate a bit of history. When the Spanish “discovered” us five hundred years ago, the estimated population on the Island was no more than 200,000 inhabitants who were living in harmony with nature. Their main sources of food came from the rivers, lakes and seas rich in protein; they were also carrying out a rudimentary form of agriculture that supplied them with calories, vitamins, mineral salts and fibre. In some regions of Cuba, they still have the custom of making “casabe”, a kind of bread made from casaba. Certain fruits and small wild animals rounded off their diets. They used to concoct a bever-age with fermented products, and they brought to world culture the rather un-healthy habit of smoking. The current population of Cuba is pos-sibly 60 times greater than the one ex-isting then. Although the Spanish mixed with the native population, they practi-cally exterminated them by making them work in the fields as semi-slaves and by the search for gold in the river sands. The native population was replaced by the importing of Africans captured by force and enslaved, a cruel practice that was applied during centuries. Of great importance for our existence were the eating habits that were cre-ated. We were turned into consumers of pork, beef, lamb, milk, cheese and other by-products; wheat, oats, barley, chickpeas, kidney beans, peas and other legumes coming from different climates. Originally, we had corn, and sugar cane was introduced among the calorie-rich plants. Coffee was brought in by the Conquis-tadors from Africa; cacao was possibly brought from Mexico. Both of these, along with sugar, tobacco and other trop-ical products became enormous sources of resources for the metropolis after the slave rebellion in Haiti that occurred at the beginning of the nineteenth century. The slave-based production system lasted, in fact, until the transfer of Cu-ban sovereignty by Spanish colonialism to the United States, in a bloody and ex-traordinary war where Spain had been defeated by the Cubans. When the Revolution triumphed in 1959, our island was a true Yankee col-ony. The United States had duped and disarmed our Liberation Army. One couldn’t speak of developed agriculture, but of immense plantations exploited on the basis of manual and animal labour that in general used neither fertilizers nor machinery. The great sugar mills belonged to the Americans. Several of them had more than one hundred thou-

sand hectares; others were tens of thou-sands of hectares in size. All together, there were more than 150 sugar mills, including those belonging to Cubans; they were working less than four months a year. The US received Cuban sugar during two great world wars, and had conceded a sales quota on its markets to our coun-try, tied in with commercial commit-ments and limitations on our agricultural production, despite the fact that sugar was in part produced by them. Other decisive branches of the economy, such as the ports and the oil refineries, were American property. Their companies possessed huge ships, industrial centres, mines, docks, maritime and rail lines, along with public services as vital as the electric and telephone systems. For those who want to understand, that’s all you need. In spite of the fact that the necessities of rice, corn, fats, grains and other food production were important, the United States was imposing determinate limits on everything that was in competition with its own domestic production, in-cluding the subsidized sugar beet. Of course, in terms of food production, it is a real fact that within the geographi-cal limits of a small, rainy and hurricane-beset tropical country bereft of ma-chinery, dams, irrigation systems and adequate equipment, Cuba could not have the resources, nor did it have the conditions, to compete with the Ameri-can-mechanised productions of soy, sun-flower, corn, legumes and rice. Some of these, such as wheat and barley, could not be grown in our country. It is a fact that the Cuban Revolution has not enjoyed a moment of peace. The Agrarian Reform had barely been passed before the five-month mark of the revolutionary triumph had been reached, and the programs of sabotage, fires, obstruction, and the use of harmful chemical measures were begun against our country. These even came to include pests to attack vital productions and even human health. By underestimating our people and their decision to fight for their rights and their independence, they committed, an error.

Of course, none of us at that time pos-sessed the experience collected during many years; we were taking off from fair ideas and a revolutionary conception. Perhaps the main error of idealism that was committed, was to think that in the world there was a determinate amount of justice and respect for the rights of

peoples when, certainly, it didn’t exist at all. Nevertheless, the decision to fight wouldn’t depend on this. The first task taking up our efforts was to prepare for the struggle that was coming up. Experience acquired in the heroic battle against Batista’s tyranny showed that the enemy, no matter what his strength, could not defeat the Cuban people. The country’s preparation for the strug-gle turned into the people’s main effort, and it took us to episodes that were as decisive as the battle against the merce-nary invasion promoted by the United States in April of 1961, the landing at the Bay of Pigs, escorted by the US Marines and Yankee planes. Unable to resign themselves to the in-dependence and exercise of the sover-eign rights of Cuba, the government of that country adopted the decision to invade our territory. The USSR had ab-solutely nothing to do with the triumph of the Cuban Revolution. The Revolution did not assume a socialist nature be-cause of support from the USSR; it was the other way around: support from the USSR was produced by the socialist na-ture of the Cuban Revolution. To such a degree, that when the USSR disappears, Cuba keeps on being socialist. By some means, the USSR learned that Kennedy would try to use Cuba with the same method that they had applied in Hungary. That led to the errors com-mitted by Khrushchev in regards to the October Crisis that I saw the need to criticize. But it was not only Khrushchev who made a mistake, so did Kennedy. Cuba had nothing to do with the history of Hungary, and the USSR had nothing to do with the Revolution in Cuba. This was the sole and exclusive fruit of the strug-gle of our people. Khrushchev merely made the brotherly gesture of sending weapons to Cuba when it was being threatened by the invasion that was or-ganized, trained, armed and transported by the United States. Without the weap-ons sent to Cuba, our people would have defeated the mercenary forces as it had defeated Batista’s army and occupied all the military equipment it possessed: 100,000 weapons. If the direct invasion of the United States against Cuba had occurred, our people would have been fighting right up to the present time against its soldiers, who would surely have had to fight against millions of Latin Americans. The US had committed the greatest mistake in all its history, and perhaps the USSR would still be in exis-tence today. Hours prior to the invasion, after the

