GAWU Combat - August/September, 2017

Issue#4 Volume#38

Combat Voice of the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU)

Editorial

Lip service to the Guyanese working-class The working-class remains, from our perspective, the most decisive force in any country. It is they who, through selfless sacrifice, hard work, commitment and dedication to their tasks and responsibilities, ensure that the wheels of progress continue to turn and that a nation moves forward and upward in the interest of all its citizens. It is the workers who fuel the nation’s economic engine, and it is the working-people who are mainly crying out; and, as citizens too, are deserving of a just reward that flow from economic development.

Combat recalls then Opposition Leader and now President, David Granger, dubbing 2014 “Year for Workers”. President Granger said then: “Workers’ Year must be one in which our working people should be able to look forward to a good life. It should be one in which they could look forward to living in safety, to working for ‘living wages’ to cope with the cost of living ,and to enjoying adequate social protection in their old age”. The President then went on to say “…workers can feel free to join trade unions of their choice; in which collective bargaining agreements between their employers and their unions will be respected, and in which the state will enforce labour laws fairly but firmly to protect them from adversity and from delinquent employers.”

It is therefore disheartening to record that, from all indications, President Granger’s Administration has not been living up to his lofty 2014 declarations. We have seen the banishment of the Ministry of Labour, now existing as a mere department under the newly-established Ministry of Social Protection. But, on the other hand, the President has seen the ‘wisdom’ of establishing a full-fledged Ministry of Business. This is a move that has raised a lot of eyebrows, particularly from the workers’ movement, and one which the President has been urged to look into with a view to give greater recognition to workers’ overall interests.

So far, there hasn’t been any corrective action, and it seems the workers’ causes have, from all intents, been pushed to the back burner.

We have seen the inalienable constitutional right to collective bargaining - a gain which was won through the sacrifice and struggles of workers, and an issue the President spoke so eloquently and passionately about in 2014 - being openly disregarded in the state sector. In the public sector, we have seen, in the last two years, the Government imposing wage increases and ignoring completely the demands made by the various recognized unions. It is irksome to note that the 2016 negotiations between the Government and the Guyana Public Service Union (GPSU) remain at a standstill at this time.

Continued on page two (2) COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

August/September, 2017

GuySuCo setting the stage to blame workers and Union for their mismanagement

Workers, residents and others of Skeldon took part in a march on September 12, 2017, opposing plans by the Government and GuySuCo to sell out Skeldon Estates and to call on the authorities to abandon their plans to close Rose Hall and East Demerara Estates at the end of 2017.

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) again finds it necessary to correct inaccuracies being spewed by the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (GuySuCo). The Corporation, in its September 25, 2017 press statement titled Frequent strikes impacting negatively on the sugar value chain, in its statement, accuses our Union of misleading workers and frustrating its efforts to attain its set targets. GuySuCo’s spurious statements are another sad and poor attempt to castigate the Union and the workers for its clear and blatant mismanagement of the sugar industry.

Workers, at this time, are hard pressed, given they are facing 2017 prices with 2014 incomes. Certainly, in such circumstances, the workers are eager to work and earn in order to defend, as best as they can, their and their family’s standard-of-living and well-being. Certainly, no worker would willingly withhold their labour, given the circumstances they find themselves in now-a-days. The fact that they are now forced to do that in order to defend and maintain their rights, benefits, and conditions tells us a lot about the State Corporation’s seeming ‘don’t give a damn’ attitude to its hard-working employees and

their representative organisations.

While the Corporation seeks to blame our Union for misleading the workers, it seems, from our point of view, that the Corporation is - maybe for its own nefarious ploys - deliberately bringing about conditions for engendering the workers’ strikes. The recent strike by the Skeldon cane cutters is an excellent case in point.

Our Union vigorously sought to resolve the dispute after discussions at the local level broke down. Repeated efforts by the Union to have the Corporation’s Head Office intervene were rebuffed, and the Corporation took a most obstinate stance in not seeking to resolve the dispute. While the Corporation publicly is up in arms at the workers’ actions, it seems not wanting to take any proactive measures in resolving such disputes.

Such a direction, we hold, is intended to lay the groundwork for the blame game for the massively low sugar production which we see will be recorded this year. Such pretexts will then be used as past experiences show, to perpetuate further assaults and withdrawals of hardwon benefits and conditions of the workers.

Continued on page two (2) PAGE ONE

Lip service to the Guyanese working-class Continued from page one (1) At the state-owned Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (GuySuCo), we have seen the sugar company refusing to engage the recognized unions in earnest discussions ,and a haughty, arrogant attitude now pervading.

Increasingly, too, we have seen Minister with responsibility for Labour matters, Keith Scott, making some very concerning statements. Most recently, the Minister is reported to have said that he is intent on having single mothers not work during the nights as security guards. Prior to that, he is also quoted as saying that elderly persons should not be engaged as security guards. It seems, from our perspective, that the goodly Minister is clearly unaware of the realities that beset very many of the ordinary working men and women. Quite rationally, a single parent would not want to leave their child/ children in the care of another while they work at night, nor would an elderly Guyanese want to work at a time when he/ she should be enjoying his/her twilight years, but the fact remains that they have to work in order to survive. It seems the

Minister, perched atop his ivory tower, is far removed from the realities, often dire, that the small man and woman must contend with now-a-days.

Alongside such assaults, the workers and their families must, now-a-days also, contend with an ever increasing cost-ofliving. Through budgetary measures the workers are faced with increased taxation, introduction of new taxes, and the taxing of previously untaxed goods and services. We have seen official data from the Government confirming hikes in the prices of food and other essential services.

It seems, from all indications, that the Guyanese workers are heading down a dark and ominous path. A path which seemingly, will see a reversal of several positive gains they recorded over the last two (2) decades, and a direction which will likely serve to push them and their families closer to, or beyond, the poverty line. The eloquence displayed by the President in 2014 seemingly has evaporated and the workers and their families have been forgotten.

Continued from page one (1) The sideshow, we see, could very well be used to further minimize the industry in the coming months, as is hinted in the Corporation’s press statement As at September 30, 2017, sugar production for the crop stood at 41,195 tonnes, though GuySuCo expected production was projected to be around 65,985 tonnes. The significant deficit, partially due to the late start-up of the Skeldon and Enmore factories, is largely a product of poor agronomic practices which are seeing cane yields being below expectations.

The deficit ought to be raising eyebrows at the Governmental and Board of Directors’ levels, especially in view of the State’s massive investment between June, 2015 and now.

GAWU has a foremost responsibility to advise workers of their rights and benefits, that is a lawful obligation of the Union. This we have done, in the case of Wales cane cutters, we have simply drawn to their attention what is contained in the Termination of Employment and Severance Pay Act, as we are required to do as their Union. Contrary to GuySuCo’s misinformation, our Union has not advised Wales’ cane cutters not to take up work at Uitvlugt, or to take up work at Uitvlugt, that is a decision we have told them they need to make on their own.This was borne out in the Stabroek News of June 19, 2017 in an article titled “Though desperate for jobs, Wales cane harvesters not

keen on Uitvlugt travel”. In that article, Wales worker Eion Fernandes is reported to have refuted “GuySuCo’s claim that the Guyana Agricultural & General Workers’ Union [GAWU] was stopping them from taking up employment at Uitvlugt, saying: ‘We put our matter to GAWU, that we don’t want to go, and they are just supporting us’”. Furthermore, GuySuCo’s Press Release of May 11, 2016 stated inter alia “…workers of Wales Estate have been offered alternative employment opportunities at Uitvlugt Estate, but some have persisted in opting for early retirement or severance pay, as applicable.” Though we have addressed this issue on several occasions, the Corporation continues with its poppycock as it continues its campaign of misinformation seemingly aimed at sowing seeds of confusion.

The clutching at straws by the Corporation is another attempt to blame everyone but itself for the situation it finds itself in. Our Union finds it saddening that the Corporation has taken such a stand, which is not helpful in its cause to boost workers’ morale and commitment.

