Bush versus Truth about Labour Rights in Venezuela
Bush versus Truth about Labor Rights in Venezuela
Dear Friends and Supporters of the OWC:
In just two weeks, the ILO's Committee on Freedom of Association will be meeting in Geneva.
On its agenda will be the Article 26 Complaint filed by the Venezuelan employers' association, FEDECAMARAS, against the Venezuelan government and the newly formed National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNT). This Complaint has been endorsed by bosses' associations in 23 countries, including the United States.
The aim of the Complaint is to condemn the Venezuelan government in the world community for alleged "violations of labor rights." Behind this Complaint -- not surprisingly -- is the Bush administration, which has been champing at the bit to secure a condemnation of the Venezuelan government in the ILO to advance its drive to isolate Venezuela and to prepare the overthrow of the democratically elected regime of Hugo Chavez. Behind this Complaint, as well, is the effort to characterize as "illegitimate" a new labor federation in Venezuela, the UNT, which now regroups the overwhelming majority of organized workers in that country.
The UNT leadership has prepared an "Open Letter to the ILO Workers' Group" as well as a background "Memorandum" to answer all these unfounded charges and to urge unionists around the world to speak out against the proposed condemnation of Venezuela in the ILO. These two texts are included below.
We call upon you to endorse the "Open Letter to the ILO Workers' Group" issued by the UNT leadership. We also urge you to get your unions and community organizations to endorse as organizations. While union and organizational endorsements are vital, individual endorsements from unionists and political activists in the United States and around the world are also needed urgently -- so please fill out the endorsement coupon below and return it to us as soon as possible.
We promised to send a first list of U.S. and international endorsers to the UNT in Venezuela by this coming weekend (February 26) -- so please get back to us with your endorsements as quickly as you can.
Thanks, in advance, for your endorsements and support.
In solidarity,
Alan Benjamin and Ed
Rosario,
Co-coordinators,
Open World Conference
Continuations Committee
PS: We have more background materials on this issue, so please contact us if you require additional texts.
PPS: We can send you, should you require it for signature-gathering among your friends and co-workers, the attached documents in PDF format with the endorsement coupons. Please let us know if you need us to send these to you.
OWC - Open World Conference in Defense
of Trade Union
Independence & Democratic Rights, c/o
S.F. Labor Council,
1188 Franklin St., #203, San
Francisco, CA 94109.
Phone: (415) 641-8616 Fax: (415)
440-9297.
******************
Endorsement Coupon of the Open Letter to the Workers' Group of the ILO
[ ] I have read the "Open Letter to the Workers' Group of the ILO" issued by the national coordinators of the National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNT) on February 3, 2005. Please add my name as an endorser of this Open Letter.
[ ] I will send a financial contribution of $ ___ to help defray the costs of this campaign. My check will be made payable to "OWC" and will be sent to OWC, c/o San Francisco Labor Council, 1188 Franklin St. #203, San Francisco, CA 94109.