cunning attack on our air force bases by US planes painted with Cuban insignia, the socialist nature of our Revolution was declared. The Cuban people fought for socialism in that battle that passed into history as the first victory against imperialism in the Americas. Ten US presidents have come and gone, the eleventh is now passing through and the Socialist Revolution is standing firm. Also coming and going were all the governments that were accomplices to the crimes of the United States against Cuba, and our Revolution is standing firm. The USSR has disappeared and the Revolution moved forward. It didn’t take place with the permission of the United States; instead it is being submitted to a cruel and merciless blockade; with ter-rorist acts that took the lives or injured thousands of people, whose authors to-day enjoy total impunity; anti-terrorist Cuban fighters are condemned to life sentences; a so-called Cuban Adjust-ment Act concedes entry, residence and employment in the United States. Cuba is the only country in the world whose citizens have that privilege, one that is denied to Haitians after the earthquake that killed more than 300,000 persons and the rest of the citizens in the hemi-sphere, those being persecuted and ex-pelled by the empire. Nevertheless, the Cuban Revolution stands firm. Cuba is the only country on the planet that cannot be visited by US citizens; but Cuba exists and stands firm, only 90 miles away from the United States, fight-ing its heroic fight. We, the Cuban revolutionaries, have committed errors, and we shall go on making mistakes, but never shall we make the mistake of being traitors. Never have we chosen illegality; lies; demogaguery; duping the people; pre-tence; hypocrisy; opportunism; bribery; the total lack of ethics; abuses of power, including crime and repugnant tortures which, with obvious albeit doubtlessly worthy exceptions, have characterized the conduct of the presidents of the United States. At this moment, humankind is facing se-rious problems without precedent. The worst is that, to a large degree, the solu-tions shall depend upon the richest and most developed countries, the countries that shall reach a situation which they are really in no condition to face un-less the world they have been trying to mould for their egoistic interests crum-bles around them, and which inevitably leads to disaster.

To be continued in the next edition

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Eight

Bell Loaders lightening cut and load tasks

Semi-mechanical cane harvesters, better known as Bell Loaders, were first used by the Guyana Sugar Cor-poration Inc (Guysuco) in 1988. A lone machine was used for trials. It was not until 2007 that the use of the machine became commercialized. At the moment there are about fifty (50) such machines across the industry.

For decades, cane cutters were re-quired to cut and load canes, mean-ing that a cutter was required to cut the canes, fetch same on his head in quantities of about ninety (90) pounds across the cane beds and place same in punts (metal barges) in the canals for transport to the factory to process into sugar. With the availability of Bell Loaders, a cutter needs to stack the canes he has cut and the Bell Loader will then transport the canes to the punts. Whenever a worker cut and stacks canes, he is able to cut about five tonnes; and whenever he is required to cut and load, he manages to cut about 2.5 tonnes. So a worker’s pro-ductivity increases by 100 per cent whenever he is not required to load the canes has reaped.

The fifty (50) Bell Loaders are not adequate for the industry hence the industry entirely cannot discontinue the cut-and-load arrangement un-til the Corporation has increased its fleet of Bell Loaders Further, during periods of inclement

weather, the machines are unable to operate because the fields become soggy, and, consequently, the work-ers engage in cut-and-load tasks. At times when canes are cut and stacked and downpours follow, the stacked canes have to be taken manually to the punts. Whenever such task is re-quired, it is described as “break bun-dles”. For this exercise, a cutter has recently begun to receive a certain payment separately. Thus there is a payment for cut-and-load, another for cut-and-stack, and another when-ever a worker has to engage in “break bundle” tasks.

The Guyana Agricultural and Gen-eral Workers Union (GAWU) and the Guyana Sugar Corporation (Guysuco) inked an Agreement, on February 17, 2011, whereby a cutter would be paid four (4) hours’ pay at G$267 per hour once he is required to under-take “break bundle” tasks. He would also be paid G$821 for every tonne of cane he fetches to the punt.

The Agreement, countersigned by the Chief Labour Officer, was reached after discussions between the Union and the Corporation spanning three (3) meetings. Shop stewards repre-senting cane cutters from the eight sugar estates were fully involved in the discussions. Through them, the 8,000 harvesters of the industry were directly represented at the meetings.

Enjoy the Guyana Festival Mashramani

Mashramani? Yes, the word is a hybrid coined from two workers in the lexion of Guyana’s Indigenous Peoples, and it means “a community celebration after successful co-operative work”. Well, the Mashramani Festival is Guyana’s varied annual countrywide celebration in ob-servance of its anniversary of Republi-canism. The actual Republic Day Febru-ary 23rd.

The festival had its beginning in the Bauxite Mining town of Linden. The Upper Demerara River community was always proud of its new name, LINDEN - bring the first name of the Prime Min-ister Linen Forbes Sampson Burnham, then that community’s favourite nation-al leader. They also searched for unique ways to welcome and celebrate Republi-can status gained on February 23, 1970.