At this time, GAWU remains committed to having good working relations with GuySuCo. We urge the company to cease alienating the workers and the Union and let us together work to overcome the industry’s challenges and protecting the “sugar value chain”, which extends to thousands of Guyanese in scores of communities along our coast.

GuySuCo setting the stage to blame workers...

COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

COMMENTARY

Our oil hopes – Guyanese none the wiser

A drill ship conducting oil exploration in offshore Guyana. Mutli-national Exxon-Mobil has announced that it has found around 2 billion barrels of oil, which it hopes to begin extracting from 2020. Guyanese, so far, are unclear about the arrangements regarding oil.

Guyanese are eagerly looking forward to 2020 when, it is expected, Guyana will join the ranks of oil-producing nations.

Oil revenues have the potential to transform Guyana and move it and its people to a much higher plateau. At the same time, we are very much aware of the curses that oil has brought to other nations.

Naturally, given the very different destinations that could be arrived at, several individuals and organisations have urged that there is need for strong, robust and transparent arrangements regarding oil.

The Administration, though it says it is committed to implementing such a regime, has however - for one reason or another - taken very contradictory actions. So far, Guyanese are not aware of the nature of the deal the Government has inked with the giant multi-national Exxon. While some tidbits are shared now and again, like an iceberg, the vast majority of the agreement is kept under water. As Guyanese, we need to be aware of our obligations, and the benefits which will accrue. President David Granger has spoken many times about protecting and defending our national patrimony. It seems that this is not applied in the case of oil.

The cost recovery element - that which will see Exxon recovering capital and current costs before profit-sharing - has also evoked a lot of concern. No details have been shared as to how cost-gouging could be avoided, and what remedies the Government has, should such practices be discovered. Similarly, concerns have also emerged regarding the production-sharing aspect. Guyanese are none the wiser what exactly the Government would do with its share, and how it would be used to benefit all Guyanese.

The investment of resources that would

come about from oil exploration and extraction is also another worry that burdens Guyanese. The Government has said that it is intent on establishing a Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF). Little or no details have been shared, but from statements made by Government officials we learnt that the Guyanese SWF would not be modelled after the Norwegian SWF, held out to be a best practice given, among other things, its management by independent experts. If a cue is taken from the Petroleum Commission Bill, it seems that Guyana’s SWF will be managed probably through the extant state apparatus. It is always not the best idea to have such funds, especially given the large sums that could accrue and bemanaged by bureaucrats.

In times of such heightened anxieties surrounding oil, little comfort is coming from officialdom. We have seen the Administration hiding behind the Petroleum Act, which it says prohibits release details of the contract it has signed with Exxon, though some persons have said this is not necessarily accurate. What is sure, at this time, is that the Government has placed Guyana’s hopes, dreams and aspirations in oil, and has chosen to ignore other important economic sectors.

This is never a wise idea, and especially given the current low prices of oil together with moves by other countries to move away from fossil fuel vehicles in the not -too-distant-future.

All in all, the Government is seemingly shirking from its responsibility to the current and future generations of Guyanese regarding oil. Combat joins the growing chorus of all to the Granger Administration to have a full and frank discussion with Guyana on its commitments and plans for oil.

PAGE TWO

GAWU stands behind its words and assertions

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) once again finds it necessary to respond to Mr Gobin Harbhajan’s letter, titled “Knowledgeables had 23 years to change the face of GuySuCo”, which appeared in the September 24, 2017 edition of the Guyana Chronicle.

At the outset, we wish to advise Mr Harbhajan that letters emanating from GAWU on the sugar industry are authored by the Union, and that we stand behind every word written and every assertion made. We do not employ highly paid writers or communication-trained persons to express our positions and stances. We wonder whether Mr Harbhajan can say the same.

While Mr Harbhajan argues that we aren’t factually supporting our assertions, it seems he hasn’t been keenly reading our letters. Certainly had the regional councillor done so, he could not have been making such laughable statements.

Here is a dose of reality, Mr Harbhajan: if GuySuCo produced 300,000 tonnes of sugar in 2017 at US$450 per tonne, then the industry’s revenue would be just over $29B. If the industry’s packaging plants are maximized, sugar revenue would be even higher. That mentioned sum, taken together with the $9.5B realizable from the Skeldon Co-Generation Plant, would see total revenue reaching $38.5B. Such sums are more than sufficient to cover the industry’s costs with all estates operating.

On the cost side, Mr Harbhajan, you should know that 70 per cent of costs are fixed, which means whether you produce 174,000 tonnes, as the industry is targeted to produce this year, or 300,000 tonnes, a great lot of the costs remain the same. In the latter case, however, average cost would be far lower than it would be should this year’s most recent target be realized. Similarly, there would also be likely reduction in strikes, as more canes COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

and less vines, grass and weeds would proliferate cane fields, thus reducing incidences of price disputes. Certainly it sounds, from our point of view, a most desirable situation, Mr Harbhajan?

While the erstwhile gentleman continues to espouse privatization, arguing that no worker would be laid off and justifying this by calling attention to the worker turnout, it seems the letter writer is not following the news as not too long ago, GuySuCo called attention to worker turnout far in excess of the 50 per cent statistic Mr Harbhajan refers to. Furthermore, even with 50 per cent worker turnout, through the use of the mechanical cane loaders, workers’ productivity is doubled. In essence with optimal utilization of those costly loaders, turnout could be really 100 per cent. Furthermore, how does Mr Harbhajan relate his privatization call when, in a short while, two (2) more estates are threatened with closure and thousands will join the very miserable lives that have beset the people of Wales.

Mr Harbhajan then goes on to talk about the Skeldon project, which he labels as a “millstone”. But it is this same “millstone”, Mr Harbhajan, that has several buyers, some who are known to his party, lining up to acquire it. Certainly, it serves to undermine the letter writer’s credence and assertions regarding the estate. The writer then goes on to speak about the Government support to sugar, but for reasons best known to himself, he inexplicably fails to explain how is it that, despite a $32B investment by the APNU/AFC Government, sugar production has dropped by 25 per cent in the last two (2) years. Clearly, from our point of view, those in charge of the industry are steering the ship into dangerous and unforgiving waters. We, nevertheless, recognize that Government support to sugar cannot be infinite, and thus our plan to

turn the industry around with some support from the Government in the medium term. We again urge the letter writer to get from his ‘high placed’ friends a copy of our submission to the Government. There he would see how we propose that the industry finance its modernization.

As we have seen with many other electoral promises, Mr Harbhajan is now denying that his party, in the elections campaign, promised sugar workers a 20 per cent wage rise. Such a promise has been a rallying call of the AFC for several years now. In fact the November 05, 2011 Kaieteur News quoted then AFC Presidential Candidate, Khemraj Ramjattan, in reference to the 8 per cent wage rise approved by the then Government, as saying “…we would make the workers happier with 20 per cent…”. Similar utterances, Mr Harbhajan, were also made during the 2011 and 2015 elections’ campaigns but like so many other com-

mitments, they are now exposed to be mere political gimmicks.

We are then serenaded about the positives of private ownership as the days of Bookers are recalled. It seems Mr Harbhajan maybe is not acquainted with the realities the workers faced in those times.

In those times, poverty stalked the sugar belt, as the workers faced daunting challenges while the sugar barons lived ‘life in London’ on their sweat, blood, and tears.

It was such a stark reality, among other reasons, that influenced the nationalization of the industry. That decision, Mr Harbhajan, was fully supported by the workers and their organisations. Certainly, if life were as good as you made it out to be in those days, the workers would have been up in arms at nationalisation.

Mr Harbhajan then goes on to call attention to the sugar levy, which he says pushed Bookers out of sugar and Guyana.

Again, the letter writer’s lack of knowledge stands nakedly exposed, as the sugar levy came to an end in 1996, and not 2002, as he asserts. Please, we urge you again, Mr Harbhajan to become acquainted with the facts before you ‘write’.

GAWU maintains that if the industry can be made viable in private hands, it stands an even better chance of doing so under state ownership.

