What Kind of Democracy for the Working Class?

Workers' Daily Internet Edition : Article Index :

What Kind of Democracy for the Working Class?

PCS National Conference:
Civil Servants Declare War on Low Pay
The Divisions in the PCS

For Your Reference:
"Serious Challenge To Your Union's Democracy"
PCS National Executive Committee Elections

London Political Forum:
Oppose the National Wealth Being Handed over to Private Capital

International News:
A War between India and Pakistan Spells Disaster for the Working Class and A Gift to Imperialism
NATO Fabrications about "Living Bombs"

In the civil war that has erupted in the PCS, the President describes what happened in the NEC meeting as a serious challenge to the union’s democracy, and supporters of the President and the General Secretary elect have characterised the events as a "coup d’etat". It is evident that the present General Secretary regards "Left Unity" domination as a return to the "dark days" of the 1980s, and to be upholding what the "Moderates" regard as democratic principles.

WDIE is of the view that the issue facing the workers in the PCS and other unions in which militant trade unionism is at odds with the leadership is how to strengthen the unity of the workers in defence of demands which serve their interests.

In this context, the issue of what constitutes the democratic functioning of a union must be settled on the basis of involving the workers to elaborate the stands which favour them and defend their rights at a time a vicious anti-social offensive is putting them in an increasingly untenable situation. Workers need unions which fight for them on this new historical basis. Now more than ever it is important to continue to raise the issues of the working and living conditions of the working class so that the workers can put forward their demands and ensure that the weight of their organisations is put behind their struggles.

Such splits which are opening up between "left" and "right" in the unions, or between "militants" and "moderates", will only serve to disorientate the workers and favour splitting their ranks unless this issue is taken up. The workers should demand discussion on the demands which will favour them within the context of the anti-social offensive and action plans which unite them in defence of these demands.

How the workers are to achieve democracy within the workers’ movement in the current conditions is a crucial issue. If they can renew the unions on a democratic basis, the workers will also be able to lead the work to democratise all other spheres of life so as to renew the society on a democratic basis as well.

The workers have the right to demand that their unions defend their interests and be more democratic. That demand must go beyond matters of "legality" or "form", because a form must facilitate a content. Which forms are suitable at any particular time is dependent on the level of consciousness and organisation which exists amongst the particular workers involved and what will assist them to develop it to a higher level. The starting point must be that the content is discussed and that it not only serve to defend the rights of the workers but be seen by them to do so.

The bourgeois disinformation about democracy speaks about it as a high ideal while bourgeois democracy is actually highly undemocratic. Reducing democracy to a matter of "form" or "process" would be to facilitate the attempts of the bourgeoisie to keep the entire working people marginalised from the political process, whether within unions or within the polity as a whole. Workers must fight to make sure that unions defend their rights against the onslaught of capital, which is getting more and more fierce. This onslaught is seeing the financial oligarchy and its governments enact laws to deprive workers of any protection whatsoever, employers manoeuvring to keep down wages and attack working conditions, and impose contracts which serve their interests to the detriment of the workers, both organised and unorganised.

It is very important that the orientation be discussed which helps the workers achieve the democracy they long for and bring to an end the wages system altogether.

by New Worker correspondent, NCP

PUBLIC and Commercial Service Union (PCS) delegates gathered in Brighton last week for the national conference of the largest civil service union.

The conference took place as PCS issued research that shows that three-quarters of civil servants earn less than the national average.

About 25 per cent of civil servants earn less than £12,770, 41 per cent earn less than £15,000 and 82 per cent earn less than £25,000.

PCS general secretary-elect Mark Serwotka said, "These figures explode the popular myth of the wealthy, bowler-hatted civil servant, enjoying a career behind a Whitehall desk.

The real picture is one of dedicated public servants, most of them PCS members, delivering Government services to the people across Britain and a large proportion being poorly paid for it."

Delegates overwhelmingly demanded a return to national pay bargaining, and ignored advice from the right-wing majority on the union’s national executive committee to oppose the motion.