The Junior Chamber of Commerce, the Linden JAYCEES, brainstormed propos-als. The group embraced the Mashra-mani Concept as explained by Amerin-dian- descended Allan Fiedtkou. Their creativity then made for a meaningful, cultural and artistic festival of events. Mashramani was born, then was quickly “nationalized” by officialdom. A national festival soon promoted the country’s history, traditions and art forms. It still endures, capturing pride of place on the country’s annual calendar of national events. You know it’s MASHRAMANI, WHEN:-

• the National Mashramani Manage-ment Committee starts planning the countrywide celebration in obser-vance of Republicanism in August –

September of the previous year.• The Mashramani Secretariat of the

Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport advertises the Mash Theme Compe-tition and reminds the nation of the regular thirteen (?) CATEGORIES OF COMPETITION AND ACTIVITIES…

• Guyanese respond by entering/par-ticipating in the Junior and Adult Calypso Competition in Dram; Cos-tume Bands; Calypso; Debating and Community; Regional and National Parades; Masquerade; Steelband; Soca and Chutney competitions; the illuminated and Decorated Buildings Competition, too.

• every Region in Guyana holds its own, Flag-raising Ceremony to recall and symbolize the very first event on February 23rd, 1970.

• WHEN, ON FEBRUARY 23RD, ALL GUYANESE, NOT REMAINING IN THE THEN REGION, OR IN THEIR OVERSEAS LOACTIONS, CONVERGE ON THE COUNTRY’S CAPITAL TO WITNESS AND PARTICIPATE IN THE GRAND, MASSIVE CARNIVAL- LIKE COSTUME BAND AND FLOAT PA-RADE.

The riotous extravaganza of costumed revellers, musical bands, singers, deco-rated vehicles and enthusiastic specta-tors give life to every conceivable artistic and cultural art form Guyanese are ca-pable of showcasing in true Guyanese-Caribbean spirit and abandon. The Guyana Agriculture and General Workers Union GAWU, followed by the union’s parent body, FITUG- the Federa-tion of Independent Trade Unions of Continued on page eleven (11)

A Bell Loader fetching harvested canes to be loaded A section of the FITUG 2011 Mashramani Band

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Nine

HYDER ALLIProfile of a GAWU Stalwart

In this edition of Combat, we profile longstanding General Council Member and stalwart of GAWU, Cde Hyder Alli of LBI Estate, who was bestowed with the Guyana National Award of the Medal of Service. Hyder Alli was born on April 04, 1938 at Vriedslust Estate Logie on the East Coast of Demerara. He is the third child of five children born to Husein Ali and Sookmin. Hyder, the father of six children, attend-ed Plaisance Roman Catholic School up to Standard Four. In 1948, during the strike which led to the shooting of the Enmore Martyrs, his father was ordered to break the strike and go to work. Having refused the or-der, within one hour, Hyder’s father (Hu-sein) was thrown out of the logie with his clothes, his wife, and his five little chil-dren. They moved to Leonora Estate, on the West Coast of Demerara, and took up residence in that Estate’s Logie. It was there, at Leonora Estate, that young Hyder Alli started his working life at age eleven (11) years old. He commenced employment as a BATO boy (someone who would walk with a mule into the cultivation, taking food for the expatriate managers). The food was carried on the mule’s back. He worked there until 1954, when his father moved from Leonora Estate to Plai-sance Village. Hyder then took up employment at Ogle Estate, which was then a grinding estate, as a punt bailer and as a mule lead, to pull empty cane punts from the factory to the cultivation and return with laden punts to the factory. He also did other jobs, such as digging drains, weedings, cleaning trenches and

fork moulding of canes. While at Ogle Es-tate, encouraged by older folks, he sup-ported the Guiana Industrial Workers Union (GIWU). Hyder got married in 1956, by which time he became inspired by the young Dr Cheddi Jagan, who was fighting for the rights of sugar workers and against the colonial system. After he got married, Hy-der moved to Vriedslust Estate as a cane cutter. In 1957, Hyder joined the People’s Pro-gressive Party and served as a union ac-tivist against the Man Power Citizens As-sociation (MPCA). He recalled he first met Dr Jagan in 1957 at a Public Meeting at Success, East Coast Demerara, when a friend introduced him. He described that meeting as one of the best days of his life, meeting such a great man who was extraordinarily modest and simple, reaching out to the very poor grassroots people. That meeting led him to become a close and dedicated activist of the People’s Progressive Party and the Union, which he is until today. Hyder Alli recalls his days as a volun-tary organizer being involved in major struggles for free and fair elections, along with better living and working conditions for sugar workers, including the recogni-tion of GAWU. In 1971, there was a major struggle against the Sugar Producers As-sociation when cane cutters questioned the proper functioning of the cane scales because of short payment due to incor-rect weighing of their canes. Out of representation by Dr Jagan, the Ministry of Labour decided to appoint cane scale supervisors on the estates. Hyder Alli was appointed one of the first cane scale supervisors attached to LBI Es-