NAME
UNION/ORG & TITLE (list if for id. only)
CITY
STATE
COUNTRY
(please fill out
and return to Open Letter to
the ILO Workers' Group We, the undersigned leaders of the
National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNT), issue this
appeal to the trade unions around the world that are
represented in the Workers' Group of the International Labor
Organization (ILO), as well as to all our sisters and
brothers who are championing the trade union battles in
defense of workers' rights. Dear Sisters and
Brothers: We in Venezuela have been part of the effort by
the working class to create a trade union federation that is
built from the bottom up by the rank and file and that is
rooted in the principles of class independence, trade union
democracy and full autonomy in relation to the State and all
political parties. This effort -- which in April 2003
brought unionists from different sectors and trade union
currents together to create the UNT -- is part and parcel of
the struggle of our people in defense of their national
sovereignty. Today, the UNT represents the majority of the
organized workforce in Venezuela. Its creation in 2003 has
given a huge impetus to the drive to organize trade unions
across our country. The rate of trade union affiliation has
increased from 11% in 2001 to 23% in 2004. The UNT also has
been present in the last two International Labor Conferences
of the ILO in June 2003 and June 2004. But these recent
years also have seen FEDECAMARAS, the employers' association
of Venezuela, join forces with the Confederation of
Venezuelan Workers (CTV) to present a Complaint to the ILO's
Committee on Freedom of Association alleging that the
Venezuelan government has violated Trade Union Freedoms and
the Right to Strike. The joint Complaint by FEDECAMARAS
and the CTV is highly unusual, as trade unions are generally
the ones filing ILO Complaints against the employers and
seeking support from the ILO Workers' Group against all
violations of trade union rights, including the right to
strike. It is unprecedented, as well, on account of the
convergence of interests between FEDECAMARAS and the
CTV. Such a Complaint can be understood only in the
context of the unfolding political situation in Venezuela,
in which FEDECAMARAS and the top leadership of the CTV
participated directly in the attempted military coup of
April 2002, together with the opposition political parties
and with the encouragement of the U.S. Embassy. The coup --
which established a "government" headed by Pedro Carmona,
then president of FEDECAMARAS -- was foiled after just two
days by the mass mobilizations of the Venezuelan workers and
people. Later, in December 2002 and January 2003,
FEDECAMARAS -- together with the same leaders of the CTV --
organized an employer lockout/work stoppage that was
political in nature and that sought to bring down the
government through the sabotage of the country's main source
of income: the oil industry. In both the attempted coup and
the bosses' lockout/work stoppage, the CTV leadership took
actions that were repudiated by the overwhelming majority of
the workers of Venezuela. At no time, in fact, were the
workers consulted by the CTV leadership about the work
stoppage in the oil industry. Quite the contrary, upon
learning of this action by the CTV leadership, the workers
mobilized massively to occupy the oil rigs and refineries to
ensure the resumption of oil production. These undeniable
facts were reported in detail by 35 leaders of the UNT to
the Contact Mission of the ILO that traveled to Venezuela in
October 2004. It is not new, nor is it unexpected, that
employers should resort to lockouts against the workers to
promote their interests. Many of you undoubtedly have
witnessed such bosses' lockouts in your countries. It is
less frequent for the employers to resort to military coups,
but, alas, such actions are not unprecedented. But isn't it
an insult to our intelligence to try to have us believe that
employer lockouts and military coups can somehow be aimed at
defending democracy and trade union rights? Do they think
we're fools who cannot see through their hypocrisy? In
June 2004, FEDECAMARAS -- with the full support of the
International Organization of Employers (IOE) and
representatives from bosses' organizations in 22 countries,
including the United States, all of them notorious for their
anti-union activities -- invoked Article 26 of the ILO
Constitution and proposed that a Commission of Inquiry be
established in relation to alleged violations of Trade Union
Freedoms in Venezuela. The March 8-24, 2005 meeting of the
Governing Body of the ILO is scheduled to take a vote on
this request by FEDECAMARAS. It is worth noting that while
this baseless Complaint against the Venezuelan government
moves through the ILO system, the government of Colombia has
not been subjected to any sanctions or pressures by the ILO
-- even when the ILO itself registered at the beginning of
2004 that 186 trade unionists had been assassinated for
their union activity in that country, a number that now
surpasses the 200 mark. Dear Sisters and Brothers: The
Venezuelan government today has wide popular support to
advance its Agrarian Reform program and, with the aim of
guaranteeing jobs and wages, to take over factories
abandoned or bankrupted by their employers. Yet at this very
moment, incidents are being staged to create a diplomatic
conflict between Venezuela and Colombia. More ominous still,
U.S. President George W. Bush and Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice have issued public warnings against the
alleged "negative" and "destabilizing" role of Venezuela in
the region. Anyone familiar with the international
policies implemented by the Bush administration in the
recent period can understand full well that these are not
simply words; they are a direct threat to Venezuela. Bush
and Rice invoke the concept of "democracy" -- but if one
looks at what is going on in Iraq today, one can see what
they mean by "democracy." Is it possible not to see a link
between these political developments and the stance taken by
FEDECAMARAS at the ILO? Regardless of what one's opinions
may be about the Venezuelan government and its policies,
it's a fact that it's a government that received the support
of more than 60% of the people in the August 15, 2004 recall
referendum, thereby dealing a blow to the effort by
FEDECAMARAS and the top officials of the CTV to oust the
Chávez government. The election results were ratified, in
fact, by the Organization of American States (OAS) and the
Carter Center, two bodies that cannot be accused of
harboring any sympathies for the Venezuelan government.