GAWU attends IUF 27th Congress

Participants at the IUF’s 27th Congress

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) attended the 27th Congress of the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF) which was convened in Geneva, Switzerland from August 29 to September 01, 2017. The Union’s General Secretary, Cde Seepaul Narine, along with Cde Dawchan Nagasar, General Secretary of the National Association of Agricultural, Commercial and Industrial Employees (NAACIE), and Cde Sherwood Clarke, General President of the

Clerical and Commercial Workers Union (CCWU), attended the historic Congress from Guyana, and were among the 518 participants from organizations of many countries who took part in the Congress’s work.

The Congress was structured along four (4) themes: organizing and fighting for well-paid jobs with dignity, rights and stability; organizing and fighting to make our workplaces safe and healthy; organizing and fighting for equality and diversi Continued on page eleven (11) PAGE THREE

Sugar workers actions’ clearly indicate their opposition to closure and sell out plans The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) finds it incumbent to respond to Mr Gobin Harbhajan’s letter titled “Not doom and gloom for sugar workers”, which appeared in the September 16, 2017 edition of the Guyana Chronicle. Mr Harbhajan seemed very upset by the GAWU-organised march and public meeting which was held at Corriverton, Berbice on September 12, 2017. Like Mr Harbhajan says, “action speaks louder than words” and quite clearly, the workers by their actions, have demonstrated that they are opposed to plans by the APNU/AFC Government to sell out Skeldon and to close Rose Hall and Enmore/LBI Estates.

niently or otherwise, fails to explain how, despite the industry receiving $32B from the State in the era of his Government, is on track to deliver its worst performance since 1990.

Mr Harbhajan, just to let you know strikes, have fallen by 44 per cent between last year’s first crop and this year’s; and rainfall, though a bit unusual, was just 15 per cent above the average. Certainly, the usual scapegoats aren’t the culprits. Then what is, Mr Harbhajan?

The parading of the industry’s employment cost is most disingenuous, and is obviously meant to convey that sugar workers earn boatloads of money. But we recall the sugar workers being told during the 2015 elections It seems that the erstwhile gentlecampaign that they were underpaid man is failing, for some odd reason, and they deserved a 20 per cent into recognize that the people have A GAWU-organised march at Skeldon on September 12, 2017. The march saw scores of workers, resi- crease in pay. It is intriguing all of a staunchly rejected his Government’s dents, and others taking part as they denounced plans to close and sell out estates. sudden that the workers are earning anti-people plans. It would have been too much. Mr Harbhajan’s clear dustreet, maintains that our Union hasn’t to us that what we have proposed is unthought that, given the wide condemna- offered “sensible and workable solutions” meritorious. plicity stands nakedly exposed. tion that the sugar plans have attracted, regarding the situation in the sugar inMr Harbhajan then goes on to say that Despite the very active debate on sugMr Harbhajan and colleagues would have dustry, when probably all of Guyana and ar that has been playing out in the press workers will not lose their jobs should the returned to the drawing board, rather many beyond Guyana’s shores are fully for some time now, Mr Harbhajan calls industry be privatized. Maybe it is that the than rigidly and wrongly holding on to aware that the Union, on February 17, to attention the strike data from GuySu- author has a crystal ball or is performing their misplaced plans. Governments the this year, shared our thoughts with the Co. It seems that the Regional Councillor some kind of ‘voodoo’. Experience has world over, even some dictatorial-type Government at a meeting led by none and former SEI Director is not aware that taught us otherwise, and as Jamaica has ones, have gone down such paths, but other than his colleague, Vice President the vast majority of those strikes relate to shown us, there is no guarantee all workseemingly the APNU/AFC Government, Ramjattan. We urge Mr Harbhajan, as we price disputes, which concern just a few ers would be retained and they would rewhich professed its love for the sugar have done before, to check with his col- workers and are legitimized by the agree- ceive similar benefits. Such a situation is workers, has chosen to break the mould. leagues before making clearly misleading ment between GAWU and GuySuCo. certainly not in the interest of Guyanese We must admit that we find it laughable assertions. Also, Mr Harbhajhan, just to While the author speaks about the de- and Guyana. We urge Mr Harbhajan to that Mr Harbhajan, like an errant driv- tell you, the Government has never said cline in sugar production, he, conve- become acquainted with the facts. er going up the wrong side of a one-way

Banner at GAWU head office vandalized

What remained of the vandalised banner

A banner reading “Did you know? Estate closure and sellout means an uncertain future for thousands of youths!” which was mounted on the fence of the Head Office of the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) at High Street and Wights COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

Lane, Kingston, Georgetown was vandalized around 1:00h on August 16, 2017. The banner was placed on the fence for less than twenty-four (24) hours, having replaced another banner, which read:- “Did you know?

Govt sugar plans will see 50,000 people pushed into poverty!” which was displayed for about two weeks.

The Union’s night guard reported that about six (6) men, seemingly youths, appeared suddenly and ripped the banner and took the cloth with them as they walked along the pavement towards the Umana Yana vicinity.

It is the first time since our Office’s location in Kingston, now sixteen (16) years, that such a destructive act was ever committed with respect to our banners. The GAWU is concerned about the motive of the persons who would have acted so destructively and/or who directed such an action in a reasonably well-lighted area and not very distant from

the Police Headquarters, Eve Leary. A report of the matter has been tendered at the Guyana Police Force at the Brickdam Police Station.

The GAWU, in recent times, has been waging a sustained campaign in protesting the Government of Guyana’s ill-considered plans for the sugar industry.

In this time, we have successfully concluded several marches, public meetings, picketing exercises, representations locally and internationally, engaging the Courts, among other things, to call attention to the grave and serious consequences that would befall thousands of Guyanese and scores of communities should the plans for the sugar industry be stubbornly and heartlessly pursued. Despite this latest adversarial attack against the Union, we will persist in our defence of the workers’ cause while promoting their interests.

It is the Union’s duty to maintain our principled and forthright positions, and reiterate our firm opposition to closure of estates and the sell-out that are being contemplated.

PAGE FOUR

Sugar plans will push thousands of ordinary people into impoverishment and into a life of shattered dreams and hopes The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) refers to a letter from Mr Gobin Harbhajan, entitled “GAWU already betrayed membership”, which appeared in the September 03, 2017 edition of the Guyana Chronicle.

While the author has stressed the need to be objective and factual, it is obvious that his letter does not live up to his lofty claim.

Mr Harbhajan accused our Union of defending the previous administration.

It would seem that our citing of relevant and accurate statistics and figures have irked the Regional Councillor, though he posits that he seeks an objective conversation premised on facts and figures. He obviously cannot have his cake and eat it too. The letter writer goes on to say that our Union implied that the Coalition Government “erred in fulfilling its economic and social responsibility”. Our Union strongly upholds this view. We steadfastly believe that the APNU/AFC Administration has not lived up and is not living up, to its responsibilities to the thousands who depend, in one way or another, on the sugar industry. Certainly, such a view is not unfounded when no less than a Vice President, though being advised of the need for a socio-economic study of the Government sugar plans, told the Unions in the industry and the Opposition party that the Government would not pursue such an important study.

Even more disturbing was the VP telling the Unions and the Opposition party that they should pursue such a study, which really means that the Government is divesting itself from a core responsibility.

Undoubtedly, then, our view is not without merit. The fact is that such studies are an indispensible tool for policymakers to properly assess decisions of the magnitude the Government is seeking to implement for the sugar industry. For Mr Harbhajan’s information, even the European Union (EU) conducted such a study in Guyana in assessing the impact of the sugar price cut.

Mr Harbhajan then laughably criticizes our Union for not providing solutions to the sugar industry. It seems that the erstwhile gentleman has obviously not COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

been following the related news. Our Union has, on several occasions, shared our views and suggestions with the public, and the Government on safeguarding and securing the sugar industry. Our suggestions, Mr Harbhajan, involve a vertically integrated industry producing several products, including electricity, refined sugar, alcohol, among other things. These are not by any means new ideas, and are backed up by several studies which have confirmed their feasibility.