tate. In 1972, Hyder was elected for the first time to GAWU’s General Council. Also, in that same year, he was banned by the LBI Estate Manager from entering the Estate. The ban was removed after Boysee Ram-karran made representation and the Min-istry of Labour intervened. Hyder attended two (2) courses of five (5) weeks’ duration each, in the Soviet Union, at the Trade Union Centre, in 1977 and 1985. Reflecting today, he does not regret his involvement in the struggle for workers betterment. He saw the recognition of GAWU and noted its many achievements for sugar workers since becoming a recog-nized union; and because he is still active, he also saw the expansion of the union into other sectors. Hyder recalls the many instances of po-lice harassment for distributing trade union materials and Mirror Newspapers, along with the protests for basic food items. He is happy that our country has re-turned to being democratic and that there

is a better standard of living for all Guya-nese. He is also pleased that the union for which he struggled to obtain recognition is in the hands of good leadership. For his outstanding contribution to Nation Build-ing, and for his dedicated service to the Working People of Guyana, Hyder Alli was awarded the Medal of Service (M.S.) in 1994. His word of advice is to “have respect for your fellow men and women, and live in harmony with your family, community and work colleagues.” He noted that the sugar industry is in a difficult position, and its future salvation lies in the Corporation showing respect for the Union and those who work for the industry.

He says he is proud that he made a con-tribution for the upliftment of his fellow man, and even though he did it for no re-ward, he cherishes the awards bestowed on him by the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), the Guyana Agricultural and Gen-eral Workers Union (GAWU), and the Gov-ernment of Guyana.

Skeldon EstateChairman: Deodat Persaud Thakur-din, Vice Chairman: Rishiram Ma-hasechand, Secretary: Uranie Heeram, Assistant Secretary/Trea-surer: Abdool Salim Zaleel and Com-mittee Members: Zalina Gomes, Mi-chelle McBean, Richard Alfred, Afzal Karim, Veerasammy Permall, Sha-meer Alfred, Abigale Blair, Khemlall Dilchand, Shyam Jabar, Kalmudeen Rampartab, Vanetta Douglas, Fzetta Davis, Victorine Crawford, Barbara Cort, Alton Henry, Chetranie Edmo-hamed, Lenox April, Steve Welcome, Derel Clarke

Blairmont EstateChairman: K. Seoshay, Vice Chair-man: C. Fraser, Secretary: S. Baksh, Assistant Secretary: B. Singh and Committee Members: J. Nurse, D. Brgwalla, C.. Ramjattan, S. Bridgelall, A. Jagnadan, F. Buddha, G. Inderjeet, M. Karamchand, V. Henry, C. Gaigh, J. Kishore, H. Johnson, I. Sukra, V. Farad

Meet your Branch Executives

Wales EstateChairman: Randy Rampersaud, Vice Chairman: Dennis Leacock, Secre-tary: Ramnarase Bissessar, Assis-tant Secretary/ Treasurer: Leo Allen and Committee Members: Niranjan Dhanraj, Rickey Rambeer, Alber Vie-ira, Cecil Debidyal, Rohit Bhaichand, Michael Chootoo, Talat Azad Khan, Sharon Williams, Pulmattie Gopaul, Saffiah George, Tarmatie George, Mi-challe Farley

Albion EstateChairman: Vimen Armogan, Vice Chairman: Ganga Persaud Shivdyal, Secretary: Rikhram Srikishun, As-sistant Secretary/ Treasurer: M.R. Gafur, Organising Secretary: Ganga Persaud Shivdyal and Committee Members: Michael Inderdatt, Ste-phen Inderdatt, Arthur Stephen, Shana Jobe, Orson Walcott, Vickram Sahadeo, Sandra Permaul, Joshua Appadu, Moses Interdatt, Arjuna Ve-rasammy

President Bharrat Jagdeo presenting Cde Hyder Alli with his Special Awardee Certficate at the Union’s 19th Congress in August, 2009

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Ten

REPRESENTATION WITHOUT RECOGNITION?Continued from page one (1)

The Forbes Burnham post-indepen-dence (1966-1985) administrations placed a high priority on appearing friendly to the trade union movement with the objective of getting trade unions to move away from being con-frontational – being always aggressive to demand rights from employers – to be-ing co-operative. Many unions and their leaders trusted Burnham’s entreaties. Those Unions were convinced that Guy-ana was going to establish an egalitarian society. Some unions actually became affiliated to the then ruling party, even pledging allegiance to Burnham’s regimes at his party congresses. The claim was that the party, Government and those unions all had working class objectives which coin-cided perfectly. GAWU, the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union, the undoubted choice of the sugar workers, refused to be trapped into that false belief. GAWU maintained its militant stand against those anti-working class actions of the Burnham regime, and had to wage a protracted and difficult struggle for rec-ognition.

Contemporary history will judge the role and results of trade unionism of those Burnham days. Suffice to say that the trade unions of today, forty-five years after independence, accept that colonialism has gone, but they are now confronted by new and challenging con-cerns; for the very RELEVANCE of trade

unions is being questioned by some. A few enlightened speeches, debates, let-ters and columns have actually broached the issue. Are trade unions relevant where and when there are friendly, co operative governments and employers? Is there a role for trade unionism in a so-ciety where all rights and freedoms are intact? Then came the audacity, in 2010, of two major employers – one is bauxite and the other is sugar – to ACTUALLY THREATEN THE “DE-RECOGNITION” OF THE UNIONS REPRESENTING THEIR MEMBERS!