Mark Serwotka argued "We demand equal pay for work of equal value. Our job is to speak up for the have-nots. The message of this conference is we demand justice, we demand fair pay and equality."

PCS has seen as a move to the left with the election of Mark Serwotka as general secretary-elect, although the national executive remains in the hands of the right wing.

But delegates clearly demanded that the union should take a campaigning position in defence of its members interests.

The recent dispute in the Department for Work and Pensions, which was the biggest civil service dispute for 15 years, was debated.

PCS members in this department suffer 10,000 incidents of assault every year and the union had spent over £7million on the recent dispute. This industrial action has seen over 6,000 new members join PCS, making it the fastest growing trade union in the country.

Mark Serwotka, the general secretary-elect, will take up post on 1 June. Opening conference he declared an "absolutely clear pledge" that "every single pledge" made during his election campaign would be implemented. He has already refused to take the general secretary’s pay, instead choosing to continue with the same remuneration he received as a civil servant.

He also pledged that PCS will be a campaigning union, and said: "We need to be more prepared than ever to deal with the question of privatisation. PCS is a trade union not a building society, when the members need us we must be there."

Conference called for democracy within PCS by voting by a massive majority for Serwotka to represent PCS on the TUC general council. The national executive committee had voted for the outgoing right-wing Barry Reamsbottom to remain as PCS’ delegate even after his retirement.

Despite threats of legal action by Reamsbottom, conference endorsed the basic premise that its elected officers should represent PCS.

A positive note to this year’s conference was the increasingly internationalist perspective that the union is taking. Delegates voted to oppose war, and condemned the union’s national executive that sought to prevent elected officials from speaking out against American aggression in Afghanistan.

Opposition to American president George Bush’s "axis of evil" speech was supported by conference despite opposition from the national executive.

Delegates voted by a massive majority to give solidarity to both Palestinian and Israeli trade unionists, and condemned the recent Israeli aggression in Jenin.

Conference also agreed to affiliate to the Colombia Solidarity Campaign, and heard from Oscar Figueroa a Colombian trade unionist. Oscar is a member of Sintraemcali that led a successful anti-privatisation campaign in Cali.

He also spoke movingly of the many difficulties faced by the Colombian trade union movement, and urged all trade union members to fight privatisation.

Trade unionists closer to home also received a message of solidarity from PCS. The 87 strikers from Friction Dynamics were given a £3,000 donation to support them in their on-going campaign.

Conference also voted to ballot all PCS members to establish a political fund to continue and expand PCS’ campaign work.

Immediate campaigns that PCS agreed to involve itself in included the need to fight against racism and fascism. An emergency motion was unanimously passed concerning the election of three fascist BNP candidates in Burnley.

Conference also agreed to affiliate to the United Campaign to Repeal the Anti-Trade Union Laws and to call upon the TUC to organise a national demonstration against privatisation.

Unfortunately, this campaign against privatisation was somewhat negated by the decision to support the European single currency. The successful motion rather idealistically called for "fundamental reforms in the EMU framework" to ensure that public sector jobs were not lost.

PCS has a key role in defending public services, and promoting the interests of its low paid members.

It is significant that a move to the left has taken place within the union and all activists most now support and implement the policies that were agreed in Brighton.

Barry Reamsbottom, General Secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union, has declared he will carry on in the post until 2004. He was due to be succeeded by Mark Serwotka, who in 2000 was elected as General Secretary.

Mark Serwotka was removed in an NEC meeting that critics claim was unconstitutional. The membership of the PCS had decided in a ballot to hold an election for General Secretary. The result was Yes 62751 votes (96.6%) No 2178 votes (3.4%). Mark Serwotka won that election.

The recent PCS Conference voted by a huge majority to confirm the agreement whereby the outgoing General Secretary left PCS employment on May 31, 2002. Barry Reamsbottom was not elected by the PCS membership, the PCS being an amalgamation of the CPSA and PTC unions. Its membership is mainly from the Civil Service and other bodies in the public sector but it also has growing private sector membership due to privatisation and contracting out. The incoming General Secretary got over 42,000 votes in the election. It is reported that Barry Reamsbottom did not think he could get 50 nominations from 1,200 branches to get on the ballot paper. He made a legal agreement to leave on May 31, 2002, before the close of nominations. Mark Serwotka was due to take sole charge from June 1.