It is also an undeniable fact that the partisans of the
current Venezuelan government obtained the overwhelming
support of the people in the state and regional elections
held in October 2004. From our vantage point as the UNT,
genuine democracy means respecting the sovereign will of
people to determine their own fate. And we wish to reiterate
this point: Venezuela's right to self-determination must be
respected and upheld independent of whatever one may think
about the current government of Venezuela. It is not up to
the U.S. government to decide in the place of the Venezuelan
people what is "positive" or "negative" for Venezuela. It
is totally understandable that the representatives of the
employers in the ILO should form a common front with
FEDECAMARAS in support of this Complaint. Likewise, it is
not surprising that governments, particularly that of Bush
in the United States, should follow suit. But in no way can
the representatives of the workers' organizations in the ILO
support this attack upon our sovereignty and our independent
trade union organizations. Is it not obvious that allowing
the Commission of Inquiry to be approved -- as FEDECAMARAS
demands -- would, in fact, be tantamount to trampling upon
our trade union freedoms and the very sovereignty of our
country? Only we, the workers of Venezuela, can and must
decide what kind of trade union organizations we should
build, in the framework of the principles of Trade Union
Freedom. We issue this urgent appeal to all trade union
organizations the world over. We call upon one and all to
reject the proposal by FEDECAMARAS and its cohorts to
sanction Venezuela and to conduct an ILO Commission of
Inquiry. Such an action is not called for, nor does it
correspond to the real situation of trade union freedoms in
Venezuela, which is a country that has ratified ILO
Conventions 87 and 98. For our part, as trade union
officers who are committed to the rank and file, we have
nothing to hide. That is why we are appending to this Open
Letter a Memorandum that responds to the specific charges
contained in the Complaint filed by FEDECAMARAS and the
CTV. We invite trade unions from all around the world to
come to Venezuela to see for yourselves the reality of our
country, where even the CTV -- which participated directly
in the attempted coup of April 2002 and the lockout/work
stoppage of December 2002-January 2003, enjoys full trade
union freedoms. We also invite representatives of the
international trade union movement to attend the upcoming
National Congress of the UNT. This will permit you to learn
firsthand from the workers about the real situation of the
trade unions in Venezuela. To conclude, we call upon all
trade union organizations and officers to reject the
provocation by FEDECAMARAS and its allies to establish an
ILO Commission of Inquiry for Venezuela. We call upon you to
add your names in support of this Open Letter to the ILO
Workers' Group. - In defense of the sovereignty of the
Venezuelan people! - In defense of true Trade Union
Freedoms! In solidarity, signed by following National
Coordinators of the UNT: Orlando Chirino, Marcela Máspero,
Stalin Pérez Borges and Rubén Linares The National Union of Workers of Venezuela (UNT) --
which was present at the 91st (2003) and 92nd (2004)
sessions of the International Labor Conference of the ILO --
wishes to convey to all trade unionists around the world the
main elements of the offensive waged against Venezuela by
FEDECAMARAS, the employers' association of Venezuela.