RIGHTS, RECOGNITION AND RELEVANCE

The fact that Guyana’s workers have a Constitutional right to establish and be-long to trade unions to represent their interests is one guarantee that they have the ability to empower themselves. However, to extent that their unions, their groupings of unions or bargaining agents, can, through their responsible postures combined with militancy and effectiveness, command respect and re-sponses from employers, to that extent no one will dare question the relevance of unions and their right to exist as one element of the democracy our society boasts about.

GAWU and its parent body were amongst the first to vehemently protest the Russian-owned RUSAL moves to de-recognise the GB&GWU, the representa-tive of those mining-sector workers. (In passing, it might be worth mentioning that some shrewd, wicked employers –

from hoteliers to bauxite mining com-panies – can bribe and influence union members to TURN AWAY from their rec-ognized bargaining agent.) And when, relatively recently, the Guy-ana Sugar Corporation dared threaten “de-recognition” of GAWU, a national outrage was ignited, resulting in some officials at Guysuco putting their tails be-tween their feet and hastily retreating, being made to look foolish. Strangely, lost in that storm of Guysuco’s idiocy was the fact that de-recognition after recog-nition lies with the Trade Union Recogni-tion and Certification Board.

This is what FITUG then wrote, in part:

“Today, flying in the face of working-class history and contributions to the economic survival of Guyana, a com-pletely State-owned agency to ignite one of the most serious industrial con-frontations in recent labour movement history.

FITUG unreservedly supports its major affiliate, GAWU, in light of this provo-cation. Does Guysuco really believe that any right-thinking sugar-worker-member of GAWU would allow its union to be crushed by this now heart-less employer? FITUG wishes to note that trade unions do address unre-solved grievances and GAWU would not shirk its responsibility and duty to its members as it continues its struggle in the ensuing weeks.”

Good sense had to prevail then. But it is

ironic that, as this is being written, FITUG was meeting with a six- member team from Norway to discuss the Guyana-Nor-way REDD+ initiative which involves Nor-way compensating Guyana for its forest preservation. How is that for trade union relevance? But GAWU must remark on Guysuco’s threatened de-recognition in the context of whom and where it came from. Has the Board Chairman become a chameleon changing colours and posi-tions as his status suits and moulds him? This one-time unionist, politician and oppositionist has taken responsibility for the de-recognition threat, later “explain-ing” that “it was an industrial relations’ tactic deployed by the Board and Man-agement, and we were hoping to engage the Union to highlight our concerns, some of which we highlighted here pub-licly; and because of the public way in which the Union treated with the letter at the initial stage, rather than seek clari-fication, we thought of clarifying the is-sues to the public.” We close by acknowledging that there are concerns when the government IMPOSES salary increases, delays ne-gotiations, and ignores unions’ repre-sentations. When National Budgets are being prepared, signals are being sent about Government’s own insensitivity to, or disrespect for, unions. We main-tain the unequivocal position that a so-ciety such as Guyana can never abandon trade unionism. Its history, its industrial culture and its very democracy cry out for the component that is independent workers’ representation.

Enjoy the Guyana Festival Mashramani

Continued from page eight (8)

Guyana- always makes the effort to hit the parade route on Mashramani Day, either with float or medium-size costume band. The reasons were simple but sig-nificant. It is important for trade unions to be seen as being involved in national events, especially when those events are related to our his-tory; our national, political or consti-tutional mile stone and contribute to our nation’s sense of identity. We feel that Mashramani is a truly national, secular, all-embracing festival which invites both reflection about seri-ous historical issues and carnival-like

celebrations which include all the ar-tistic and dramatic creativity of both children and adults. Another spinoff of the Republican Mashramani festival are the econom-ic pursuits which could generate solid CASH for individuals and county. Cos-tume designers, manufacturers of beverages and foods, stores that sell “Mash materials”, vendors, taxis- all can cash in on some aspects of the Mashramani festival. So, there you have it. Perhaps, you can understand a little better now why GAWU and FITUG both wel-come and always try to participate in MASHRAMANI, OUR ANNUAL, NA-TIONAL REPUBLICAN FESTIVAL.

WFTU 16th Congress in April The World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) convenes its 16th World Trade Union Congress on April 6 – 10, 2011 in Athens, Greece. Delegates from all the continents would gather at the Tae Kwon Do Stadium for the Opening Ceremony. The Congress will attract delegates from all across the globe and will discuss the issues and threats to the working class since the 15th Congress which was held in Havana, Cuba in 2005. The 16th Con-gress will analyze the current world situ-ation. It will examine the progress of the WFTU, the successes and failures, the new tasks ahead, in defending workers’ interests, trade union rights and free-doms and dealing with the just concerns of all peoples and nations the world over. The World Federation of Trade Union (WFTU), was established in the wake of the Second World War after the defeat of Hitlerite fascism as well as the founda-tion of the United Nations in June, 1945. It was formed to bring together trade unions across the world in a single inter-

national trade union organization. Many trade unions from different countries at-tended the first Congress of the World Federation of Trade Unions held in Paris from 3rd to 8th October, 1945. However there was a split in this body with the creation of the International Confedera-tion of Free Trade Union (ICFTU) in 1949 and the advent of the Cold War. The WFTU is headquartered in Athens, Greece and focuses on organizing re-gional federations of unions in the Third World, campaigning against imperialism, racism, poverty, environmental degrada-tion and exploitation of workers under capitalism and in defense of full employ-ment, social security, health protection, and trade union rights. The WFTU con-tinues to devote much of its energy to organizing conferences, issuing state-ments and producing educational ma-terials. The WFTU’s affiliates represent 72 million workers from 110 countries. GAWU as an affliate of the WFTU will partcipate at this historic Congress.

