Combat - January/February 2012 edition by GAWU

Combat

Sugar First Crop Commences

Issue#:1 Volume#: 33

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

January/February, 2011

Guysuco aims to produce 265,000 tonnes sugar this year

The Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (Guysuco) commenced the harvesting of canes for the year, targeting production of 265,000 tonnes sugar, of which the production of 101,813 tonnes is to be attained at the conclusion of the current first crop. A mere target of 265,000 tonnex explains the inablity of the industry to meet its sustainable challenge. The undermentioned indicates the number of grinding weeks of the Estates during the First Crop:Skeldon - 8 weeks Albion - 12 weeks Rose Hall - 9 weeks Blairmont - 10 weeks Enmore - 13 weeks Wales - 10 weeks Uitvlugt - 8 weeks In other words, each estate will operate for about 10 weeks during the crop. Will the industry attain its first crop target? The quantity of cane and the yields per hectare will basically determine the crop’s production. The first crop target over the past five (5) years averaged 108,911 tonnes sugar, while the average achievement was 100,393 tonnes sugar, or 92.87 per cent. Taking into account an average of ten (10) grinding weeks across the industry’s seven factories, including the poorly performing and newly constructed Skeldon factory, the first crop target, although low, may not be attained owing to inadequate canes. As at week ended February 25, 2012, the sugar production attained was as follows:Estate Skeldon Albion Rose Hall Blairmont Enmore Wales Uitvlugt Total

Target to Date 0 3,780 2,431 4,725 986 2,052 3,750 17,724

Production to Date 0 2,337 1,186 195 0 436 1,174 5,330

COMBAT: January/February, 2012

Variance 0 1,443 1,245 4,530 986 1,616 2,576 12,394

Inclement weather across the industry and industrial unrest particularly at Blairmont Estate have significantly marred the early performance of the crop. There are two potential issues which are currently troubling the industry. The The newly built Skeldon sugar factory Corporation exercise which evaluated 173 jobs among 6,214 timeneeds to pay workers their Annual Production Incen- rated workers who are members of the Union. Seven tive (API) of 7.58 days’ pay for last year (2011). Work- new scales or bands are to be implemented retroacers at Rose Hall, Albion, Blairmont and Uitvlugt Estates tively to January 01, 2011, and certain “service paywould receive 9.1; 8.07; 8.56; and 8.17 days’ pay re- ments” are to be awarded, taking into account the past spectively, owing to better individual production levels services of employees in their current jobs. Should the than the other estates. implementation of the Report be delayed indefinitely, In the past years, not later than the first month of the it will create a potential breeding ground for industrial year, workers received their API. The cash-strapped action. Corporation publicly stated, two weeks ago, that it could hardly obtain loans from the commercial banks The good news is that the Minister of Labour, Dr N.K. for crop financing, and workers would not be able to re- Gopaul, in a letter to the Union dated February 21, ceive their API before March 16, 2012, some days after 2012, assured the Union that the recommendations of two shipments of sugar would have been dispatched to the Job Evaluation Committee would be implemented Tate and Lyle in London, thus ensuring adequate rev- in June this year. The Union has since written Guysuco enue inflows to facilitate the payment of the Incentive. drawing its attention to the Minister’s assurance, and The other issue is the implementation of the Job Eval- is seeking an urgent meeting with the Corporation to uation Report. The Corporation and the Union, in late identify the actual date of the implementation of the December, 2011, completed a tedious job evaluation Report. Page One

GAWU members partcipate Meet your Branch Executives in Mash celebrations At recently held Branch Conferences the elected committees comprise:-

GAWU’s members taking part in the celebrations

Some 300 members of the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), drawn from our membership in the sugar industry, participated in the annual Mashramani celebrations and float parade on February 23, 2012. Members of the Union joined members of the Guyana Labour Union (GLU) and the National Association of Agricultural, Commercial and Industrial Employees (NAACIE) under the banner of the Federation of Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG) in the annual celebrations. FITUG’s band marched under the theme: “Forging an Immediate Tempo to Unite Guyanese - FITUG”. Revel-

lers were attired in Guyana’s national colours. Green for our agricultural resources, Red for the zeal and dynamic nature of national building, Gold for Guyana’s mineral wealth, Black for the endurance that will sustain the forward thrust of the Guyanese people, and White for the rivers and water potential. GAWU had been participating in the celebrations for many years. This year, for the fourth consecutive time, it has participated in the country’s Mashramani celebrations under the banner of FITUG, which, incidentally, was the only trade union body which has been participating in this national event.

Twenty-eight (28) members of the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) belonging to BEV Processors Inc, Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC), Noble House Seafoods Limited, National Parks Commission, Sugar Industry Labour Welfare Fund Committee (SILWFC), Demerara Distillers Limited (DDL), Demerara Harbour Bridge, Berbice Bridge Company Inc, Demerara Timbers Limited (DTL) and Caricom Rice Mills Limited, participated successfully in a two-day course at the GAWU Labour College on February 14 and 15, 2012. Presenters focused, on the Termination of Employment and Severance

Pay Act, the Occupational Safety and Health Act, National Insurance Scheme (NIS) Benefits, Collective Bargaining, How a Company Operates, the History of the Union and Working Class Ideology, among other subjects. At the conclusion of the seminar, participants expressed their appreciation to the Union for conducting what they described as a very educational course. They felt obliged to encourage their workplace colleagues to attend similar courses when the opportunity arises. They also expressed their interest in attendingcourses of longer duration with a wider curriculum.

Twenty-eight complete two-day course

COMBAT: January/February, 2012

Skeldon Estate Chairman: Deodat Persaud Thakurdin, Vice Chairman: Ernest Mandal, Secretary: Uranie Heeram, Assistant Secretary/Treasurer: Abdool Salim Zaleel and Committee Members: Michelle McBean, Shaym Jabar, Barbara Cort, Derrick Clarke, Intiaz Persaud, Victorine Crawford, Abigale Blair, Ranjandra Churan, Laljit Chatterpaul, Richard Budhoo, Balram Deo, Rebecca Harris, Jerrick Southwell, Stephanie Adams, T. Beharry, Y. Drepaul and Lennox April Albion Estate Chairman: Hernie Parks, Secretary: Rickram Shrikshun, Assistant Secretary/Treasurer: Bevon Sinclair, Organising Secretary: Ganga Persaud Shivdyal and Committee Members: Mohamed Gafoor, Victor McKenzie, Vishnu Nandlall, Krishnadatt Ramlakhan, Krihnadat Pooran, Deodat Doodnauth, Ingrid George, Nola Thomas, Cronston Dey, Vickram Sahadeo, Ravichan Singh, Leloetha Skeete and Debbie Semple Rose Hall Estate Chairman: Mohamed Ahamad, Vice Chairman: S. Rabindranauth, Secretary: Charles Cadogan, Assistant Secretary/Treasurer: K. Ramnarase and Committee Members: I. Persaud, C. Sinclar, D. Simon, S.Parris, R. Dhanraj, G. McChorde, N. Sukhia, K. Ramo-