This Memorandum is an addendum to the "Open Letter to the
Workers’ Group of the ILO" that we issued in Caracas on
February 3, 2005. Some Necessary Background In 1999,
Hugo Chavez assumed the reins of government in Venezuela
after winning the presidential election in 1998 by a
substantial margin. It was from this time on that
FEDECAMARAS and the Confederation of Venezuelan Workers
(CTV) joined forces to lodge a series of formal Complaints
against the Chavez government before the ILO's Committee on
Freedom of Association and the ILO's Committee of Experts on
the Application of Conventions and Recommendations. It is
no secret that FEDECAMARAS and the leadership of the CTV
opposed from the very beginning the policies of the
legitimately elected government of the Bolivarian Republic
of Venezuela. Nevertheless, things changed qualitatively in
April 2002, when the central leaders of both organizations
participated directly in the coup d’etat which, for 48
hours, established a "government" headed by Pedro Carmona
(then president of FEDECAMARAS), with two government
ministries consigned to leaders of the CTV. Despite the
explicit support of the U.S. government for the coup and the
participation of high-level officers of the Armed Forces in
its preparation and execution, the attempted coup failed
because of the overwhelming mobilization of the Venezuelan
people, who demanded the immediate return of Chavez as the
president of the Republic. Nine months later, between
December 2002 and January 2003, the managers and directors
of PDVSA (the state oil company), with the support of
FEDECAMARAS and the CTV, decreed a work stoppage that was in
effect a sabotage of the country’s main source of income.
This work stoppage in the oil industry was decided without
any workers’ assembly having voted to carry it out. It
was the workers, once again, who combated the employer
lockout/work stoppage and who re-started production in the
oil industry and in the other sectors affected by the
lockout. It was the workers who, through their concerted
actions in defense of Venezuela's sovereignty, defeated this
employer lockout. As a result of the FEDECAMARAS-CTV
lockout, many private companies closed their doors. An
estimated 250,000 people lost their jobs, with an equal
number forced to accept takebacks and concessions. The UNT
was constituted in April 2003 as a reaction by the
overwhelming majority of the trade union rank and file who
opposed the CTV's participation, alongside the bosses, in
the attempted coup and in the lockout./work stoppage of late
2002. Many trade unions and federations that belonged to the
CTV became founding members of the new workers'
confederation in Venezuela: the National Union of Workers of
Venezuela (UNT). The Most Recent Complaints (No. 2249 and
No. 2254) After the failed coup d’etat in April 2002 and
the year-end sabotage/work stoppage, the CTV in February
2003 issued ILO Complaint No. 2249 with the following
allegations: murder of a trade unionist; preventing the
legal registration of a trade union; hostile declarations by
the authorities against the CTV; order of arrest against the
president of the CTV; promotion of a new labor confederation
by the authorities; obstacles in collective bargaining in
the public sector; orders of arrest and penal procedures
against trade union leaders; firing of over 18,000 workers
for their trade union activities; non-compliance with
collective-bargaining agreements; interference by the
authorities and Petroleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA) and
other anti-trade union acts; tardiness in procedures for
violation of trade union rights; negotiation with minority
organizations of public service employees, setting aside the
more representative unions; and actions by the authorities
to divide trade union organizations. One month later, in
March 2003, FEDECAMARAS and the International Organization
of Employers (IOE) lodged Complaint No. 2254, in which they
alleged the following: the exclusion of employers'
organizations from the country's decision-making process;
interference of the government aimed at promoting a new
employer organization in the agricultural sector; the
detention of Carlos Fernández on February 19, 2003 in
retaliation for his actions as president of FEDECAMARAS;
actions by violent paramilitary groups with government
support; actions against the installations of an employer's
organization and against protest actions by FEDECAMARAS; the
creation of a hostile environment for employers, by allowing
the workers to take over and occupy farms in full
production; application of a decidedly unilateral foreign
exchange system by the authorities, thereby discriminating
against affiliates of FEDECAMARAS in relation for the
participation of FEDECAMARAS in the national ‘civic work
stoppages’." We refer all trade unionists to the full text
of these Complaints on the ILO website so that you can draw
your own conclusions. - Concerning the discussions in the
ILO Committee on Freedom of Association, please visit the
following pages on the ILO website:
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb289/pdf/gb-9.pdf. -