COMBAT: January/February, 2011 Page Eleven

EDUCATION CORNER

NATIONAL DEMOCRACYBy Dr Cheddi JaganContinued from last edition The previous administration ratified the United Nations (UN) Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the Covenant on Eco-nomic, Social and Cultural Rights, but hon-oured them in the breach. It had a dismal record of reporting to the United Nations on the fulfillment of these rights, and it refused to sign the Optional Protocol to the Cove-nant on Civil and Political Rights. The PPP/CIVIC Government has ratified the Optional Protocol and intends to expand the authority of the Ombudsman. It will provide regular reports to the United Nations. It also proposed to retrace the footsteps of the PPP Government in the 1957 – 64 period when, under a national democracy, the country at-tained both economic growth (an average annual rate of 10 per cent in rice, seven per cent in sugar and bauxite, and eight per cent in manufacturing) and human development (high levels of education and health, with special emphasis on women and children, guarantees of Fundamental Rights, a multi-party political system and periodic free and fair elections). Participation involves empowering the peo-ple to exercise control over resources and the decision-making processes which affect management of resources. In keeping with the need for efficiency, and to prevent bureaucratic /command type management, trade unions in the pub-lic sector have been give the right of work-ers’ participation in management and deci-sion-making. And, at the grassroots’ level, broad-based Community Development Councils have been established in commu-nities throughout the country for self-help activities towards poverty alleviation; im-provement of physical, social and cultural

infrastructure; community policing and anti-narcotics and anti-smuggling activities, as well as for co-management.

Good Governance Apart from entrenching a democratic cul-ture, good governance must encompass transparency and honesty in public admin-istration, prudent financial husbandry, integ-rity in public life, justice and equity. Corrup-tion, extravagance and lack of accountability, vices which characterized the past, will not be tolerated by the PPP/CIVIC administration – a policy which has won the confidence of the people. PPP/CIVIC, in establishing a clean and lean administration, is “reinventing” government. National accounts had not been presented to parliament for nearly a decade. The PPP/CIVIC Government has brought to the Na-tional Accounts Committee (chaired by an opposition member) accounts for 1993 and 1994. Through cuts in extravagant and wasteful expenditure, additional budgetary allocation was made to combat crime and to increase expenditure on social services from eight per cent in 1992 to 14 per cent in 1993 and 16 per cent in 1995. And at the UN World So-cial Summit in Copenhagen, I made a pledge that, by 1997, Guyana would allocate 20 per cent of budgetary expenditure for social de-velopment, in keeping with the UNDP 20/20 compact, which provides that any Third World state expending 20 percent for the social sector should receive an equivalent 20 per cent of international support. The previous administration had made the State indistinguishable from the ruling party, and subverted and emasculated the state institutions, such as the Elections Com-

mission, Public Service Commission, Police Service Commission, Teaching Service Com-mission and the Judicial Service Commission, and made them instruments of “Party-para-mountcy”. The police, army, public service and judi-ciary are once again asserting their inde-pendence and professionalism, and ridding themselves of overt and covert political in-fluences. The results of these bold policies have been a clean administration and in-creased revenues, especially at the Customs Departments. The PPP/CIVIC Government respects fully the independence of the institutions which deal with employment. Employment and promotion will be carried out irrespective of political affiliation, race and ethnicity and re-ligious persuasion. Qualification, merit and experience are the basis for employment and promotion. In this regard, and also to cope with fears of racial/ethnic insecurity, a Task Force on Race Relations has been set up under the leader-ship of the distinguished Bishop of Guyana, the Rt Rev. Randolph George. A draft report is being circulated for broad discussion with the objective of enacting a Race Relations Act and establishing a Commission to deal comprehensively with all forms of discrimi-nation and racist incitement, and to provide for equality of opportunity. The Government is committed to accelerat-ed development of the Amerindian people. A Task Force has been set up to elaborate a comprehensive Development Plan and proj-ects for these communities. The Guyana Airways Corporation (GAC) in-stituted in 1993 a scheduled air service to various parts of the Interior. This has proven to be a boon, particularly for the Amerindi-

ans. Women play an important role in Guyanese society. They are well-represented in the National Assembly, and two are Ministers of Government. It is proposed to enact legislation to guar-antee equality of opportunity for women, to provide greater opportunities for their edu-cation, and to embark on urban and rural projects for gainful employment opportuni-ties. Young people have been affected seriously by the maladministration of the PNC regime. The decline in educational standards along with the absence of sport, cultural and lei-sure facilities contributed significantly to de-moralization of Guyanese youth, leading to migration, drug addiction and other social vices. In retrospect, we may never be able to calculate the negative effects of National Service in its initial format, and Mass Games. In the cultural field, Government is work-ing to develop community centres through-out the country, for cultural activities and to broaden training with more sport coaches and equipment. The provision of facilities in culture and sport will really assist in divert-ing the youths from alcohol and narcotics. It will also facilitate the improvement in educa-tional standards and technical skills. The expansion of operations in the fields of mining and forestry has raised concerns about effects on the environmental sector. Government is in the process of establishing an Environmental Protection Agency. A National Environmental Action Plan has been approved, and an Environmental Pro-tection Act will shortly be presented to Par-liament.