tar, R. Southwell, R. Ramlall, Ramsaywack, K. Sukhu, C. Lindo, V. NewYear, L. Simon, R. Sinclair and O. Richardson Blairmont Estate Chairman: Julius Nurse, Vice Chairman: Rubraj Singh, Secretary: Bhikram Singh, Assistant Secretary/Treasurer: Travis Edwards and Committee Members: Gowkarran Inderjit, Narine Jairam, Vernice Henry, Jasoda Kishore, Brentnal Drakes, Mahdendra Puran, Shiek Baksh, Mahendra Persaud, Motilall Dyal, Dharamdeo Bridgewalla, Brian Roopnarine, Bramdeo Rampersaud and Kapil Persaud Enmore Estate Chairman: Rampersaud Prashad, Vice Chairman: Roy Dundas, Secretary: Balram Sukhram, Assistant Secretary/Treasurer: Mondoer Persaud and Committee Members: Penelope DeFretias, Suresh Oudith, Richard DeFretias,Rudolph Gill, Noaymie Farrel, Vidyanand Persaud, Shonnet Glasgow and Chetram Mahindranauth LBI Estate Estate Chairman: Laloo Tekchand, Vice Chairman: Vishnu Lewis, Secretary: Rakesh Daby, Assistant Secretary/Treasurer: S. Sharukh and Committee Members: Harilall Boodram, Heralall Budhu, Mahendra Jaimangal, Dunstan Collins, Subschand Ramjeet, Inhan Ali and Durga Singh

Raymond Wong persishes Cde R a y m o n d K h a n Wong, a long standing employee of the the National Parks C o m mission (NPC), died following an accident on Vlissengen Road on (Friday) February 17, 2012. He succumbed mainly from severe head injuries. Raymond, as he was popularly called, was a supervisor of NPC. At the time of the accident, he was returning to one of the two bases of the NPC in Georgetown following a task he and the driver of a tractor and trailer conducted at Sparendaam, six miles from Georgetown. The left rear wheel of the tractor traversed into a deep pot hole on Vlissengen Road, resulting in Wong being catapulted from the floor of the trailer where he was sitting. He was almost pitched head-on to the hard ground, and died about eight (8) hours later in the intensive care unit of the Georgetown Public Hospital. Cde Wong, who was two (2) years away from retirement, left to grieve his family, including his seven (7) children, relatives and friends. He is remembered to have been the most steadfast union activist at NPC, who had promoted and supported the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union

(GAWU) to become the representative union at the Commission. It took twelve (12) long years of struggle for union recognition. Raymond Wong never wavered in promoting GAWU among his colleagues, who grew in number over the years in support of the Union. Despite court injunctions filed by the then incumbent Union and other frustrating activities, recognition of GAWU by the employer was obtained on January 09, 2009, mainly due to the active and large numerical support of the employee,s led and inspired by Raymond. The Union in recognition of Raymond’s dedicated service appropriately honoured him at the Union’s 19th Delegates Congress in August, 2009 through the presentation of a Certificate and a Gold Union Pin. Raymond worked with the NPC for twenty-four (24) years, and was stationed at the Zoological Park for many of those years; but last November he was transferred to the Botanical Gardens. Every employee at NPC knew Raymond pleasantly and personally. At his funeral, on February 21, 2012, at Unity Street, La Grange, West Bank Demerara, which drew a large gathering, many of his workmates were present. Appropriate tributes were delivered by his relatives, friends and workmates. The President of GAWU, Cde Komal Chand, observed the exemplary life Ryamond had lived as a villager and an employee. He observed that Raymond made a significant contribution to the development of his country. He advised that others should emulate at least some of Raymond’s attributes. Page Two

GAWU observes thirty-six years of Recognition SPA’s stance was attributable to the changing political climate and the fact the industry was slated by Prime Minister Forbes Burnham for nationalization in 1976.

Mills Limited, BEV Processors Inc, Noble House Seafoods, the Demerara Timbers Limited, the Guyana Forestry Commission, the Demerara Harbour Bridge Corporation, the Mahaica/Mahaicony/Abary Agricultural Development Authority, the National Parks Commission, and the Berbice Bridge Company Inc.

The result of the poll vindicated GAWU’s claim that it had overwhelming support of the sugar workers. Of the 21,655 votes casted by workers, the MPCA ignominiously received 376 or 1.71 per cent, 92 or 0.42 per cent were deemed spoilt, and GAWU deservedly obtained 21,487 or 97.87 per cent of the votes.

To make the Union’s name reflective of its growing membership outside of the sugar industry, at the Union’s 8th Congress, in 1978, the Union’s name was finally changed to the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), but the acronym “GAWU” was retained because it has become a household name in Guyana.