In fact, the current GuySuCo CEO, in a previous incarnation in the post in 2009, had included several of those ideas in his “Blueprint for Success” at that time.

The author then criticizes our Union for agitating on behalf of the workers we represent. It seems he is saying that sugar

workers are not deserving of a life similar to those enjoyed by himself and his colleagues, and they and their families needed to be kept at ‘basement levels’. We also find the view echoed by Mr Harbhajan a U-turn from the view he and his colleagues held prior to the May, 2015 elections. In those times, we heard that the workers were underpaid and they and their families were told about a 20 per cent pay rise. Like many other commitments, those utterances were obviously insincere and were meant to dupe and deceive.

Mr Harbhajan pontificates that he ac-

cepts that no estate should be closed, but privatized, in keeping with the Sugar Commission of Inquiry (CoI). The author then makes a passing reference to Wales, saying the calamities which beset the area would have been avoided had such an approach been taken. But it was the Government of which Mr Harbhajan is a part that refused an offer from the private cane farmers to take over the lands and factory at Wales. Instead, the people of Wales and all Guyanese were told that diversification into non-sugar crops was to be their saviour. It is saddening to record that just a small area has seed paddy cultivation in the given circumstance where in deprivation and desperation - are growing exponentially in the communities linked to Wales Estate. Similarly, Enmore and Rose Hall

are identified for heading down the same misery-filled road of closure. It seems to us that Mr Harbhajan is blowing a lot of hot air.

We, share and accept, Mr Harbhajan’s view that sugar can be profitable. Equally, we hold that if private owners can make it profitable, GuySuCo can achieve similar feats. While the author speaks to the Government’s support to the industry, he seems to forget the billions of dollars the industry channelled directly to the Treasury; the indirect employment it fosters; the infrastructural support it has provid-

ed; its drainage and irrigation services, which prevent many communities from being inundated; its training and diffusion of skills throughout the country, among the great lot of things it does for the Guyanese people.

The worn out red-herring GuySuCo debt figure is also called to attention by Mr Harbhajan. On this matter, we urge him to look at the disaggregated figures.

There he would find that the devil is really in the details. The proportion of labour costs to overall costs is also mentioned by Mr Harbhajan. But it seems the author fails to recognize or appreciate that the industry is still largely labour intensive.

Interestingly, according to GuySuCo, during its presentation to the Economic Services Committee earlier this year, 6 per cent of costs are attributed to the Senior Staffers – a small cohort of the thousands employed by the industry. Furthermore, with 70 per cent of costs in the industry being fixed, lower production will result in higher average costs, as an elementary economics student would explain.

Certainly, a higher production level would lend itself to lower production cost.

We are also asked by the author to share what areas we have in commonality with the Sugar CoI. On this matter, we ask Mr Harbhajan to seek from his high-placed, jet setting colleagues a copy of our proposals presented to the Government on February 17 this year. There he would see where we are supportive of the recommendations of the Sugar CoI and where we aren’t. Such an explanation would take much of the limited space in this response. We also should stress to Mr Harbhajan that our proposals have not been deemed outlandish or undoable by the ‘experts’ in GuySuCo and the Government. In fact, aside from a singular sentence in the ‘State Paper’ advising that GAWU submit a proposal to the Administration, nothing has been said about the Union’s ideas, which are supported by empirical studies.

While Mr Harbhajan accuses the Union of betraying its members, that is a moniker best suited to the letter writer and his colleagues, who seem bent on pushing thousands and thousands of ordinary people into impoverishment and into a life of shattered dreams and hopes.

PAGE FIVE

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

Why won't American media tell the truth about what's happening in Venezuela? seized power for 72 hours in 2002, one of their first orders of business was to shut down the government’s TV channel.

Phases of economic warfare When coup and media campaigns failed to upend the government or silence its mouthpiece, the opposition resorted to economic warfare. This war has had several phases: a national strike in 2002-2003 brought Venezuela’s state-run oil company, PDVSA, to a halt, denying the government its main source of revenue. A more recent phase around 2014 Violent opposition groups incinerated over 50 tons of food stored in a government warehouse in Ansaw smugglers take huge quanzoátegui in late June tities of subsidized fuel, food

By Justin Podur has been victimized by a number of facand staples across the border to tors outside of its control, but especially Colombia to sell or simply dump, denyDonald Trump stood before the U.N. by a precipitous drop in the price of oil, ing poor Venezuelans essential goods as a and called for the restoration of “political the country’s main source of revenue. means of exerting pressure on the federal freedoms” to a South American nation The oil price drop of 2015 was a glob- government. in the throes of an economic crisis. The al phenomenon. Since the formation of Ultimately, the greatest source of Vencountry in question was Venezuela; but OPEC in the 1970s, the Saudi Kingdom ezuela’s economic woes has been its own he could have just as easily been describ- has been able to use its immense reserves currency, the bolívar. Global markets can ing Argentina, whose right-wing govern- to undermine other oil-producing coun- wreak havoc on governments by making ment imprisoned indigenous politician tries’ attempts to maintain a high and sta- runs on their currency, and Venezuela has Milagro Sala, has run inflation into the ble price for petroleum. Even if all these attempted to immunize itself against this double-digits, and is in the process of nations were to ally, the Saudi Kingdom by imposing a fixed exchange rate. Over re-imposing the sort of austerity policies can turn the tap up or down and change the long term, the Venezuelan Revolution that triggered a popular revolt and debt the entire global economy to benefit its has not been able to surmount the coundefault in 2001. own geopolitical agenda and that of its try’s dependency on the extractive indusThe description also fits Brazil, where U.S. patron. It did so in the late 1970s to tries generally or petroleum specifically, President Michel Temer has been caught offset lowered production in Iran after which had always been one of its goals. on tape discussing bribes and where his the 1979 revolution. And it did so again If the opposition has succeeded in sabformer cabinet member’s apartment was in 2015, partly in response to the success otaging the economy over the past courecently raided to the tune of 51 million of the Iran-U.S. nuclear deal. It’s not a ple of years, it has also benefited from reais ($16 million). Temer, who assumed perfect mechanism; the price drop hurt Chavez’s death. The Democratic Unity office only after leading the impeachment the Saudi economy before prices slowly Roundtable (MUD) may have lost the of his predecessor, Dilma Rousseff, has climbed anew. But the most severe effects presidential election to Chavez’s succesalso run an aggressive programme of aus- were felt by the United States’ designated sor, Nicolas Maduro, but it captured the terity, dissolving the programs that lifted enemies: Russia, Iran and Venezuela.

National Assembly. No sooner did MUD tens of millions of Brazilians out of pov- Since 1999, the Venezuelan Government assume its new seat of power than it imerty and into the middle class. has experimented with a process of social mediately declared it would not work In both countries, right-wing forces and economic reform using constitution- with Maduro. Rather than help solve the have taken power and undermined frag- al and electoral means. The president who country’s economic crisis, it has celebratile democratic norms with the objective initiated the experiment, Hugo Chavez, ed it, hoping it will finally topple the govof reversing the modest redistribution of called it the “Bolivarian Revolution,” but erning United Socialist Party of Venezuwealth achieved under left-wing admin- for the most part it is now simply called ela (PSUV). istrations over the past 15 years. Backed Chavismo.

If the opposition does ultimately capture by the United States Government with its While Chavez was alive, no politician the presidency, the best-case scenario is long history of subverting leftist move- could rival him for the presidency. This that Venezuela adopts the ruinous ausments in the region, and a mainstream was true despite the 24-hour demoniza- terity policies of Macri’s Argentina or media that’s all too eager to carry its wa- tion of him in the country’s private me- Temer’s Brazil. The worst-case scenario ter, the right is now attempting the same dia, and the systematically negative cov- could look something like the U.S.-led feat in Venezuela. erage of his government across Western occupation of Haiti, with the country’s news outlets. As often occurs whenever oil industry turned over to the multinaHow the opposition fights a popular a country runs afoul of the U.S., Chavez tionals, like Iraq’s was more than a decade government was presented as a dictator, despite his ago. numerous electoral victories. So popuViolent threats have always been levUnlike Brazil and Argentina, Venezuela lar was he that when opposition leaders elled against Chavismo, mainly through COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

paramilitary incursions from Colombia.