Continued in the next edition

GAWU observes thirty-five years of RecognitionContinued from page five (5)

was considering derecognizing the Union. What a nefariously contemplated action that would have unknown consequences! Immediately there was a strong con-demnation of Guysuco’s letter by the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG) in a strongly-worded statement that said, among other things “This outrageous threat to a union, which battled for recognition upon the blood, sweat and tears and death of their mem-bers for almost thirty (30) years (1948 – 1976) under autocratic regimes, reeks of “massa-day” disrespect for, not merely GAWU, but the entire working-class la-bour movement of this country.” This was followed by President Bharrat Jagdeo, who was out of the country for less than two days, on his return, diffus-ing what would have caused an explosive situation. He assured, in a statement at the airport on his arrival, from Brazil, that

under his Government’s watch, GAWU would never be derecognized. Guysuco’s Chairman, Dr N.K. Gopaul, lat-er said “It was an industrial relations tac-tic deployed by the Board and Manage-ment, and we were hoping to engage the Union to highlight our concerns, some of which we highlighted here publicly, and because of the public way in which the Union treated with the letter at the ini-tial stage rather, than seek clarification, we thought of clarifying the issues to the public.” What a tangled web he weaved through his practice to deceive. GAWU’s General Council met on Decem-ber 17, 2010 at an emergency session. It decided to conduct a number of actions, including strike, demonstrations, visits, etc. it was agreed to invite overseas soli-darity messages, should the Corporation implement its derecognition threat. It is believed that President Jagdeo’s prompt action in distancing his Govern-

ment from the intended action of Guy-suco averted a national outcry and sugar workers’ retaliatory actions. Apart from genuine representation and negotiated benefits secured from em-ployers by way of collective bargaining, the union also offers Bursary Awards, a and Death Benefit and Credit Union fa-cilities. It publishes a bi-monthly news-paper, Combat, which is distributed to Union members and to Unions, Libraries, etc. The Union also maintains a proud re-cord of accountability. Since its recogni-tion, the Union has never failed to have its yearly Accounts audited promptly by the Auditor General. Education of its members is treated as a high priority. The Union last year (2010) commissioned the GAWU Labour Col-lege. The College boasts dormitory facili-ties for 35 persons, two class rooms and a library, among its facilities, and replaces the Union’s School which was destroyed by fire during the 2001 post-national and

regional elections’ disturbances. The Col-lege is being used to impart labour edu-cation to the Union’s rank and file. At the international level, GAWU is an affiliate of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) which has a membership of millions in 110 countries; and to the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers Association (IUF), which repre-sents 336 organisations in 120 countries, comprising a membership of some 12 million workers. Locally, GAWU is an af-filiate of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG). The unions affiliated to FITUG are organized in many strategic sectors of the country’s economy, and they represent approxi-mately thirty-five thousand (35,000) of the fifty thousand (50,000) unionized workers in the country.

COMBAT is a publication of the Guyana Agricultural & General Workers Union (GAWU)59 High Street & Wights Lane, Kingston, Georgetown, Guyana, S.A.Tel: 592-227-2091/2; 225-5321 , 223-6523 Fax: 592-227-2093

Email: [email protected] Website: www.gawu.net

Sugar-Workers receive five days’ pay as API - First Crop 2011 off to a positive start

The Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc. (Guysuco) benefited from the ideal weather for harvesting early in January onto the end of February this year, al-lowing Guysuco to commence its spring (first) crop earlier than in previous years, targeting a production of 138,791 tonnes of sugar, the highest target since 1978 At the beginning of this year it was predicted that the La Nina weather phe-nomenon, which existed for more than seven months last year, would continue to restrict cane harvesting until early March this year. However, there were almost five (5) weeks of fine weather, which allowed the Corporation to pro-duce 30,000 tonnes of sugar at six (6) of the eight (8) estates. Heavy downpours from February 18th to 21st, 2011 abruptly halted cane har-vesting. On (Monday) 21st February, 2011, the fields of all the estates across the industry were inundated with sev-eral inches of water. Will the weather remain unfavourable for the remaining weeks in February, thus jeopardizing the reaping of the crop’s canes? The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), as it would be recalled, had been pressing for the sugar workers to obtain a wage increase for 2010, despite Guysuco’s contention that it could not pay any increase on ac-count of the year’s poor production. Last year, Guysuco ended with a production of 220,818 tonnes of sugar, the low-est in two decades. On November 20, 2010, the Union reiterated its demand in a press statement. Noting the state corporation’s financial status, the Union argued, “The industry imminently needs a life boat which can carry workers, management and the industry to safety. To salvage the current crisis, the work-ers must be treated with dignity and re-spect. The powers that be, who cannot exonerate themselves from some of the past and present negative happenings of the industry, are in the driver’s seat.” On December 22, 2010, President Bharrat Jagdeo convened a session with a representative group of sugar workers from each of the eight (8) Estates at the Guyana International Conference Cen-tre. He announced the award of a five (5) per cent wage rise retroactive to January 01, 2010. GAWU and thousands of sugar