However following the NEC elections, where the "National Moderate Group" and Inland Revenue Membership First (IRMF) got a majority on the National Executive, Barry Reamsbottom called an NEC meeting for May 23.

Barry Reamsbottom had produced legal advice stating he could remain General Secretary until 2004, which was circulated minutes before the meeting began. According to the counsel’s opinion, merger terms in 1999 permitted him to stay for five years. That made invalid, according to the legal opinion, a union ballot approving a rule change to hold a leadership ballot, the ballot Mark Serwotka won and thus the contract Barry Reamsbottom signed last year to leave on May 31, 2002. Barry Reamsbottom recommended that he carry on as General Secretary, and that Mark Serwotka return to the civil service or be offered another HQ job.

The standing orders for the NEC say that 14 days’ notice shall be given of meetings and seven days’ notice of agenda items. However, the rules do allow for the General Secretary in consultation with the President to call a meeting if there are matters of urgency to discuss.

As the PCS President, Janice Godrich sought legal advice. She obtained advice from a Queens Counsel that the proposed meeting was unconstitutional and invalid unless Barry Reamsbottom fully consulted her and showed reasons an urgent meeting. At the beginning of the meeting she made a statement to that effect and stated that she was very happy to meet with Barry Reamsbottom to discuss the issues but that in line with the legal advice there could be no NEC meeting. There was no challenge to this, but instead Revenue Vice President Ted Euers declared that he was assuming Presidential powers and claimed to chair the meeting. Despite protests that this was also unconstitutional and unlawful, he purported to hold the meeting in the midst of uproar, and forced through a series of decisions.

These included: that Barry Reamsbottom remain as General Secretary until his retirement age; that the agreement between PCS and Barry Reamsbottom that he should finish his term of office on May 31 be ignored; that the election for General Secretary be ignored.

Mark Serwotka said Barry Reamsbottom’s camp had tried to intimidate the union’s president and voted her out of the chair when she ruled the meeting unconstitutional.

Barry Reamsbottom said: "There were the most extraordinary scenes ... even in the darkest days on the executive in the 1980s, when militants came within an ace of seizing control of the union, nothing like that happened."

Mark Serwotka said: "It’s an affront to democracy. He did not stand in the election. He has not challenged the result over the last two years, he signed a legal agreement to go and he has given me half the union’s duties over the last 18 months."

Janice Godrich, National President of PCS, addressed the following to all branches on May 23.

I am writing with great sorrow to advise you of a serious challenge to the democracy of your union.

Just over 18 months ago, PCS members voted to elect Mark Serwotka as the new General Secretary of the union. Mark is due to take over on 1 June 2002.

The current General Secretary, Barry Reamsbottom, chose not to stand in those elections. Instead he signed an agreement with the union, under which he agreed to leave office on 1st June at the end of his five-year term. He accepted a financial compensation offer covering the period to his normal retirement date in 2004.

At the recent Biennial Delegate Conference of the union, delegates voted – almost unanimously – to endorse the agreement with Barry Reamsbottom. Conference instructed the National Executive Committee to ensure that the agreement was implemented.

I have to tell you that Barry Reamsbottom is now attempting to have the democratic election overturned, and to go back on the agreement he reached with the union.

In the recent elections for the PCS NEC the so-called "Moderate Group" faction – supported by Barry Reamsbottom – obtained a narrow majority of seats. Allegations of unfair electoral practices against the "Moderate" faction are currently being investigated, which may result in the elections having to be re-run.

Immediately the new NEC took office this week, Barry Reamsbottom attempted to convene a meeting at no more than 48 hours notice. I asked to be consulted as President, as the union’s rules require, about the timing and agenda for the meeting, and the reasons for its urgency. But this was refused. I therefore felt I had no option but to seek legal advice. I was advised that the proposed meeting breached the union’s rules, and should be declared invalid.