From December, 1997, workers in Guyana no longer have to Representatives of GAWU and the Sugar Planters Assocation go through a travail like GAWU signing the Recognition Agreement on February 27, 1976 had to go through to secure any employer’s recognition. The PPP It was thirty-six (36) years ago on February 27, 1976 that the Government enacted a law to ensure workers’ right to beGuyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) long to a union of their choice, and to have their union recsecured recognition from the Guyana Sugar Corporation ognised. The employer is also legally compelled to bargain (Guysuco), then the Sugar Producers Association (SPA), to with that Union. The PPP in Government in 1953 and 1963 become the bargaining agent of the field and factory work- got debated appropriate legislation for union recognition. ers of the sugar industry. Unfortunately, in 1953, the British Government, as colonial master of Guyana, removed the Government just as the The many battles for recognition of GAWU in the sugar in- Government was approving the legislation, on charges that dustry spanned almost three (3) decades. There was no law the Government was promoting communism. In 1963, the to compel an employer to recognise a Union of the workers’ combined parliamentary opposition, fully supported by the choice, and thus sugar workers and GAWU were forced to workers’ umbrella body, the Trade Union Congress (TUC), the employ confrontational and antagonistic actions, from time Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the British Intelligence, the to time, in the struggle for union recognition. American Institute for Free Labour Development (AIFLD) and other hostile anti-Socialist bodies, opposed the law. The SPA had the then incumbent Man Power Citizens’ Association (MPCA) in its bosom, it is said, a few years after that In our annals, it must be indelibly recorded that the culmiunion became the recognised bargaining agent in 1939. The nation of the long and hard struggle for GAWU’s recognition workers’ struggle for a new union started with the Guiana is inextricably linked to Dr Cheddi Jagan. As a foremost politiIndustrial Workers Union (GIWU), which was formed in 1946. cian, a trade unionist and Honorary President of GAWU, he One of the early highpoints in GIWU’s support of sugar work- tirelessly advocated for GAWU’s recognition in the Legislaers was in the struggle of the workers at Non Pariel, Lusig- ture, in the street corners and in papers presented at overnan and Better Hope in 1948, to address the then imposition seas and local fora whenever he referred to workers’ strugof the cut-and-load system in the place of the cut-and-drop gles for betterment and changes. Indeed, Cde Cheddi was system. The objective of the strike also included recognition an outstanding colossus who rendered relentless support of GIWU by the planters, and the protestation against the in the long and bitter recognition struggle. From the days in miserable working and living conditions in the sugar belt. 1943, after his return from studies in the United States of That struggle ended when five (5) sugar workers were cold- America, and especially after the martyrdom of five workers bloodedly killed and fourteen (14) others injured on June 16, at Enmore in 1948, he stood as a true ally in every work1948 by the colonial police who collaborated with the sugar ers’ struggle. He not only stood with the sugar workers, but planters. with all other workers in the promotion of their rights and GIWU did not survive beyond a few years. Soon after 1955, it became fully defunct following a split within the leadership of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) in 1955. Another challenging Union, the Guiana Sugar Workers Union (GSWU), was formed and registered in 1961. It was renamed the Guyana Agricultural Workers Union (GAWU) in 1962. GAWU continued the struggle for union recognition. The sugar planters were determined not to recognise GAWU despite the fierce struggle mounted by the Union and the sugar workers. There were strikes called by GAWU which at times closed or seriously affected the functioning of the industry for days, weeks and months. Lives were lost, workers who refused to divorce their support to GAWU were sanctioned by the planters. Workers were also harassed by the state machinery. There were cases whereby they were brought before the court on trumped-up charges. At last, the SPA decided to have a poll conducted by the Ministry of Labour on Old Year’s Day 1975. The change of the COMBAT: January/February, 2012

in improving their working conditions. He used every forum at his disposal, whether local or overseas, to stand with the masses. From 1947 in the Legislature, then the youngest Parliamentarian, he stood alone, supporting the sugar workers, defending their interests against the the plantocracy hawks and their allies in that August body. He agitated equally on behalf of other workers. Cheddi Jagan, as leader of the Political Affairs Committee and the Peoples’ Progressive Party (PPP), as well as head of the PPP Governments in 1953, 1957, 1961 and 1992, remained steadfast in his commitment towards the promotion of the welfare of the working class in Guyana. Since GAWU’s recognition in 1976, workers from many occupations have turned to GAWU for union representation. The Union, today, undoubtedly the largest Union in the Caribbean, represents twenty thousand (20,000) workers. Workers represented are from the Guyana Sugar Corporation (Guysuco), the Sugar Industry Labour Welfare Fund (SILWFC), the Demerara Distillers Limited (DDL), Caricom Rice

A period of 36 years as a recognized Union was different from 28 years during which the Union was fighting for recognition in the sugar industry. During the last 36 years, GAWU had to advance the pay levels of its members, represent improvement of their conditions of work, and obtain better fringe benefits for them. Representation outside of the walls of the employers has not been neglected, since GAWU does not restrict itself to struggle within the sphere of economism. Because of the massive role of sugar in the country’s economy, its contribution to the nation’s Gross Domestic Product, its being a net foreign exchange earner, its employment of 18,000 Guyanese and the militancy of its workforce, many politicians attempted to organize the sugar workers away from GAWU. They saw that sugar workers would enhance their political aspirations. Sugar workers, however, aware of GAWU’s commitment and ardent work which resulted in improvement of their welfare, have not allowed themselves to be fooled, and they remain fully supportive of GAWU. No efforts are spared in the organizational building of the Union. The functioning of groups and branches of the Union is promoted to empower rank-and-file members in their involvement to address issues, especially at their workplaces. Of utmost importance, the Union ensures that, in every decision taken with regard to pay rise, working conditions, and securing of new fringe benefits, the workers in every bargaining unit of the Union are fully involved in negotiations with their employer through their shop stewards or representatives. Not only were attempts made to woo away GAWU members and to divide the unity of thw workers for some politician’s selfish aggrandizement. Two distinct attempts had been made to derecognize GAWU in the sugar belt. There was an attempt by the Hoyte Administration in 1988. Guysuco suspended its relationship with the Union for about two (2) weeks, and starved the Union financially through the nondeduction of union dues. Opposition to the Government’s action and the fear of reprisal by the Union’s membership caused Guysuco to restore its relationship with the Union. Two years ago, the Union came under intense pressure as it heightened its struggle to secure appropriate pay for its members in the sugar industry, noting the escalation of the cost of living. Union-supported industrial action attracted criticism from the Government, and in December,2010, the Corporation threatened, in writing, to derecognize the Union. The Union immediately galvanized support against the Corporation from the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG), its members and friends, and thus the then President, Bharrat Jagdeo, recognizing the dangerous situation which might evolve, made an unambiguous statement that GAWU would never be derecognized while he served as President. Apart from genuine representation and negotiated benefits secured from employers by way of collective bargaining, the union also offers bursary awards, and a death benefit and credit union facilities. It publishes a bi-monthly newspaper, Combat, which is distributed to Union members and to Unions, libraries, fraternal unions etc. Continued on page six Page Three

Could Ecuador be the most radical and exciting place on Earth? By Jayati Ghosh Ecuador must be one of the most exciting places on Earth right now, in terms of working towards a new development paradigm. It shows how much can be achieved with political will, even in uncertain economic times. Just 10 years ago, Ecuador was more or less a basket case, a quintessential “banana republic” (it happens to be the world’s largest exporter of bananas), characterised by political instability, inequality, a poorly-performing economy, and the ever-looming impact of the US on its domestic politics. In 2000, in response to hyperinflation and balance of payments problems, the government dollarised the economy, replacing the sucre with the US currency as legal tender. This subdued inflation, but it did nothing to address the core economic problems, and further constrained the domestic policy space. A major turning point came with the election of the economist Rafael Correa as president. After taking over in January 2007, his government ushered in a series of changes, based on a new constitution (the country’s 20th, approved in 2008) that was itself mandated by a popular referendum. A hallmark of the changes that have occurred since then is that major policies have first been put through the referendum process. This has given the government the political ability to take on major vested interests and powerful lobbies. The government is now the most stable in recent times, and will soon become the longest serving in Ecuador’s tumultuous history. The president’s approval ratings are well over 70%. All this is due to the reorientation of the government’s