workers, throughout the sugar belt wel-comed the President’s announcement. Many workers, however, were dismayed that five (5) per cent was not sustain-able. The workers’ continuous struggle and agitation, led by their Union, un-doubtedly accounted for the State’s in-tervention. Following the commencement of the crop in January, the Union pressed the Corporation to award six (6) days’ pay as Annual Production Incentive for last year’s production. There were four meetings, the last being on February 04, 2011, The Corporation, which had been arguing that it could not award more than four (4) days’ pay, and the Union, which held to its demand settled through compromise for five (5) days’ pay. Quali-fied workers across the industry received the five (5) tax-free days’ pay on Febru-ary 25, 2011. They were most pleased with the Union’s perseverance to secure the award. The five (5) per cent wage increase for last year and the settlement of the An-nual Production Incentive issue brought about encouragement and a state of op-timism within the workforce. This was noticeable since the crop commenced until the downpours during February 18th to 22nd , 2011. When the sunny weather resumes, it is predicted that workers would continue to perform at a similar pace as they had prior to arrival of the rains. However, there is an outstanding mat-ter which has the potential to bedevil the reaping of the crop. GAWU and its thousands of members, since the be-ginning of the year, wanted the Corpo-ration to adjust the rate of pay upward by five (5) per cent in keeping with the five (5) per cent, wage increase last year. The Management of Guysuco is insisting that the workers must secure the crop’s target of 138,791 tonnes of sugar in or-der to have the rate of pay adjusted. The workers are vehemently opposed to the unusual stance of the Corporation; and the Union, as a matter of principle, could not countenance such conditionality. At the last meeting between the Union and the Corporation, on February 21, 2011, the Corporation sought to have some time before further engaging the Union on the issue. Clearly, on this mat-

ter, the Corporation is not acting within the industrial relations’ sphere. There seems to be directive given to the Cor-poration by person/s who are unaware of the culture of the sugar workers and who has/have no respect for industrial relations’ norms. The industry is poised to realize its tar-get of 298,879 tonnes sugar this year, as quoted in the National Budget. Such fa-vourable production would represent a break with the past six (6) years with an average production of 242,157 tonnes.

After it would have supplied its contrac-tual market, Guysuco would be able to sell part of the expectect production on the world market where the price of sugar is at 30 US cents per pound and is higher than the prices obtained in the Corporation’s contractual market. It is wiser for the Corporation to implement the new rate without further delay than to invoke the workers’ militancy in what could be regarded as an unnecessary struggle.

GAWU’s Republic Day Message A deep sense of history and observing polit-ical and constitutional milestones motivates this message of congratulations and best wishes for our forty-one year-old Republic, from the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU).

As we do on these annual anniversaries, GAWU advises the people of this nation to indulge in sober reflections, even before they participate in the merriment of Mash-ramani celebrations. Paramount on the agenda of the review and reflection should be the question of what our status as a Re-public within the Commonwealth of Nations brings us. Recall that our then leaders actual-ly agreed that the full break with the British Monarchy was necessary to reinforce our na-tional post-independence pride and identity.

However, there should be rigorous as-sessment of the performance of our past governments from 1970 to the present time. Depending on one’s perspectives and preferences, the answers to the questions this anniversary can stimulate would vary significantly. GAWU, as a bargaining agent for thousands of workers in vital sectors of our national economy, wishes to focus on the quality of life since 1970. Objectively we note stagnation and economic setbacks in the past 41 years. We recall that with the introduction of the Economic Recovery Programme (ERP) in the late 1980’s, on the industrial, employment, social services and investment fronts, little trickled down to the working-class to improve their standard of living to any significance.

With the restoration of democracy following free and fair regional and national elections in October, 1992 there was a resurgence of hope, confidence in the new era of freedoms and rights restored; local investments to match the foreign interests; a boom in infra-

structural works – roads, bridges, schools, hospitals, clinics, sports stadium and drain-age and irrigation necessities.

Again we must ask ourselves has the work-ing-class benefited as they should have in the face of prudent management of our eco-nomic resources to withstand the challeng-ing blows of foreign financial collapse and European Union and withdrawal of prefer-ences for our sugar. There have been many resourceful and successful programmes which certainly helped Guyana to avoid economic catastrophe and to survive better than many other vulnerable small states.

In such an environment, GAWU empha-sizes the need for even more consideration for workers –including our members – there must be strong measures to implement tax reforms, raise the tax-free threshold to at least $50,000 per month, consider more educational assistance for the needy, reform Guysuco’s management structure, imple-menting an aggressive programme to reduce significantly poverty, restore professionalism in the police force and appropriate legisla-tion to address corruption – and that’s is just a partial list of Republic Anniversary requests on behalf of our constituency.

We close these rather sober, reflective An-niversary greetings by encouraging cautious and responsible celebrations in all communi-ties, villages and towns. As this is being writ-ten, just hours before Mash/Republic Day, February 23, the brutal downpours of rain remind us of the reality of Climate Change and its effects on all.

But Guyanese know to weather storms and there is reason to reflect and celebrate.

Happy Republic Anniversary forty-one!Happy Mashramani 2011!