Concerning the discussions in the ILO Committee of Experts
on the Application of ILO Conventions and Recommendations,
please go to:
http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/ilc/ilc91/pdf/pr-24p2.pdf. We
also invite you to read the Report we prepared for the ILO's
International Labor Conference in June 2004 titled "The
Truth About Trade Union Freedoms in Venezuela." [See
below.] We would like in this short space to make a few
observations regarding the latest Complaints presented by
FEDECAMARAS and the CTV. The first comment is that,
putting aside their complementary nature, both complaints by
the CTV and FEDECAMARAS have carefully avoided mentioning
the fact that both organizations participated, along with
sectors of the oppositionist political parties and military
brass, in an attempted coup d’etat and later, an operation
aimed at bringing the national economy to its
knees. Hence, the allegations that the arrest orders for
Carlos Ortega (president of the CTV) and Carlos Fernandez
(president of FEDECAMARAS) are a violation of trade union
freedoms are completely false, since participation in a coup
d’etat and later in a sabotage operation against the oil
industry has nothing to do with the labor rights enshrined
in ILO Conventions 87 and 98. It is also completely false
to suggest that the work stoppage-sabotage of the oil
industry of December 2002-January 2003 can be equated with a
strike. No worker assembly at any time voted to conduct this
job action, nor was any prior strike notice given, as
established under the law. Those who were fired from their
managerial and security positions were fired simply because
they abandoned their jobs and responsibilities. It is
worth reprinting a communiqué of the oil workers’ trade
union organizations -- FEDEPETROL, FETRAHIDROCARBUROS and
SINUTRAPETROL -- regarding these events. It states, in
part: "We, the workers on the payroll, did not join or
otherwise support the lockout/work stoppage. We kept the
plants operating and supplying oil and gas to its customers
-- which was a difficult task. We had to take over the jobs
held by management when they walked off their jobs, without
any legal or contractual obligation to act as we did. "
We, the workers on the payroll, had just signed a
collective-bargaining agreement with management in which we
obtained some important gains. In the face of the
irresponsibility of our supervisors, who walked off their
jobs, the 30,000 wage-earners in the oil industry took upon
ourselves the patriotic duty to ensure that our principal
industry not succumb and that our people not be engulfed in
desperation and chaos, with unpredictable results we would
still be regretting today had we not succeeded in keeping
our industry up and running." The so-called UNAPTEROL
"trade union" -- one of the ILO Claimants, along with the
CTV and FEDECAMARAS -- was formed by managers and heads of
PDVSA to "represent the workers" in the collective
bargaining process in the industry, in the place of the
three aforementioned trade union organizations. UNAPETROL
has not been recognized by the government for a very simple
reason: Its composition (predominantly company managers and
supervisors) runs counter to the principle of "purety of
representation" and counter to ILO Convention 87 itself,
which prohibits joint organizations of workers' and bosses'
representatives. That is why the authorities responsible for
registering trade unions in Venezuela did not recognize
it. As for the "murder of a trade union leader" -- an
accusation that appears in Complaint No. 2249 -- the death
was the result of a private fight. Numar Ricardo Herrera,
member of the Federation of Construction Workers, was
unfortunately murdered at the end of the May 1 celebrations
of the CTV a big distance from the place where the
demonstrators had gathered. Manuel Arias, after an argument
with Herrera, fired his gun and killed him. The killer was
apprehended by police authorities and is being tried for
homicide. This was an isolated event without any political
connotations or violation of trade union freedoms. The facts
are there for all to see and examine. The FEDECAMARAS
Complaint includes the charge "of exclusion of employer
association from the decision-making process." This
accusation is completely bogus. In Venezuela, the
legitimately elected president was again ratified in office
by the August 15, 2004 referendum. It is a government that
is perfectly competent to make decisions on its
own. Measures taken in defense of the poorest sectors of
the population, such as the recent Law on Land Use (January
10, 2005), constitute for FEDECAMARAS and its junion
partners the "creation of a hostile environment for
employers." The arrogance of the bosses reached its height
when they complained that "the application of foreign
exchange controls was decided unilaterally by the
authorities." Venezuela is a sovereign country and can take
whatever measures its elected officials deem fit to promote
the wellbeing of the people. If a government of a sovereign
nation does not have this right, who then has such a right?