The "Moderate" faction led by Barry Reamsbottom ignored this, and continued to meet unconstitutionally, endorsing a resolution declaring Mark’s election as invalid. If allowed to stand, this decision would allow Barry Reamsbottom to remain as sole General Secretary until 2004.

Another proposal made was that I, as the democratically elected President of the union, would in future be excluded from all sub-committees of the NEC, many of them dealing with important members’ business.

In view of these disgraceful attacks on your union’s democracy, I have had no option but to seek a High Court declaration that the "meeting" of the NEC was unconstitutional and that any decisions taken are null and void.

I deeply regret this sequence of events but I am convinced that everyone with the union’s interests at heart must unite to fight this attack on its democracy. During this difficult period we must all continue to work together to deal with members’ pay and conditions to the very best of our ability.

I will keep you informed of developments. In the meantime, please make sure that as many members as possible see this circular.

The General Secretary elect of PCS earlier this month asked branches to provide information of relevance to the inquiry being conducted over complaints received in respect of the NEC elections. During the course of the elections, many branches complained that unofficial groups of candidates appeared to have used union membership data, without proper authority, to distribute election material to individual PCS members at their workplace address.

The union commissioned a firm of auditors to conduct a more detailed investigation. The General Secretary elect, to ensure that the union took all necessary steps in response to evidence of electoral malpractice, asked a firm of solicitors retained by the union to:

• Evaluate the strength of evidence available to the union in relation to the use of unauthorised access to PCS membership data by, or on behalf of, any unofficial group of candidates in the 2002 NEC elections.
• Give him their opinion on the extent to which, taking into account that evidence, together with the provisions of the union’s rules and electoral regulations and any relevant statutory and case law, there may be grounds for questioning the validity of the election results.
• Give him their opinion as to what action it might be appropriate for him to take in order to protect the integrity of the union’s election process, either now or in the future, including (if appropriate) what factors should be taken into account in considering whether to re-run all or part of the 2002 NEC elections.

Stop paying the rich, end the militarisation of the economy and freeze debt repayments to the financial oligarchy. These were concrete demands emphasised at the London Political Forum meeting on May 22. Called to discuss how to prevent the national wealth being handed over to the rich, analysis in introductory remarks reviewed economic developments over five decades, as well as a health worker’s experiences of the Private Finance Initiative. The range of ideas discussed showed that demands for the working class taking hold of what belongs to it and empowering people to decide themselves on the direction of the economy have grown out of consistent opposition to the restructuring of an economy in which the claims of the rich come before society’s needs.

The privatisation of health care, education, communications, council housing, social programmes, transport – seen in the PPP sale of London’s tube networks – and delivering the essential features of a modern society as sources of profits were all criticised. With this opposition were many anecdotes of the deliberate running down of services to create a consensus where even PPP or PFI intervention are deemed acceptable, as well as the problems caused by people’s absence from participation in the decision-making. The purpose of an economy to meet the growing and complex needs of the members of society was emphasised during this part of the debate.

A new publication, London Political Forum, was also launched at the meeting. According to a journalist who worked on the newsletter-style eight-page voice of the London Political Forum, it can be used to raise the level of political debate in London by more widely publicising the Political Forum’s discussions and to mobilise for meetings. Several people bought copies of the first edition, which contains speeches and reports of the Forum’s February and March meetings.

The next meeting of the Forum will be held on June 22 at Marx House in Clerkenwell Green. Discussion will continue on how people’s claims on society are met, their rights to a livelihood, to health care, to education and other social programmes given a guarantee, and the needs of the modern society.