approach, made possible by a constitution remarkable for its recognition of human rights and the rights of nature, and its acceptance of plurality and cultural diversity. Consider just some economic changes brought about in the past four years, beginning with the renegotiation of oil contracts with multinational companies. Ecuador is an oil exporter, but had benefited relatively little from this because of the high shares of oil sales that went to foreign oil companies. A new law in July 2010 dramatically changed the terms, increasing the government’s share from 13% to 87% of gross oil revenues. Seven of the 16 foreign oil companies decided to pull out, and their fields were taken over by state-run companies. But the others stayed on and, as a result, state revenues increased by $870m (£563m) in 2011. Second, and possibly even more impressively, the government managed a dramatic increase in direct tax receipts. In fact, this has been even more important in revenue terms than oil receipts. Direct taxes (mainly corporation taxes) increased from around 35% of total taxes in 2006 to more than 40% in 2011. This was largely because of better enforcement, since the nexus between big business and the public tax administration was broken. Third, these increased government revenues were put to good use in infrastructure investment and social spending. Ecuador now has the highest proportion of public investment to GDP (10%) in Latin America and the Caribbean. In addition, social spending has doubled since 2006. This has enabled real progress towards the constitutional goals of free education at all levels, and access to free healthcare for

all citizens. Significant increases in public housing have followed the constitution’s affirmation of the right of all citizens to dignified housing with proper amenities. There are numerous other measures: expanding direct public employment; increasing minimum wages, and legally enforcing social security provision for all workers; diversifying the economy to reduce dependence on oil exports, and diversifying trading partners to reduce dependence on the US; enlarging public banking operations to reach more small and medium entrepreneurs; auditing external debt to reduce debt service payments; and abandoning unfair bilateral investment agreements. Other efforts include reform of the justice system. One exciting recent initiative is the Yasuní-ITT biosphere reserve, perhaps the world’s first attempt to avoid greenhouse emissions by leaving oil underground. This not only protects the extraordinary biodiversity of the area, but also the habitats of Ecuador’s indigenous peoples. The scheme proposes to use ecotourism to make human activity compatible with nature. All this may sound too good to be true, and certainly the process of transformation has only just begun. There are bound to be conflicts with those whose profits and power are threatened, as well as other hurdles along the way. But for those who believe that we are not condemned to the gloomy status quo, and that societies can do things differently, what is happening in Ecuador provides inspiration, and even guidance. The rest of the world has much to learn from this ongoing radical experiment.

Rush for land a wake-up call for poorer countries, report says By Claire Provost Population growth, the increasing consumption of global elite, and an international legal system skewed in favour of large scale investors are fuelling a worldwide rush for land. This is unfolding faster than previously thought, and is likely to continue, according to the largest study of international land deals to date. Researchers estimate that more than 200m hectares of land – over eight times the size of the UK – has been sold or leased between 2000 and 2010. But although the food price crisis of 2007-08 may have triggered a boom in international land deals, the study argues that a much broader set of factors – linked to population growth and the rise of emerging economies – is raising the prospect of “a new era in the struggle for, and control over, land in many areas of the global south”. Forty civil society and research groups fed into the global commercial pressures on land research project, co-ordinated by the International Land Coalition (ILC), which draws on a decade of data to identify and analyse trends in large land acquisitions, and highlights the role of governments in brokering deals that may marginalise rural communities and jeopardise the future of family farming in favour of big industrial projects. This is, to date, the most comprehensive study of international land deals, pulling together findings from investigations around the world. Over the last year, a number of reports have focused on cases of foreign investors “grabbing” large tracts of land in poor African countries to grow cheap food for their own populations. But, according to a study published by the ILC, rich national investors play a much larger role than previously thought, food is not the main focus of these deals, and African governments are not the only ones signing away large COMBAT: January/February, 2012

tracts of land. Data collected by researchers show that around 40% of land acquired over the last decade is intended for biofuel production. In comparison, 25% is for food crops, and another 27% for mining, tourism, industry and forestry. But the focus of land deals also varies by region: In Africa, 66% of land deals cross-referenced by researchers are intended for biofuel production, compared with 15% for food crops. Meanwhile, food production seems more significant in Latin America (27%), along with mineral extraction (23%). The report also notes that regional dealings may be on the rise: in South-East Asia, for example, 75% of reported land deals have been struck by regional players, and South African investors have acquired an estimated 40.7m hectares of African land since 2009. The full data from the Land Matrix research project will be published later this year. Though policymakers seem to have recently warmed to the potential role of family farms, the report says, enthusiasm for industrial-scale agriculture continues to sideline small farmers. Many developing countries, under pressure from the IMF, the World Bank and a number of government aid agencies, are going to great lengths to attract and legally protect foreign investment in agriculture and extractive industries, setting up sophisticated specialised agencies to promote investment opportunities and offering benefits such as tax breaks and low prices, said the ILC. The US aid agency, USAID, hosted an international conference to promote foreign investment in South Sudan. Research by the US-based Oakland Institute suggests that almost 9% of South Sudan’s land had already been leased or bought by investors prior to the country’s independence in July this year. The study argues that international trade regimes are over-

whelmingly skewed in favour of international investors, while fewer and less effective international mechanisms exist to safeguard the rights of the rural poor. Meanwhile, the common lack of formal legal titles to land is heightening the vulnerability of rural communities. “As governments own the land, it is easy for them to lease large areas to investors, but the benefits for local communities or national treasuries are often minimal,” said Lorenzo Cotula, of the London-based International Institute for Environment and Development. “This highlights the need for poor communities to have stronger rights over the land they have lived on for generations.” Last year, the G20 summit in Seoul encouraged all countries and companies to uphold a set of principles for responsible agricultural investment, developed by the UN and the World Bank. But critics argue that voluntary international agreements can amount to little more than window-dressing. Earlier this year, African leaders gathered in Lusaka, Zambia, to discuss ways to regulate land-based foreign direct investment. Resistance to large land deals is growing. In August, residents of Mukaya Payam, in South Sudan’s Central Equatoria state, launched a campaign against what would have been the country’s largest land deal – a 49-year lease of 600,000 hectares by an American company. Last month, hundreds of smallholder farmers and civil society activists converged on Selingue, in southern Mali, for the first international farmers’ conference to tackle the global rush for land. The ILC says: “Optimistically, it may even be hoped that rural communities in many parts of the world are able to finally achieve secure access to, and control over, their land through struggles catalysed by the increasing demand for it. It is to be hoped that the rush for land will act as a wake-up call, provoking a reconsideration of the path we are on.” Page Four