From April through July, the Venezuelan opposition was engaged in a small-scale urban insurgency against the government. Abby Martin’s July program on TeleSUR, “Empire Files,” offers a flavour of what this looks like: the assassination of Chavistas, the intimidation of Chavista voters and the destruction of government buildings and warehouses (including those for subsidized food).

The insurgency put the government in an impossible position: If it represses these protests, it risks providing a pretext for a U.S. intervention or another coup. If it does not, a relatively small and unpopular opposition could impose minority rule. Meanwhile, the opposition adds fuel to the flames by refusing the government’s attempts at dialogue (which the Pope has offered to mediate).

The Venezuelan Government recently tried to bring its opponents back into the fold by calling for a new constitutional assembly, whose members were elected in July 2017 and which is currently in session. Its reward? Another boycott, and the rejection of all constitutional changes the elected assembly makes as illegitimate.

The coup playbook These methods—foreign incursions, sabotage and violent demonstrations, combined with a refusal to negotiate— were part of the Haitian opposition’s playbook in the years preceding the 2004 overthrow of Haiti’s elected government.

Despite the mass anti-war protests of that period, the Haitian coup was met with surprisingly little international resistance, which helps explain why Venezuela finds itself in such a precarious position. What in the early aughts looked like the birth of a new Latin American sovereignty has been rolled back: coups have overthrown governments in Honduras (2009), Paraguay (2012) and arguably Brazil (2016).

As the U.S. steps up its regime change efforts in Caracas, many leftists in progressive and social media have expressed confusion or equivocation. Their difficulty in distinguishing between an embattled social democracy and a violent, right-wing rejectionist opposition is a testament to the weakness of anti-imperialism in Western politics at the moment.

Progressives should have no such difficulty. Chavismo is an incomplete, flawed, ongoing democratic experiment. The alternatives on display are clear: terror, occupation and austerity.

PAGE SIX

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

US threatens genocide and crimes against humanity in North Korea member states to refrain from the threat of use of force against another state. Thus Trump’s threat to totally destroy North Korea violates that mandate. In addition, the pre-emptive use of force violates the Charter.

Moreover, self-defence, under the UN Charter is a narrow exception, saying that countries may engage in individual or collective self-defence only in the face of an armed attack.

North Korea has not attacked the United States or another UN member country, nor is such an attack imminent. Both Trump’s threat to use milA nuclear bomb exploding. The world stands on the precipise of a nuclear confrontation at the US rachets up itary force against North tensions with North Korea threatening to totally destroy the state.

Korea and the mounting

By Marjorie Cohn of international disputes, and forbids the of a pre-emptive strike Donald Trump threatened to “totally use of force except in self-defence or with would violate the Charter. destroy North Korea” in his address to Security Council authorization. the United Nations General Assembly In 1953, after one-third of North Korea’s The Crime of Genocide on September 19. That threat violates population was decimated, the United By stating the intention to totally dethe UN Charter, and indicates an intent States and North Korea signed an armi- stroy North Korea, Trump has threatened to commit genocide, crimes against hu- stice agreement. But the US never allowed genocide. manity, the war crime of collective pun- a peace treaty to be adopted. North Korea The crime of “genocide,” as defined in the ishment and international humanitarian has repeatedly advocated the signing of a Rome Statute for the International Crimlaw. Moreover, a first-strike use of nuclear peace treaty to formally end the Korean inal Court, is committed when, with the weapons would violate international law. War. To this day, 30,000 US troops con- intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a naBy threatening to attack North Korea, tinue to occupy South Korea. tional, ethnical, racial or religious group, Trump is endangering the lives of count- The US has also refused to pursue the any of the following acts are committed: less people. In the past, he has indicated “freeze-for-freeze” strategy suggested by killing members of the group, causing sehis willingness to use nuclear weapons China and Russia. Under this plan, North rious bodily or mental harm to members and Kim Jong-un has threatened to retal- Korea would freeze its nuclear and mis- of the group, or deliberately inflicting on iate. The rapidly escalating rhetoric and sile testing, and the US and South Korea the group conditions of life calculated to provocative manouvre on both sides have would end their annual, provocative joint bring about its destruction in whole or in taken us to the brink of war. military exercises. Vassily Nebenzya, part.

Trump’s threat prompted North Kore- Russia’s ambassador to the UN, said this Trump’s threat to totally destroy North an foreign minister Ri Yong-ho to state, path would offer “a way out” of the cur- Korea, if carried out, would destroy, in “Given the fact that this [threat] came rent situation. whole, the national group of North Korefrom someone who holds the seat of the US Instead, the US has engineered punitive ans. That would amount to genocide. presidency, this is clearly a declaration of sanctions against North Korea, which war.” Ri added, “Since the United States have only strengthened the latter’s resolve Crimes Against Humanity declared war on our country, we will have to develop usable nuclear weapons. Since Under the Rome Statute, “crimes against every right to make counter-measures, 1953, North Koreans have lived in fear of humanity” include: the commission of including the right to shoot down United annihilation by the United States. murder as part of a widespread or sysStates strategic bombers even when they In his speech to the General Assembly, tematic attack against any civilian popuare not inside the airspace border of our on top of his threats toward North Korea, lation; or persecution against a group or country.”

Trump also issued a veiled threat to pull collectivity based on its political, racial, Such a move by North Korea would vi- out of the Iran nuclear deal. That sends a national, ethnic or religious character, as olate international law. But that does not dangerous message to North Korea that part of a widespread or systematic attack justify US law-breaking. Two wrongs do the US cannot be trusted to abide by its against any civilian population. not make a right. After two world wars agreements.

Trump’s threat to totally destroy North claimed millions of lives, the UN Charter Korea, if realized, would constitute a was adopted in 1945 “to save succeeding The UN Charter Prohibits Threats and widespread and systematic attack against generations from the scourge of war.” The Pre-emptive Use of Force the civilian population of North Korea, Charter mandates the peaceful resolution Article 2 of the Charter calls on UN COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

which would amount to a crime against humanity.

The War Crime of Collective Punishment The crime of “collective punishment” is a grave breach of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which is considered a war crime.

Collective punishment means punishing a civilian for an offence he or she has not personally committed.

If Trump were to make good on his threat to totally destroy North Korea, he would be punishing the civilian population for offences committed by the North Korean government. This would constitute the war crime of collective punishment.

Destroying North Korea Would Violate Distinction and Proportionality The United States has a legal obligation to comply with the requirements of proportionality and distinction, two bedrock principles of international humanitarian law, as delineated in the First Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions.

“Proportionality” means an attack cannot be excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage sought. “Distinction” requires that the attack be directed only at a legitimate military target.

The total destruction of North Korea would violate the principles of proportionality and distinction.

First-Strike Use of Nuclear Weapons Violates International Law In its 1996 advisory opinion, “Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons,” the International Court of Justice (ICJ) determined that “the threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict, and in particular the principles and rules of humanitarian law.”

The ICJ went on to say, “However ... the Court cannot conclude definitively whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defence, in which the very survival of a State would be at stake.”

That means that while the use of nuclear weapons might be lawful when used in self-defence if the survival of the nation were at stake, a first-strike use would not be.

Donald Trump’s apocalyptic threat against North Korea violates international law. It also imperils the lives of untold numbers of people. We must urge Congress to prevent Trump from launching a catastrophic war.

PAGE SEVEN

GAWU will never tire repeating that we stand with the workers

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) refers to Mr Gobin Harbhajan’s letter which appeared in the August 24, 2017 edition of Stabroek News. We fully agree with the letter writer’s contention that social and economic development should be the foremost responsibility of any Government. This is a notion which, we believe, should not be lost; but, for some inexplicable reason it is not taken into account by those who currently control the levers of power.

Mr Harbhajan goes on to blame the sugar industry’s current state to mismanagement by the previous administration.