By WDIE South Asia corespondent

It is now nearly five months since both the Indian and Pakistani governments began massing hundreds of thousands of soldiers along the border using the pretext of an attack on the Indian parliament. War between India and Pakistan can never be justified, as it will bring a colossal genocide for the peoples of the sub-continent. All the progressive and revolutionary forces must oppose this. The ruling classes of both India and Pakistan do not have anything in common with the working class. History shows the ruling classes of this sub-continent will do anything, however criminal or shameful to maintain their class rule. The enemy is not the people of India or Pakistan or Kashmir, this or that religion; the real enemies are the ruling classes and their states. It is they who have invited foreign imperialism, multinationals and banks into their countries, used religion to incite communal violence and partitioned the nations of Bengal, Punjab and Kashmir. It is they who have invited neo-colonial domination through the IMF, World Bank, WTO, etc., they who have used the military against the masses in the style of the colonialists, passed numerous draconian laws and measures, and waged wars at the expense of the other.

The Anglo-American imperialists are eager to see such a genocide as it fits well into their "New World Order". What is so cynical is they are supplying arms to both sides, helping to build up the armaments while at the same time playing the role of "peace brokers". US forces are already operating in Pakistan along the Afghan border allegedly "hunting" al Qa'ida members with the support of the Pakistani Intelligence Service. The Anglo-American mass media portrays India and Pakistan as "rivals" destined for "war" while the Anglo-American role of "reducing tension" and "dialogue" is hyped up. In fact it is the imperialist powers, the legacy of colonialism and complete capitulation of the ruling classes of India and Pakistan to world imperialism which is the source of war and tension in the region. British troops have returned to Afghanistan after an absence of 80 years and are likely to return to the sub-continent under the auspices of US imperialism.

A war between India and Pakistan spells disaster for the working class and a gift to imperialism, all due to the criminal rulers of India and Pakistan!

Disinformation is being put out by NATO warning about "living bombs". This was carried by a Turkish newspaper on May 22, referring to alleged "suicide bombers" of one of the organisations which has been put on the list of so-called "terrorist" organisations by the EU, Britain and the US, and which has continually pointed out that it is a legitimate political organisation which has never engaged in terrorism.

The newspaper article stated that the DHKP-C in Europe and in Turkey would carry out actions against embassies and consulates. The information, from the Interior Ministry, contained the heading "NATO SECRET" which is only used for news of the highest importance, and says that, after the DHKP-C was put in the EU terror list, it prepared actions aimed at freeing its militants in the prisons.

The DHKP-C (Revolutionary People's Liberation Front) has issued a response, in the form of an open letter, to NATO. DHKP-C said that the news is completely untrue. The letter says: "This kind of mendacious news is an attempt to discriminate against people. An attempt is being made to create a basis for repression and massacres. If NATO, which is given as the source, really is the originator of this news, NATO must comment upon it. If it is not true, if NATO did not issue such information, if it is an invention by Turkey's contra-guerrillas as a part of their psychological warfare, then NATO should make public that the news item does not stem from it."

DHKP-C in a statement of May 16 gave examples of Turkish police lies about "living bombs":

LIE.: February 13, 2001... The newspapers wrote that 10 women were preparing to carry out a suicide attack. Once again the Istanbul police headquarters did brilliant investigative work. It turned out that some of them were in fact in prison, others were working quite legally.

LIE: October 19-20, 2001... It was announced that Yunus Guzel was allegedly a living bomb. He was then tortured to death while he was being detained in investigative custody.

LIE: February 8, 2002... Again the same heading: "Suicide attack alarm": This time Fatma Kozupinar was described as a living bomb. She had recently been released from prison, was being treated at the TIHV (Turkiye Insan Haklari Vakfi, Turkish Human Rights Foundation, which helps give medical care to seriously ill prisoners who have been released) and was living with her family.

LIE: March 8, 2002...The police headquarters put out a statement that according to their information, the newly released Halil Aksu was going to carry out a suicide attack. Halil Aksu was not even able to walk unaided.

LIE: April 10, 2002...The Istanbul police published a new list of "living bombs". According to the news, the police had uncovered 10 living bombs. And then? There was no "then". In this way it became clear that they are lying.

DHKC-P points out that lessons can be drawn from the demagogy about "terrorism" put out by the US and Israel. If the police put more news about suicide attacks into circulation, the organisation says, everyone can ask themselves: what plots are they up to, what internal power struggles are going on, what filth are they now trying to cover up?