Tripod: One leg broken

Despite the fact that the GWU has fared badly in the Sea Malta experience, it is still adamant in holding the second protest march today. Like the Phoenicia example, the GWU mishandled the Sea Malta question leading to serious consequences as all employees who used to work in that government company ended up losing their job.

As is to be expected, the GWU is exonerating itself of any blame. It states it tried hard not only to save jobs but also to ensure that all its members employed at Sea Malta will keep enjoying the benefits that it worked so hard to procure for them. It declared that it based its negotiating power on decisions made by its members.

In normal circumstances, decisions based on a broad spectrum by the people directly affected by conclusions reached are likely to be good. In this particular case no hasty decisions should have been made. There were two collective agreements within the same enterprise; and the two were entered into with the company by the same trade union.

It makes sense to provide for two collective agreements because that way the maximum benefits for the workers could be achieved. But when the company is about to change hands or close down, the situation becomes extremely difficult. A crucial decision by union leaders has to be made: Should the members be grouped to vote within their collective agreements or should they vote together and then negotiate according to what the majority concludes?

If one person is to have one vote, logic dictates that the best way to go about it is to let all the people cast their vote together. But the GWU decided otherwise and this path led it to a more confusing situation as it repeatedly changed its platform. To the public at large it has been discredited; of greater significance is the fact that both sets of former GWU members at Sea Malta, the seafarers and shore-based workers, turned against it as well.

As a face-saver, the GWU is not only attempting to influence the people through its newspapers but also hardening its stance with other government companies and firms. In this way it will just be compounding its own problems. What is required is an assessment of the whole situation. The country needs strong unions with a positive approach that are prepared to work with other social partners so that workers and country will become wealthier.

It should be remembered that out of the tripod of causes leading to the holding of national protests, that is, social burdens, redundancies and arrogance, one leg has been broken as the GWU has seriously mishandled one of them. It has also shown it can be arrogant in the process of negotiations and in its expectations of how others should behave.

Given that the MLP has declared that a Labour government will grant special privileges to the GWU, given also that many prominent MLP members of Parliament took part in the last national protest and that the Leader of the Opposition spoke of the time when people will have to take to the streets, whatever the GWU decides or carries out tends to affect the MLP's prospects at the next general election. There is so much that is similar between the two organisations.

If public perception is that the GWU is not the best vehicle for safeguarding jobs, this may also be applied to a potential future MLP government. As a result, the GWU is shouldering a tremendous responsibility. It is not only its image that is at stake but also that of the MLP. Floating voters will certainly observe the hard evidence.

A militant trade union is not likely to achieve the best results in this present age. It was bad enough that wiser counsel was completely discarded after the election of the secretary general. Today people are not impressed with fire and brimstone. Now everybody has the capacity to ponder, think and evaluate decisions made and examine the consequences.

Another national protest is likely to adversely affect Malta's commercial life, investment prospects and employment opportunities. The GWU should know better than to keep on harping on more militancy. It should answer workers' present day needs in a more positive and constructive way. Otherwise, the people may conclude that the national protest is just another political ploy.