While we agree that all was not perfect in those times, at the same time, we recognize that no estate was closed nor were thousands of Guyanese thrown into a life of uncertainty and misery, as we see happening presently at Wales. Added to that, the author, for reasons best known to him, refuses to draw attention to the pervasive mismanagement taking place in current times. We hasten to remind that sugar production has fallen from 231,000 tonnes in 2015 to an expected 174,000 tonnes in 2017, a 25 per cent drop, assuming this year’s target is met.

While the author speaks about the monies provided by the European Union (EU) for the sugar industry, he fails to tell Guyanese that the last $5.4B which were transferred to the Government in the latter part of 2016 are still withheld COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

from the industry. Perhaps, Mr Harbhajan is unaware of such facts. Or, maybe, he just didn’t consider it suitable for his purposes. Mr Harbhajan argues also that the ‘turnaround plan’ was not a success, to which we beg to differ. We recall production rising from 186,000 tonnes in 2013, to 216,000 tonnes in 2014, and then to 231,000 tonnes in 2015. Such performances in those years were obviously encouraging and welcoming trends.

Mr Harbhajan’s assertion that the “Skeldon Modernisation Project was the death knell of the industry” requires that he separates the facts from fiction. In the last months, we have heard and read about several parties who have expressed unsolicited interest in acquiring Skeldon.

Certainly, if the estate were in such a bad state as the author implies then those interested clearly do not believe his fiction.

Furthermore, the author, who signs his letters, among other things, as a “Former Member of the Board of Directors (Skeldon Energy Inc)”, should be well aware of the value of the Skeldon Co-Generation Plant and must be au fait with the huge sums garnered by SEI through the production of the plant. He ought also to be aware of SEI’s recommendation to the Parliamentary Economic Services Committee - having co-generation plants established at other estates in view of the substantial income potential.

Then, after all his confabulations, Mr

Harbhajan tells Guyanese that “sugar is profitable”, but for such profitability to be realized, the industry must be placed in private hands. Well, this is really a mouthful. The letter writer argues that the Government should uphold the Sugar Commission of Inquiry (CoI) recommendation in this year.

The privatisation of the industry was one of the one hundred and fourteen (114) recommendations made by that costly CoI. The author should be re-

minded that the CoI also said no closure of estate should be pursued, but already Wales is closed and Rose Hall and Enmore/LBI are likely destined for the same fate. Several other positive recommendations were also made by the CoI, including diversification and that non-sugar agricultural diversification should be done on lands outside of sugar. All of those, it seems, are ignored by Mr Harbhajan, and we daresay that the CoI report is destined to sit on a shelf to gather dust.

While Mr Harbhajan, like another of his ilk, Mr Abel Seetaram, sought to take a swing at GAWU, again the attempt suffers from not providing relevant, substantiated facts. We repeat - and we will never tire of repeating, as some would wish - that we stand with the thousands of workers who are and will be affected by the plans being cooked up for sugar. Such plans are tantamount to condemning thousands to joblessness and their families to an existence of severe deprivation.

We cannot subscribe to such betrayals of our membership.

Skeldon workers picket GuySuCo outreach meeting - NO CLOSURE, NO SELLOUT

PAGE EIGHT

GAWU presents bursary awards

LEFT: GAWU President, Cde Komal Chand, with the bursary awardees recipents in Georgetown. RIGHT: Cde Harvey Tambron, GAWU Vice President (back row, second from the right) with the awardees in New Amsterdam.

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) presented bursary awards to children of GAWU members. Over the past years, the union has been awarding the best performing children of GAWU’s members in the National Grade Six Examinations.

Two separate activities were held: at the union’s offices in New Amsterdam, Berbice and Georgetown on August 25, 2017 whereby the monetary awards to the successful students were handed out in the presence of their parents.

In his message to the students at the Demerara ceremony in Georgetown, the President of GAWU, Comrade Komal Chand, congratulated the students on their achievements, and also congratulated their parents, whose support and encouragement, he stressed must have greatly assisted the students. He advised the students, noting the importance of education, to continue to acquire higher learning as they entered secondary school in the new school term in September. He also told the students that GAWU is pleased and proud to award the bursaries, as the Union recognizes their suc-

cess at the National Grade Six examinations and wishes to encourage them to continue to diligently pursue their studies for greater attainments. Comrade Harvey Tambron, Vice President of GAWU, who spoke at the Berbice Awards Ceremony, also expressed similar sentiments.

Altogether, twenty (20) students received twenty-three (23) bursaries, of which three (3) were awarded by the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union Co-operative Credit Union Society Limited.

Albion cane cutters opposed to gang merger protesting against the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (GuySuCo) action to reassemble their working gangs, namely:- 14A, 14B and 15A - into one gang. This unilateral action will reduce the shop stewards’ service from nine (9) to three (3) workers over a workforce of approximately 700 cane cutters.

An official of the Corporation visited the Albion location on July 25, 2017 and merely informed the shop stewards of the Corporation’s decision. He refused to have an engagement with the stewards on the rationale for the decision. He told them, Workers taking part in the picketing exercise of August 03, 2017 reportedly in an unpleasant tone, Scores of cane cutters from Albion Estate staged a spirthat “it was a Management decision”. ited picketing exercise outside of the Estate’s AdminThe large number of cane cutters are aware that their istrative Office on August 03, 2017. The workers were COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

issues and problems which arise in the course of their work could not be effectively serviced by three (3) of their colleagues. This is the reason, over the past years, that their shop stewards ratio has been about 3 to 230 – 250 workers – a ratio which has been tested and which worked to date.

This newest intrusion onto the workers’ right by the ‘New GuySuCo’ is yet another rollback of their gains, and is succeeding in promoting greater demotivation within the harassed workforce across the sugar belt.

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) calls on GuySuCo to engage immediately the Union and the shop stewards in earnest with a view to address the “gang merger”. The forceful merger at this time, the commencement of the harvest of the industry’s second crop, is a most negative approach by the duo IMC leaders, and may not be taking the best interests of the industry into consideration.

PAGE NINE

GuySuCo ‘seemingly’ GuySuCo forcibly takes striking undermining Skeldon cane cutters to work Estate’s performance It was most disconcerting for the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) to learn from workers of Skeldon Estate that the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (GuySuCo) has decided not to undertake any land tilling and cane planting for the remainder of the year at that estate. Furthermore, the Union was even more disturbed and shocked when it learnt that the application of herbicides and fertilizers to canes has also been discontinued by the Corporation. In fact, we have been advised that the Corporation has had Skeldon’s tillage tractors transferred to other estates. Similarly, we understand that Skeldon’s stock of fertilizers is being sent to other estates. In the case of the cane planters and the spray hands, they have been compelled to undertake cane cutting and rat catching tasks respectively. The decision by GuySuCo can be likened to cutting one’s nose to spite one’s face.

Our Union is most perplexed by GuySuCo’s actions, especially noting that Skeldon is expected to remain in sugar production, and thus the strong need for the maintenance of the cultivation. With the intended divestment of Skeldon still not popularly supported in Guyana, or at least still some way off, it follows that the estate would operate under GuySuCo’s banner for some time more, and therefore we are even more confounded by the sugar company’s unwise decisions.

From our perspective, the decision to end these important field operations is another sordid attempt to paint Skeldon as a poor performer, and to strengthen the call for its divestment. The GAWU holds strongly to the view that, with the recent repairs to the boilers and the correction of defects in the factory over the last few years, the factory is now poised to demonstrate its potential and to throw cold water on its many naysayers. Such a state of affairs would be most embarrassing to the divestment cheerleaders. It is in this context we see the spiteful decision to starve the factory of canes. Someone(s) is/are undermining the Skeldon Estate’s performance, it would appear.

The seemingly deliberate running down of the cane cultivation also has several wider and important implications. Certainly, less canes in the field would serve

to reduce the estate’s value and allow it to be sold cheaply to possibly a chosen, favoured buyer. Furthermore, less canes would obviously impact on the current field workers, who would have reduced work opportunities in subsequent crops, and thus their earning capacity would be reduced which will affect the wider communities and scores of vendors and businesses.