US Trojan Horses in Venezuela

by Nil Nikandrov In February, 2012, representatives of 55 Venezuelan NGOs called on the international community to defend democracy in the country at a media event in Miami, charging Hugo Chavez with threatening democracy, neglecting human rights, and igniting a civilian conflict in Venezuela. The participants of the event pledged that a campaign built around the demand to put the Venezuelan leader on trial would continue in order to keep Chavez’s regime under permanent pressure, and its coordinator Carlos Fernandez announced that an appeal had been supplied to the Hague Tribunal to make Chavez face justice over nothing less than alleged crimes against humanity. At the moment, the key lines on the Venezuelan opposition’s grievances list are company nationalizations, the looming closure of the anti-Chavez Globovision TV channel, attempts to introduce Marxism in Venezuelan schools, and crackdowns on the opponents of the current Venezuelan regime. Fernandez, who had been on the radical fringe during the 2002 outbreak of anti-government protests in Venezuela, urged the international community to act immediately and warned that failure to do so would result in the entrenchment of a militarist, Castro-communist regime in Venezuela for years. He also confided to the audience that an investigator was dispatched by the Hague Tribunal to Columbia to examine files on the notebooks which belonged to slain FARC secretariat member and spokesman Raúl Reyes. Chavez would eventually face justice for his FARC connections, claimed Fernandez. NGOs mushroomed in Venezuela after Chavez’s 1998 electoral triumph, and at the moment their number estimatedly reaches several hundred. Back in 1998, the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) enjoyed unlimited freedom of maneuver in the country and made full use of it to expand the influence of the US intelligence community over Venezuelan society. Correspondence from the US embassy in Caracas, released by WikiLeaks, left no doubts that the US Department of State, the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), the US Defense Intelligence Agency, and the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) had been taking advantage of the situation to make inroads into Venezuela. Washington had to learn as the 2002 anti-Chavez coup collapsed that the Venezuelan leader was a serious opponent who would not crack under pressure and at all times remained a clever strategist. Chavez managed to handle sucCOMBAT: January/February, 2012

cessfully recurrent conflicts with the Empire, while staunchly upholding his socialist project domestically and building ever stronger positions internationally. Given Chavez’s record, which includes oil sector nationalization and the expulsion of the fifth column from the petroleum industry, the removal of conspiracyprone officers from the army top command, and nationally oriented socioeconomic reforms, plans for his ouster in a violent putsch obviously stand no chance, and Washington therefore has to place its bet on a color revolution in Venezuela. This type of revolt in the country does not seem altogether impossible as support for the opposition in Venezuela typically measures around 35% and the Venezuelan middle class, students, and intellectual circles for the most part do not favor Chavez. These are the communities currently comprising the audience of the Venezuelan NGOs and receiving from them perks in the forms of grants, travel support, and costly gadgets. Color revolution champions are trained in Venezuela based on movies featuring corresponding episodes from recent East European history. As in Cuba, the white color is chosen as the hallmark of the Venezuelan protesters. What Venezuela’s NGOs must pretend to be oblivious to are Chavez’s achievements in fighting poverty, strengthening the national economy, and boosting the amount of welfare for the population. Naturally, Venezuela’s young are the NGOs’ main target audience. Student attack groups played the central role in the clashes between protesters and police in Venezuela in May, 2007 when the government revoked the license of the RCTV channel (the step was taken in connection with the fact that the RCTV broadcasting contract expired at the time). Chavez described the unrest as an attempt to overthrow the Venezuelan government and called the residents of lowincome urban quarters and villages to resist what he termed a fascist offensive. In response, Andrés Bello and Catholic University student leader, John Goicoechea said that Chavez drumming up support among the more radical part of his constituency who were supposed to confront the violenceprone students was an irresponsible policy. Shortly thereafter, Venezuela’s state-run TV showed Goicoechea’s phone book with the US embassy phone number and that of the US diplomat who worked with students. Goicoechea later stepped out of the spotlight, but there is surely still a place for him as a skilled color revolution activist in CIA plans and we will see him stage a comeback. The US programme of training students from affluent Venezuelan families stays on-line, though tricks with white shorts, white paint on palms, etc. reflect a rather unimaginative attempt to replay past success stories. NGOs like Provea, Cofavic, Centro de Derechos Humanos (in the Catholic University) Una Ventana a la Libertad, and Sinergia occupy the human rights advocacy niche. According to Chavez and his supporters, the groups, along with the opposition media, deliberately draw a distorted picture of what is happening in Venezuela, hammering just about every aspect of the country’s life, be it the situation within the army,

the struggle against crime, detention conditions, workers’ employment terms, the environment, Indian problems, etc. Activists from the above NGOs were spotted a number of times with CIA operatives who supply to them instructions and funds. The NGOs submit to the CIA lists of candidates for admission to courses teaching “self-defense” under the conditions of “instability”, which evidently means a provoked crisis. The legitimacy of Venezuela’s electoral procedure is being permanently challenged. US puppeteers who used to say that Chavez had employed the national electoral council for ballot-rigging were instrumental in forming the NGO known as Sumate. María Corina Machado, a defeated candidate in the 2002 presidential race, headed Sumate in 2002. Predictably, she called into question the outcomes of essentially all elections and referendums in Venezuela, for example, that of the 2004 referendum in which Chavez smashingly won 60% of the vote. The image of Sumate suffered a heavy blow when it was learnt that money – occasionally, tens of millions of US dollars – was fed to the group on a regular basis by the NED. Chavez accused Sumate of conspiracy in the wake of the revelations. Machado personally met with US President G. Bush at the peak of her career, but her prestige was irreversibly eroded. In 2005, the Venezuelan office of the general prosecutor charged Sumate with exerting pressure on the authorities and receiving funds from an organization controlled by the US Congress, but the case, after a series of re-openings, finally stalled in court. The activity of NGOs in Venezuela continued completely unchecked over the first decade of Chavez’s rule, while the police and counter-espionage agency were constantly discovering that the confidants of the US and other Western countries in Venezuelan NGOs collected information of military importance across the country or surveyed its regions bordering Colombia, Brazil, and Guyana. It should also be noted that foreign intelligence services are keenly interested in Venezuela’s Amazonia, and environment- protection NGO activists are spying in the parts of the country formerly frequented by US preachers from the New Tribes Mission. Some 30 secret aerodromes were used to illegally carry out Venezuelan gold, diamonds, precious metals, and, according to several accounts, uranium. The latter circumstance may be paradoxically related to the concerns voiced by Bush’s and Obama’s Administrations over Venezuela’s allegedly existing secret uranium mines with Iranian workers on staff. An end was put to the untamed activity of NGOs – the US Trojan Horses in Venezuela - in December, 2010 when the parliament of the country passed a law on the protection of political sovereignty and national self-determination. The legislation was backed by the ruling United Socialist Party (PSUV) and predictably met with resistance mounted by the opposition which actually thrives on foreign donations. By law, groups are subject to sanctions for receiving money from abroad with the aim of destabilizing Venezuela or undermining the present authorities. If caught red-handed, NGO activists would have to pay in fines twice the amount received from other countries or even face the loss of political rights for 5-8 years. Moreover, fines and deportation now await foreign nationals involved in funding subversive NGO activities in Venezuela. With the financial transparency regulations for NGOs now in place, there is hope that the level of corruption in Venezuela’s politics will visibly decline, but it should be realised that the channels via which NED, USAID and others, pour millions of dollars into the country have not been fully severed. As noted by Eva Golinger, a person extremely knowledgeable about CIA operations against Venezuela, the easiest way to smuggle currency into the country is to have it delivered by diplomatic mail. Page Five

