PSSP’s Position on the UN’s 2nd Resolution and the Coalition Forces’ Attack on Libya

Posted in statements on March 25th, 2011 by pssp – Be the first to comment

25 March 2011

-The Western power must cease their attack on Libya immediately!
-Libya’s liberation must be achieved by the Libyan people!

On 17 March 2011, the UN Security Council quickly adopted Resolution 1973, the second resolution imposing sanctions against Libya. Shortly thereafter, U.S., U.K. and France-dominated coalition forces began a military strike against Libya that has now gone on for several days without stop. The UN Security Councils speaks of the attack in humanitarian terms saying its goal is the protection of civilian life. We are certain, however, that the ultimate goal of the Resolution 1973 and the attack on Libya is to serve the imperialist goals of Western powers.

1. Libya’s anti-government forces and even the UN Security Council are not the ones who get to decide whether the attack will be limited to the goal of “protecting civilians” or not. It is the participating Western powers who decide the targets of military operations and the ultimate war aims. Libyan anti-government forces have no say whatsoever concerning the form, means or scope of military operations.

2. The Western powers are currently considering the next steps in their attack, including the possibility of sending in ground troops. It is true that Resolution 1973 does not allow for occupation of Libya. We only have to look a few years back, however, to know that this means little. With Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. said occupation was not the goal, but we all know what the result of the wars perpetrated on these countries were.

3. If the Iraq and Afghanistan experiences are repeated in Libya, then Libya’s future is dark regardless of whether it is the anti-government forces or the Western forces who ultimately depose Gaddaffi. The Western country’s power to make war is overwhelming, but their ability to bring peace, political security and economic prosperity to the countries that are the victims of their wars is sorrowfully weak. In addition, we can be sure that the elites the western governments help to bring to power will be the ones most beneficial to western oil companies, the ones most ready to deliver up Libya’s underground resources.

4. Contrary to what some claim, it has already been proven that western intervention is not the best means to prevent civilian casualties. The NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 was disastrous, only serving to increase animosity and fear. In its wake the most horrible of racial cleansing campaigns occurred in Kosovo.

The ultimate goal of the Western power’s military action is to suppress the Arab people’s movement against western imperialism. We condemn the western power’s hypocritical talk of humanitarianism and call on the United States, the United Kingdom and France to end their attack on Libya immediately.

Egypt's 1.25 Revolution: Not the End, but the Beginning

Posted in introduction on February 18th, 2011 by pssp – Be the first to comment

Wol-san Liem
Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements

Starting on January 25 the world watched with baited breath for 18 days as the people of Egypt took to the streets, chanting, praying, battling security forces and, above all, calling for the resignation of President Hosni Mubarak. And then it finally happened. On Friday, February 11 the president and his family left Cairo for their home by the Red Sea. Shortly afterwards, Egyptian Vice President Omar Sulieman, appointed 12 days earlier in an attempt to appease protestors, announced that Mubarak had passed all authority to the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces. The military authorities responded with their third statement in two days in which they promised to, "conduct free and fair presidential elections," and "sponsor the legitimate demands of the people."
The mainstream media has portrayed the January 25 Revolution (as it is now being called) as a spontaneous revolt sparked by the uprising in Tunisia that toppled the government of President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali on January 14. That Egyptians drew great inspiration from Tunisia is undeniable. In fact, however, the January 25 Revolution has strong roots in the political and socioeconomic structure of Egyptian society. Far from spontaneous, it was the culmination of the organizing of Egyptian democratization activists, young people and worker over the last several years. Understanding this background is important to grasping the true meaning of the January 25. This article investigates January 25th's domestic origins as a basis for assessing the possibilities for structural change the revolution has opened up.