In view of the unfolding situation, the Union wrote the Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer, urging a meeting consistent with the relevant agreement between the GAWU and the GuySuCo. Through our letter, we pointed out to GuySuCo that these developments, which have significant bearing on the workers, were not discussed with them at the estate, nor were the representative Unions engaged.

On that score, we called on the GuySuCo to have an urgent engagement. In the first place, the Corporation was obligated to engage us on these matters and it was only after GAWU’s exposure that the Union, which was being kept in the dark, was GAWU invited to a meeting which was held on September 26, 2017. At the meeting, the Corporation related mainly that its financial situation forced the cessation of the operations concerned. The GAWU reiterated its view that the GuySuCo is running down the estate.

GAWU wishes, with these developments in mind, to emphasize that we remain staunchly opposed to plans by GuySuCo and the Administration to divest Skeldon Estate. We hold that the investment, in correcting defects, is bearing fruit, and its sale would see the owner of the estate benefiting tremendously. Furthermore, there is absolutely no guarantee that the new owners would sustain the employment of all the workers, nor is there any surety that the workers’ hard-won benefits, rights, and conditions would be respected. These are major concerns of the Union and workers, and certainly lay bare the nature of those in authority. Such a rollback is not in the interest of the people, the economy and the country; and the decision makers should really listen to the cries and pleas of the people.

“Capitalist barbarism, crisis and Imperialist wars,

or socialism” COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

Cane cutters of Skeldon staged a picketing exercise outside of the estate on September 22, 2017. The workers protested the sudden withdrawal of a long-standing practice without any discussion with the workers. The next day (September 23, 2017), as the workers’ strike action continued, 55 workers were forcibly taken to work. Some of the workers lept off the lorry as it approached the orderline, while some others walked out from the cultivation to the public road. The actions by the GuySuCo reminds us of a time when forced labour was the norm, and violates workers’ right to work and to strike.

As cane cutters of Skeldon Estate took strike action on September 23, 2017, protesting the haughty and arrogant attitude of the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (GuySuCo), the workers were most upset by the sudden and unannounced withdrawal of a long-standing practice whereby they are paid their extra payments proportionate to the task they would have completed. The workers related that, for as long as they can recall, this has been the system employed at Skeldon Estate, and it has served the workers and the estate well.

It is indeed saddening that, so soon after the commencement of the crop, workers are forced to take strike action to defend their rights and conditions. If it were the case that the Corporation had wished to change the practice at Skeldon, certainly it could have engaged the Union and the workers in discussions to reach an amicable solution in the nine (9) months the estate was not operating. It seems rather than taking an enlightened approach to the situation, the Corporation has chosen to employ a ‘wrecking ball’ attitude in addressing the workers’ issues. This is a most disturbing approach in our contemporary times.

The Union was also very perturbed to learn that about 55 cane cutters were seemingly forcefully taken into the cultivation against their will to work on September 23, 2017. Normally, the workers from the different villages are transported to the Baker Shop Dam order line, where the number of workers is recorded by the relevant managerial personnel

before they are finally transported to the worksite. However, the lorry travelling from Crabwood Creek picking up workers along the way went straight into the cultivation, though the workers kept demanding that the chauffeur stop at the order line as is customary. Seven of the workers, we understand, disembarked from the moving lorry at the order line, at their own risk, and a further six (6) walked out from the cultivation where they were taken. This is, in our view, a most improper act, if not a criminal one.

It also speaks to the low levels that the GuySuCo has descended, and harks back to a time of forced labour, a time we of the GAWU felt was condemned to the history books. Moreover, it is the first time as an independent state that we recall that workers have been taken against their will to work and in our view violates their inalienable constitutional rights to strike and to work.

The GAWU has been making efforts to have the Union and the Corporation intervene at the central level to arrest the situation and find a solution. The Corporation, however, has not agreed with the Union’s request. Also, efforts by the Union and the workers at the local level were in vain. Quite possibly, the Corporation is seeking to engender the workers’ protest actions towards its own nefarious ends. Certainly, with sugar production lagging far behind the set target at this time, the Corporation is obviously looking for a scapegoat to cover up its poor management.

PAGE TEN

GAWU says: GuySuCo should build bridges, not walls

The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) finds it necessary to correct several inaccurate statements made by the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (GuySuCo), through its recent press release, which was reported in the September 23, 2017 Stabroek News – “GuySuCo pillories GAWU over spate of sugar industry strikes”.

While the sugar company seeks to cast aspersions on our Union and the workers, we find its assertions are far from reality and are completely baseless and unfounded. GuySuCo, in a most objectionable manner, sought to ridicule the workers’ protests but importantly failed to tell the Guyanese people that the workers’ actions arose from the Corporation seeming policy to keep the Union and the workers at arm’s length.

As was widely reported, the company failed to pay the workers on September 15, 2017 – a move which, to wage earners, is tantamount to a criminal act. That communication was very much upsetting to the workers, who learnt of the delay just a few hours before their wages’ were payable on September 15, 2017. It was only in the late afternoon of September 14, 2017 that GuySuCo informed our Union about the delay in the wages payment. Certainly the Corporation would have known for some time before it contacted our Union that the workers’ wages would have been delayed. Therefore, it raises the question: why did the Corporation choose not to engage the workers and the Union, resorting rather to a paltry phone call on the eve of the pay day.

We naturally enquired from GuySuCo about when the wages would be paid and were told that no date has not yet been identified. As a responsible organization, we informed our members as best as we could, given the late notice by GuySuCo. We also advised the workers that the Corporation could not have advised us COMBAT

Aug/Sep 2017

on a payment date. In the ensuing days, our Union, at the central and estate levels, we continued to engage the Corporation about the payment date, but no clear information was being provided. This we also communicated to our members.

Quite expectedly, workers’ apprehension was building, given their urgent need for their wages to sustain their families and to meet their obligations. In such circumstances, the workers, with the Union’s full support, staged a number of picketing exercises calling on the sugar company to honour its legal obligation to the workers. It was only after the workers ‘picketing exercises that the Corporation finally advised that the workers would be paid on September 20, 2017, five (5) days late. Certainly, it wouldn’t have been farfetched for the Corporation to have contacted our Union to apprise us of this.

The workers, having being paid on September 20, 2017, enquired from GAWU whether they would be paid on September 22, 2017. Our Union, through our Field Officers, on September 21, 2017 contacted the respective Estate Managers, who advised them they were awaiting advice from the GuySuCo Head Office.

The Union next, around 14:45h on September 21, 2017, wrote the Corporation’s Chief Executive Officer (CEO) regarding the workers’ wages. To date, our Union has not received any response from the Corporation’s CEO concerning our letter on the matter. That notwithstanding, our Union’s Field Officers continued to remain in contact with the respective Estate Managers during the evening of September 21, 2017, who advised that they were still awaiting instructions from the Head Office. It was only until after 20:00h on September 21, 2017 that we learnt that the workers’ wages would be paid, but at a later-than-usual time. Again, it wouldn’t have taken great effort for the CEO, having received our correspondence, to con-

tact our Union. We are by no means difficult to reach.

The Corporation, while seeking to be critical of our Union and the workers, has displayed clearly its lack of understanding of workers’ concerns and compassion. Unlike the big shots ensconced in their cushy office and enjoying their huge remuneration packages, the workers depend on the timely release of their wages in order to ensure that they have food on their tables; that they can send their children to school; that their electricity, water and telephone services are not disconnected, among other things.

Sugar workers now-a-days are confronting a steep decline in the real incomes, noting the steadily rising cost-of-living whereas their rates-of-pay are confined to 2014 levels. It has, sadly, forced many workers to live ‘week-to-week’.