Guyana receives G$3.4B from EU Job Evaluation being negotiated as Accompaning Measures

The European Union (EU), in December 2011, disbursed to the Government of Guyana G$3.4B (€12.5M) out of an allocation of G$5.6B (€18.8M) as Accompanying Measures for 2010. The difference between the allocation and the actual disbursement was as a result of the Guyana Sugar Corporation (Guysuco) being unable to achieve its targeted production in 2010. The Accompanying Measures are in fact financial assistance from the European Union (EU) to the 18 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) sugar-producing countries to alleviate the negative impact of the EU’s 36 per cent price cut during the years (2006 – 5 per cent price cut; 2008 – 9 per cent price cut; and 2009 – 22 per cent price cut) for sugar sold by the ACP countries to the European Union (EU). In order to access the assistance, countries were required to submit multiannual adaptation strategies (MAAS), better known as Sugar National Action Plans. Guyana submitted its plan in March 2006, seeking €440,232,980 or US$620,789,649 towards a series of projects which were aimed at, among other things, increasing production and improving productivity in the sugar industry; since Guyana, unlike the majority of Caribbean sugar-producing nations, has a comparative advantage in the production of sugar. Between 2007 and 2010, the EU has disbursed G$19.3B (€72.5M) out of an allocation of G$28.1B (€97M) to the Government towards the MAAS. Guyana suffered a penalty of €6M for the late submission of Guysuco’s 2008 - 2017 Business Plan, and the remaining €18.5M was not disbursed due to Guysuco’s failure to achieve its production targets in 2008, 2009 and 2010. This year, the Government stands to receive an additional G$6.8B (€24.9M) as an allocation for 2011. For 2012 and 2013, the EU has allocated G$15.5B (€49.8M), and should Guyana fulfill the agreed parameters, the full sum with respect to 2011 and the ensuing years to 2013 would be disbursed. The EU Delegation in Guyana, in announcing the recent disbursement through a press release on January 30, 2012, stated as follows:“Euro 12.5 million was transferred in December 2011 by the European Union to support the sugar sector in Guyana. This disbursement was part of the EU-funded Multi-annual Sugar Programme 2007-2010, which supports the Government of Guyana in its efforts to COMBAT: January/February, 2012

improve the competitiveness and viability of the sugar industry in Guyana. From 2006, when the programme started, the European Union has already made available € 72.5 million to the sugar sector in Guyana, equivalent to GYD $19.3 billion at today’s exchange rate. A further amount, up to € 24.9 million, is scheduled to be disbursed in 2012, once the Financing Agreement is signed between the EU and the Government of Guyana, which is expected in the near future. This will be part of the second Multi-annual Sugar Programme for the period 2011-2013. The EU support continues to assist Government’s policy to reform the sugar sector by upgrading Guysuco’s sugar factories, establishing a sugar packaging plant at Enmore, increasing sugar production, and mechanizing Guysuco’s field operations in particular, thereby improving the cost-effectiveness of the sugar industry. This EU assistance is provided through a direct budget support mechanism, and the disbursements are made based upon the achievement of performance indicators that monitor the implementation of the sector policy on sugar. Funds are also channelled towards studies, evaluations and audits to ensure effective implementation. The EU formulated its overall response strategy following the submission of the Guyana National Action Plan on Sugar in March 2006, which emphasises enhancing the competitiveness and productivity of the sugar sector. This approach was reconfirmed in the latter part of 2011 for the new Multi-annual Sugar Programme 2011-2013.” Of the €72.5M received, the Government has released €8M or US$12M to the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (Guysuco) for construction of the Packaging Plant at Enmore, which was commissioned in May, 2011. GAWU has been strongly advocating that 76 per cent of the EU disbursements to the Government arising from the Accompanying Measures must be fully allocated to the Corporation, since 76 per cent of the projects outlined in the plan are sugar-oriented. Guysuco deservedly requires the full financial support being received by the Guyana Government from the EU, following the 36 per cent price cut for its capitalization programme to make the industry competitive and viable. The industry’s production has been disappointing over the past seven (7) years, and the lack of immediate financial investment in the industry would succeed in deepening the debilitating process of the most important entity of the country’s economy.

Following the completion, on December 28, 2011, of the work of the Job Evaluation exercise, which was conducted by a ten-person committee comprising equal representatives from the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) and the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (Guysuco), the Union and the Corporation met on February 07 and 16, 2012 to formally approve the implementation of the Committee’s recommendations. The Committee evaluated 173 jobs among six thousand two hundred and fourteen (6,214) time-rated workers who belong to the field foreman and field/factory bargaining units. On February 16, 2012, the Corporation agreed to implement the seven new recommended wage bands or scales. The Corporation, however, wants the implementation of the new bands from January 01, 2012 rather than January 01, 2011. GAWU is adamant that the retroactivity payment must be with effect from January 01, 2011. Further, the Corporation wants to pay as a service payment only half a per cent for each year of service a worker has served in his/her current post up to a maximum of ten (10) years’ service. In the case of employees who belong to the bargaining unit of the National Association of Agricultural, Commercial Industrial Employees (NAACIE), the Corporation awarded a service payment of two (2) per cent for each year of service up to ten (10) years. GAWU, at the Union/Corporation meeting of February 16, 2012, deemed Guysuco’s “half a per cent” offer to the Union as outright discriminatory. Guysuco pointed out at the meeting that a sum of G$1.3B (US$6.5M) would be required to implement the new bands from January 01, 2011 and the two (2) per cent service payment up to ten (10) years back. The meeting on February 16, 2012 ended with the the Corporation’s representatives seeking to have another meeting later, since further guidance from Guysuco’s hierarchy was required. There was a breath of fresh air with respect to the implementation of the report of the job evaluation exercise in that the Minister of Labour, in a letter to the Union dated February 21, 2012, assured the Union that the findings of the job evaluation committee would be implemented before the end of June, 2012.