It is obvious that the Complaints filed by FEDECAMARAS
and the CTV are part of a continuing policy aimed at making
the ILO the stage to gain advantages in the political
disputes inside Venezuela and not, as it should be, to
defend trade union rights when these are threatened. The
Proposal of an ILO Commission of Inquiry Venezuela has
received several Direct Contact visits from officers of the
ILO. A Direct Contact Mission of the ILO visited the country
on October 13-15, 2004. The delegation interviewed leaders
of the UNT, at which time we provided complete information
and the truth about the situation of Trade Union Freedoms in
Venezuela. We rejected point by point the joint accusations
by the bosses and the leaders of the CTV -- leaders who, it
should be noted, hold office illegitimately as they were
"elected" in fraudulent trade union elections in October
2001. The UNT learned during that visit that the Executive
Director in charge of Principles and Fundamental Rights in
the ILO, Mr. Kari Tapiola, had informed the government of
Venezuela that several employer delegates had filed a
Complaint against the government of Venezuela based on
Article 26 of the ILO Constitution. If approved, this
Article 26 Complaint would call for sending a full
Commission of Inquiry to Venezuela to investigate the status
of trade union freedoms and the right to create a trade
union (ILO Convention 87) and the right of trade unions to
collective bargaining (ILO Convention 98), both conventions
ratified by Venezuela. It should be noted that the
employers' delegates, both full and alternates, who
supported the Article 26 Complaint by FEDECAMARAS were the
delegates from the following countries: Argentina,
Australia, Austria, Brazil, Canada, Cyprus, France, Germany,
India, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Mexico, Norway, Saudi Arabia,
South Africa, Venezuela, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland,
Tunisia, Great Britain and the United States -- for a total
of 23 employers. The next Governing Body of the ILO on
March 8-24, 2005, must decide by majority vote if Article 26
of the ILO Constitution applies or not in the case of
Venezuela. The Complaint lodged by the employers notes
that "since 1999 the employers' association of Venezuela, as
well as the workers' organizations, have been victims of
intimidation. Moreover, the government’s policies have led
to the closure of 100,000 companies and the loss of
employment for thousands of workers. ... Yet despite the
different recommendations formulated by the governing bodies
of the ILO, the Venezuelan government continues to make
physical, economic and moral attacks against independent
Venezuelan employers, sidelining the majority of employer
organizations and excluding them from the processes of
social dialogue and tripartite consultation." These are
among the many arguments contained in the ILO
Complaint. It also should be noted that since March 2003,
the employers' group of the ILO has been threatening to push
for the Commission of Inquiry procedure in relation to
Venezuela. Thus, before the end of the 92nd meeting of the
International Labor Conference, the spokesperson for the
employers, during the Conference plenary session devoted to
the report from the Committee of Experts on the Application
of Conventions and Recommendations, said the following:
"Unfortunately this year we have not been able to impose a
special paragraph for Venezuela, a country where there are
undisputed violations of trade union freedoms. This
situation has not improved especially in relation to
previous years, during which we introduced special
paragraphs. For this reason, the employers will present in
conformity with Article 26 of the ILO Constitution, a more
stringent Claim, one that no doubt has already reached the
International Labor Bureau." The UNT considers that the
convening of an ILO Commission of Inquiry, as proposed by
the employers of Venezuela and their counterparts in other
countries, is aimed at imposing a "sanction" against the
government of a sovereign country. Such a Commission of
Inquiry would also be an affront against all Venezuelan
trade unionists who are truly committed to the defense of
the workers and their rights, to the defense of national
sovereignty and democracy. That is why we urge all our
trade union brothers and sisters around the world to endorse
and support the "Open Letter to the Workers’ Group of the
ILO" which accompanies this Memorandum. Caracas, February
2005 National Union of Workers of Venezuela
(UNT)
MEMORANDUM
on the Employer Offensive Against Venezuela Within the
ILO