GuySuCo’s disturbing missive goes on to point an accusatory finger at our Union. The GAWU sees this as nothing more than incessant, hollow harping by GuySuCo. As we have clearly illustrated

with the recent delayed payment matter, the Corporation seemingly remains unconcerned about its employees plight and from all indications, has taken on a ‘might is right’ approach. In recent weeks, we have had cause on several occasions to write the Corporation regarding several matters of concern. It was only after our correspondences that the GuySuCo has chosen to respond to the workers’ concern. Certainly, had the Corporation had any sort of respect for its workers, it would have engaged them and their organisations in raising and discussing matters of mutual concern.

GAWU reiterates that we remain committed to having fruitful relations with GuySuCo. But, at the same time, we are well aware that it takes two to tango. We urge the Corporation to shed its yester-year behaviour and join us in this time to face together the challenges of the industry. The contemporary approach calls for us to build bridges and not walls, as GuySuCo is currently doing.

Continued from page three (3)

The IUF’s commitment to equality in the workplace and in society transcended in the decision to organize a well-attended pre-Congress first-ever meeting of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersexual (LGBTI) workers and allies. Also for the first time, a pre-Congress Young Workers’ Conference took place. Representatives from these two (2) groupings were approved by delegates to have representatives on the IUF governing structure. Working groups designated by the LGBTI workers and allies, and the young workers conferences will further their work in keeping with the changes to the IUF’s rules that were approved by the Congress.

GAWU attends...

-ty; and organizing and fighting for progressive, democratic politics.

In reality these struggles are inseparable: the right of all workers to form trade unions and collectively negotiate improvements in their working conditions are the foundation for securing safe workplaces; stable, well-paid jobs, and equality and respect for all workers. It is what unites the daily struggles of food and beverage workers; farm and plantation workers, hotel, catering and restaurant workers; the struggles of migrant and domestic workers, all of them active at the Congress.

The Congress also expressed its warm appreciation for the contribution of retiring General Secretary Ron Oswald, who led the IUF since 1997 with deeply felt commitment, inspiration and imagination. Cde Sue Longely, Assistant General Secretary, was unanimously elected to succeed him as the IUF’s new General Secretary. The IUF’s long-standing President, Hans-Olof Nilsson of the Swedish Foodworkers Union, also resigned at the Congress and the Cde Mark Lauritsen of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) of North America was elected as the new President of the Organisation.

Significantly too, was the largest-ever Women’s Conference which met before the Congress and revised the IUF Action Programme for Equality to take account of new issues and challenges facing women workers and trade unions. Importantly, women representatives are now the majority of the members on the IUF’s Strategic Leadership Committee.

A number of resolutions were approved by the Congress, and a new 45-person Executive Committee was elected to guide the organisation during the next five (5) years. GAWU’s General Secretary was re-elected to serve on the IUF’s Executive Committee.

PAGE ELEVEN

FITUG seeks 2018 Budget to ease the burdens of the working-people and to uplift their and their families’ lives

FITUG’s delegation with Minister Sharma, second from the left. The Federation sought several improvements towards uplifting and improving the lives of the working-people.

FITUG argued that the burdensome tax measures are hurting the workers and called on the Government to reverse those negative policies. The trade union body also called on the Government to re-examine its plans for sugar and to establish a special programme for the communities linked to the recently-closed Wales Estate.

The Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG), on September 18, 2017, met with Minister within the Ministry of Finance, Jaipaul Sharma, at this Ministry’s invitation, to share the proposals it wished to have included in the 2018 National Budget. The Federation did point out to Minister Sharma that it was disappointed that proposals it submitted regarding the 2015, the 2016, and the 2017 National Budgets, were seemingly not considered.

FITUG also pointed out to the Minister that it was very concerned by the trying and difficult times our people are facing now-a-days. We called attention to the heavy tax burden, reducing economic growth, and a steadily contracting job market. In such times, we noted, the working people and their families are the hardest hit through unemployment, reduced employment and benefits, underemployed, a reduction in their standard-of-living, among other things.

Through our submission to the Minister, FITUG sought improvement in the tax allowances; increased old age pensions and public assistance; the institution of 24-hour state-operated day care centres for single parents; ensuring allocated sums benefit the people; protection of our patrimony, and transparent arrangements regarding the exploitation of our natural resources.

On the sugar industry, the FITUG is seeking that the Government hold it hands on its plans, which will cause severe and great disruption, and engage all stakeholders, including the trade unions and business community, to find workable solutions to the industry’s challenges.

We also reiterated that the Government

ought to conduct a socio-economic study relating to the industry. Such a study, we held, is an important prerequisite in addressing decisions about the industry.

Looking at Wales, the FITUG called on the Government to implement an income support mechanism for the people affected by the estate’s closure; to encourage investment in the area in an effort to spur job creation; to provide skills training required by the labour market to displaced workers and youth, and matching them with extant vacancies; to provide counselling and other social programmes to address the social anxieties that have gripped the people and communities, among other things.

The Federation also sought improved support for the trade union movement, and lamented that previously approved sums were not disbursed to the movement despite the relevant procedures being complied with by unions. FITUG also sought to have a more efficiently functioning bureaucracy, and shared a number of ideas in this regard. The Federation felt that such efficiency would lend to more resources being available for the people.

The Minister, having listening to the Federation, undertook to transmit our concerns to his colleagues in the Government. He advised the FITUG that several other bodies will be engaging the Government on the Budget, and after a complete review is conducted, the Administration will decide on what matters would be featured in the 2018 Budget. The FITUG advised the Minister that it felt its proposals were reasonable, and should be included in the 2018 Budget.

GuySuCo on track to deliver worst sugar production in 27 years

Cane cutters loading harvested canes into punts (barges) which would be taken to the factory for processing into sugar. The second sugar crop of the year is now in its 11th week, and production is 24,790 tonnes sugar behind expectations at this time. Given the short time which remains before the crop would come to an end, and more so the poor cane yields being recorded, it is doubtful that the GuySuCo would be able to realise its set target. All indications are that the Corporation would have its worst production since 1990.

As at September 30, 2017, eleven (11) weeks had elapsed since the second sugar crop began at Blairmont Estate on week-ending July 22, 2017. With all the estates now operable, production for the crop stood at 41,195 tonnes as follows:Estate SWR AN RH BCF EDE ICBU Total

S/Crop S/Crop Target Actual 30,097 2,347 32,521 13,158 19,682 8,356 19,320 11,892 12,991 645 10,223 4,707 124,834 41,195

Var 27,660 19,363 11,326 7,428 12,346 5,516 83,639

At this time, according to the GuySuCo production schedule, the crop’s sugar production should have reached 65,985 tonnes sugar. In other words, there is a production shortfall of 24,790 tonnes sugar. The significant production deficit is in part due to the late start-up of the Enmore and the Skeldon factories, which begun operations six (6) and two (2) weeks later than expected. But of greater importance is the lower-than-expected cane yields across the industry, which has undoubtedly served to curtail production. The poor cane yields point, in our view, to grave and gross mismanagement.

It is disturbing that, despite the industry receiving billions as subsidy from the Treasury, plus an additional $2B from the

sale of land to the State, production and productivity are declining. Certainly it calls to attention the stewardship of those who are entrusted to manage the industry.

From interactions with workers, and given that just about 12 weeks remain in the crop, it is highly doubtful that the Corporation would reach its set target. All signs are indicating that sugar production may be around 150,000 tonnes sugar this year.

This would be the worst production since 1990, when 129,920 tonnes sugar were produced. The GuySuCo, recognizing the writing on the wall, has begun to set the stage to lay blame on the workers and the Union. This most disingenuous attempt to paint the workers with the Corporation hierarchy’s ‘brush of failure’ is for us disturbing and disconcerting. It speaks to the low levels being sunk to by those who are perched atop the Corporation’s hierarchy in seeking to mask their tracks of mismanagement and to shift blame to the unwitting hard-working employees in the sugar industry.

Our Union, smelling the rat, has pointed out, through our press statements and our public pronouncements, that the Corporation is embarking on such nefarious ploys. Certainly, the ‘dirty hands’ of the highly-rewarded GuySuCo hierarchy should stand exposed for all to see.

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: INFO@GAWUGY.COM WEBSITE: WWW.GAWUGY.COM