GAWU observes thirty-six years of Recognition Continued from page three

The Union also maintains a proud record of accountability. Since its recognition, the Union has never failed to have its yearly accounts audited promptly by the Auditor General. Education of its members is treated as a high priority. The Union, in March 2010, commissioned a Labour College - the GAWU Labour College. The College boasts dormitory facilities for 35 persons, two classrooms and a library, among its facilities. It replaces the Union’s School which was destroyed by fire during the 2001 post-national and regional elections’ disturbances. The College is being used to impart labour education to the Union’s rank and file. At the international level, GAWU is an affiliate of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) which has a membership of 80 million in 120 countries; and to the International Union of Food, Agricultural, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers Association (IUF), which represents 336 organisations in 120 countries, comprising a membership of some 12 million workers. Locally, GAWU is an affiliate of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Guyana (FITUG). The unions affiliated to FITUG are organized in many strategic sectors of the country’s economy, and they represent approximately thirty-five thousand (35,000) of the fifty thousand (50,000) unionized workers in the country. Page Six

GAWU at WFTU Presidential Council The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) was represented at the 6th Presidential Council Meeting of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) held in Johannesburg, South Africa on February 09 and 10, 2012. GAWU’s President, Cde Komal Chand, a Presidential Council member, attended the meeting, the first, following the highly successful 16th WFTU Congress held in Athens, Greece from April 06 – 10, 2011. The meeting began with a presentation by the WFTU’s dynamic General Secretary, Cde George Mavrikos. In his presentation, Cde Mavrikos reviewed the international situation since the last WFTU Congress. He enumerated a number of events which were initiated, inspired and participated in by the WFTU across the world. He identified the basic issues in today’s struggles as “First, a deepening capitalist crisis through an effort of the bourgeoisie to transfer the burden of the crises to the working and popular layers. Second, the tension of the intra-imperialist conflicts and their expression through tough aggressions of NATO, the EU and their allies. Third, the struggle of the working class and the popular layers which is getting more intense and gives hope and perspective to the peoples and the workers.” He said “the latter fight back and their struggle is intensifying every day.” Almost all the delegates addressed the two-day meeting, outlining their respective struggles and gave their account of the dire international situation. The WFTU is strengthening its bulwark role in guiding the world’s working class movement as the antagonism between capital and labour becomes intensified. More and more unions have become affiliated to the WFTU. Currently, the WFTU has 80 million members in 120 countries. Also, it has just added another Regional Office in South Africa to the member offices in the continent. The success of the 6th meeting is owed to the support from four progressive unions in South Africa namely:the National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa (NUMSA); the National Education, Health and Allied Workers Unions (NEHAWU); the Chemical, Energy, Paper, Printing, Wood and Allied Workers Union (CEPPWAWU); and the Police and Prisons Civil Rights Union (POPCRU). The following is Cde Komal Chand’s address to the meeting:“Allow me at the very outset to convey on behalf of the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) fraternal greetings to all the delegates present here to participate in this meeting of the Presidential Council of the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU). Greetings also are extended to the working people of South Africa and particularly our Trade Unionists representing the South African working-class. When we met at our 16th Congress, less than a year ago, we identified and spoke of the crises which have beset the world. As we begin 2012, we can say, in many respects, there is an aggravation of those crises. The ruling classes and their handmaidens in the imperialist/capitalist world are hard pressed to find real solutions and an end does not appear in sight. Referring to the economic/financial crisis of capitalCOMBAT: January/February, 2012

ism which has engulfed the global economy since September, 2008, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) said recently that the world economy is ‘deeply into the danger zone’ and warned that the global economy could fall into an economic spiral reminiscent of the 1930s. And, the International Labour Organisation (ILO), in its Global Employment Trends Report 2012, revealed that one (1) in three (3) workers globally is either living in poverty or is unemployed. The report said, that there are 27 million more unemployed workers today than at the start of the crisis and the ILO forecasts that an additional 3 million will join the ranks by year end. These and similar revelations attest to the serious and aggravated state of the world in which we live. Not only are the working people and youth the victims of the crises, but the ruling classes are also placing the burdens of their so-called solutions on the backs of the working-class, youth and working people as a whole. Thus, austerity measures abound. Millions, including pensioners, are affected. Education and other social benefits critical to the livelihood of working people and their families are drastically and heartlessly being slashed. We should underline that in the pursuit of ‘solutions’ by the ruling classes, there is no meaningful condemnation of the neo-liberal policies, now a system of exploitation and greed which have triggered the crises and which today hound our world. Instead, we see fresh assaults on democracy and freedoms, all the while trying to delude us into believing they are genuine upholders and promoters of such values. We must be wary of such developments. They are clearly directed against the interests of the working, democratically-minded and peace-loving peoples. One of the more recent attacks coming to the public’s attention are the several measures directed at the right to privacy and free speech through the control of the internet and which has met widespread protest and resistance. Equally, the world’s working-class is duty-bound to actively condemn the various violent actions by the capitalist states against the peaceful protests of peoples and youth. To perpetuate its ruling class status, the elites will stop at no crime and show no or little respect for law, sovereignty, morality, or tradition in the process. But, comrades, we cannot help but recognise and be inspired by another reality of our troubled world. Here, I speak of the militant struggles and, at times, fierce battles launched by workers and other sectors in several countries, including, importantly, in Europe and North America. We note the diverse and creative methods used in their struggles to defend their interests, their livelihoods and their lives. Their struggles for specific and immediate goals cannot be delinked to the wider struggles in defense of freedoms, democracy for social justice, against war and environmental concerns. The WFTU has a matchless history of support and international solidarity. Karl Marx, wrote in the Communist Manifesto of a spectre haunting Europe. In

our day, that spectre has transcended the boundaries of Europe and is hovering over other regions of our planet. In such times, as big as the challenges are, the WFTU must continue and intensify its solidarity activities and make its unstinted contribution for farreaching social and economic changes and an alternative, pro-working people social order. Comrades, as we meet here today, we cannot be oblivious to the loud war-drums of US imperialism, its NATO allies and Israel, signaling more wars, this time with Syria and Iran. We have seen the atrocities and barbarism the Pentagon and its NATO allies and their puppet states are capable of in Libya, also in Iraq, Afghanistan, and other countries, in Africa. And in blatant disregard to world opinion, the US continues to embrace Israel, with its violent, naked and apartheid policies against the Palestinians. They do so, with the complicity of the corporate mainstream media, and sadly certain local forces too. War atrocities are followed by control and plunder of the country’s wealth and/or are in keeping with geo-political objectives. As the prospect of more wars initiated by imperialism and its allies, the adrenalin of the war hawks and sectors of the multinational corporations are flowing. But serious analysts have sounded the warning, that war in the Persian Gulf can very well lead to a Third World War and even, heaven forbid, to a nuclear conflagration. The war machine and madness must be stopped. We must say a resounding NO to covert operations against countries, assassinations, and military adventures and conflicts. The struggle for peace must be given the urgent attention that it deserves. The WFTU must also pay greater attention to imperialism’s machinations in the developing world, especially those countries with fertile land and which have strategic resources. There are growing protests and struggles around the land grab phenomenon and in the mining practices of multinationals. These activities that exploit and extract countries resources and sold as ‘development’ projects bring with them a range of problems – from environment to human rights – while minimally impacting on poverty in those countries. In the drive to grab and control the world’s resources, super-profits and world hegemony, imperialism’s true nature stands exposed even more starkly today. What is does not get through collaborationists’ officials, “soft” power and “smart” power, it takes by might. But there is no smooth sailing. The system of capitalism is wracked by the crises. It is facing challenges not just by the working people of the developed countries, including the USA, but increasingly, by peoples across the world. The situation calls for our collaborative efforts, united actions and clear and courageous leadership. The working class along with other sectors of the working people and youth are at the frontlines. Let them be assured that alongside them in these struggles is the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU).” Page Seven

Guysuco’s Poor Management Continues

18 “white elephant” tractors bought The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), through a usually reliable source, learnt that eighteen (18) Italian-made Landini tractors, purchased some time ago, to facilitate tillage operations across the industry, have been found to be unsuitable. Costing millions of dollars, the Union understands that the supplier’s liability period for the machines expired before the Corporation became aware of the machines’ unsuitability. It is understood that the Corporation hopes to convert the tractors to drain-digging operations, which

will be costlier to use than the traditional machines, of which the Corporation has an adequate fleet. Workers want to know about the steps which were followed to determine the suitability of the tractors, and whether the proper procurement procedure was followed. The machines should be deemed white elephants and placed in the scrap heap of the Corporation, waiting to be disposed of as they become rusty derelicts sometimes the future.

12 wrongly suited Bell Loaders purchased

Above, one of the older models of Bell Loaders in the Corporation’s fleet

According to information reaching the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), the Guyana Sugar Corporation Inc (Guysuco) recently purchased twelve (12) brand new Bell Loaders or Mechanical Cane Loaders from South Africa. It has been reported that the booms of the Loaders are much shorter than the required size. The acquired Bell Loaders, therefore, have to acquire longer booms. Guysuco, therefore, is taking the booms from those Bell Loaders which are await-

ing replacement spares and using them as replacements for the shorter booms. As such, the old Bell Loaders are likely to be left permanently unserviceable. Additionally, the Union was advised that the newly acquired Bell Loaders are fitted with incorrectly sized tyres, which do not allow the maximum use of the loaders in our terrain. What a wasteful expenditure of our beleaguered sugar industry, arising from apparently the bungling of the governace of the industry.

Advisory Committee appointed to inquire into Blairmont strike On February 21, 2012, Minister of Labour, Dr N.K. Gopaul, appointed an Advisory Committee in keeping with Section Six (6) of the Labour Act Chapter 98:01 to inquire into a strike by workers who were seeking the removal or transfer of the Estate’s Manager, Victorine Corbette and the Agricultural Manager, Anil Seepersaud from Blairmont. The decision to appoint the Advisory Committee followed eleven (11) days of work-cessation by an overwhelming number of workers of the Estate from February 10 to 21, 2012. Initially, the striking workers identified three issues. One related to inadequate compensation cane cutters of the 6B2 gang received for cane reaped on February 09, 2012. Another, surrounded intended disciplinary action addressed to two (2) workers of the Field Workshop should they fail to offer acceptable explanations for certain alleged infractions. The final issue related to factory workers requiring a pass issued by the factory manager to security at the factory gate confirming the completion of workers’ tasks. This requirement applied only to piece-rated workers engaged in task work, who, at times, would complete their assignments before the end of their shift, when the majority of factory workers would end their day’s work. The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU), through the shop stewards and the Field Secretary and later the General Secretary, was able to have two of the issues favourably resolved by February 12, 2012. The outstanding issue, relating to the harvesting gang was to be further addressed after those workers resumed work. It came to the fore, after exhaustive intervention to resolve the three issues, the workers wanted the removal of the Estate Manager and the Agricultural Manager. The workers claimed that the two (2) Managers were gradually denying them some of their longestablished working conditions and customs and practices. The leadership of the Union subsequently held a meeting for almost

five and a half hours (5½) hours with twenty-four (24) shop stewards of the Estate at the Union’s Headquarters on February 16, 2012. The stewards outlined a number of issues affecting them at their workplace. They pointed out that some of their working-conditions were being changed arbitrarily. The Union having heard of the matters, informed the stewards that the identified matters would be raised with the Corporation, as soon as Guysuco could meet with the Union after the conclusion of the strike. On the demand for the removal of the two Managers, the Union advised the stewards that the Corporation intimated that such request would not be entertained without the reasons established by the Union following a resumption of work. The shop stewards, at the conclusion of the meeting, agreed to advise their fellow workers to return to work with effect from February 17, 2012. The workers across the estate did not return to work as was expected. The Minister of Labour, on February 21, 2011, announced the appointment of the Advisory Committee. The workers subsequently resumed work. The Committee comprises of former Minister of Labour, Dr Dale Bisnauth as Chairman; former Chief Labour Officer, Mohamed Akeel as a member; and Neville Nichols of the Ministry of Labour as Secretary. The Committee’s Terms of Reference are as follows:“To inquire into the trade dispute existing between the Guyana Sugar Corporation and the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union with particular reference to the circumstances, which led to the strike at Blairmont Estate on 9th February 2012 and the call made by the workers for the removal of the Estate Manager and the Agricultural Manager and to make such recommendation as deem expedient” The Union with evidentiary support from the shop stewards and workers will address the Committee with reasons supporting the removal of the two (2) Managers. The first sitting of the Committee is expected in the first week of March, 2012.

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: gawu@bbgy.com Website: www.gawu.net