1) Origins of the Revolution: 30 Years of Neoliberalism and Dictatorship
What was it that sent millions of Egyptians into the streets on January 25 and kept them there, and especially in Tahrir (liberation) Square, for the next 18 days? The most immediate cause was the call for a mass protest against police corruption and human rights abuses put out by several opposition and youth organizations. The plan was to rally in front of the Ministry of the Interior on January 25, Egypt's National Police Day, asking for the Minister's resignation. Demands for the day also included restoration of a fair minimum wage, limitation of the presidency to two terms, and repeal of the repressive Emergency Law (explained in detail below). These demands, and the organizers hopes that January 25 would become "something big", grew out of mounting frustration with economic disparity and the repression of democratic rights that have defined Egyptian society for the last several decades.
In Egypt, class polarization, dictatorship and the alliance with the United States are closely intertwined. This configuration of state and society has its origins in the years following the death of Egypt's first president, Gamal Abdel Nasser in 1970 during which time the nationalist foreign policy and authoritarian populist system of government that had defined Nasser's rule were dismantled. During the 1970s Nasser's successor, President Anwar Sadat, began an open alliance with Egypt's newly rising urban capitalist class, a product of Nasser's state-led industrialization, and opened the economy to foreign investment. He also concluded a peace agreement with Israel and established an alliance with the U.S. based on acceptance of latter's role as strongman in the region in exchange for billions in military aid and economic assistance. Following the neoliberal agenda promoted by the U.S., IMF and World Bank, Sadat began privatizing public enterprises and cutting public expenditures on healthcare, education, public sector salaries and social security.
Mubarak, who came to power in 1981 after Sadat was assassinated, strengthened the alliance with the U.S. and continued the implementation of neoliberal policies. Economic reforms during the last three decades have included a reduction of food subsidies established during the Nasser era, the rollback of land reform and liberalization of the rural land market, further privatization of state-owned enterprises, greater openness to international financial markets and foreign investment and the establishment of special economic zones (SEZs) where investors enjoy tax concessions and weak labor regulations. The end of land reform sent much of the rural population to the cities, which soon became over-crowed with the poor and unemployed. Privatization was accompanied by layoffs, a reduction in real wages, deterioration of working conditions and labor flexibilization. The SEZ, established through Law No. 83 of 2002, have furthered these downward trends. As Columbia University historian Timothy Mitchell notes, Mubarak's policies put public funds in fewer and fewer hands, diverting resources away from labor-intensive industry, agricultural development and education into the pockets of financers and speculators.
The Mubarak regime developed a strong relationship with a small group of businessmen, whom it favored with government contracts and in the sale of public enterprises. This relationship has been especially tight in recent years, due to the influence of Mubarak's son, Gamal Mubarak, and Ahmad Nazif, Prime Minister from 2004 to January 2011. The business elite has been the main benefactor of Egypt's rather impressive economic growth, (GDP averaged 7% growth per year between 2005 and 2008), which thinly masks rampant poverty and stark class polarization: Some 40% of Egyptians live on less than $2 a day while a hundred families own more than 90% of the country's wealth. Egypt's unemployment rate is near 10% and much higher for youth: 30% of university graduates are unemployed. 60% of all workers are employed in the informal economy.
Mubarak protected the wealth of a few and maintained his regime through widespread repression of democratic rights. An Emergency Law justified as a measure needed to defend against terrorism has been in place consistently since Sadat's assassination in 1981. It grants vast powers to the police, suspends constitutional rights, legalizes censorship, allows the government to imprison individuals indefinitely without charge, sharply restricts street demonstrations, and prohibits unapproved political organizations. Egypt's most recent general elections are known to have been particularly corrupt. In the lead up, the government carried out widespread repression, baring candidates from running, preventing citizens from voting, and arresting a thousand members and supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood, Egypt's largest opposition organization, which had made significant gains in the previous elections in 2005.
This deeply entrenched economic disparity and political repression led to ever-increasing anger and was the main impetus behind the revolution. A wide, cross-class segment of the population had come to see the government as acting in the service of someone other than them: itself, the neoliberal elite, the U.S., Israel. The protesters who brought Mubarak down did so based on a complex mix of socioeconomic and political grievances against this government that had turned its back on them and the system it represented.

2) Agents of the Revolution: Youth and Labor
The media has cast a spotlight on Egypt's well-educated youth as the main force behind the protests. It has also highlighted the role of facebook and twitter in mobilizing millions. This emphasis on online social networks makes youth participation in the protests appear highly spontaneous, lacking planning and organization. While it is true that many out in Tahrir square had never been to a demonstration, others had prior experience and have been organizing themselves as a political force over in recent years. The April 6 Youth Movement, one of the main organizers behind the first rally on January 25 and throughout the protests, was originally formed to support workers striking in Mahalla al-Jubra, a textile manufacturing center in the Nile Delta in April 2008. Another group, the We Are All Khaled Said Movement, was organized last year in respond to the police murder of a Khaled Said, a small businessman who posted pictures of cops dividing up drugs they had confiscated during a bust on his personal blog. The group quickly began mobilizing an all out campaign against rampant police violence and corruption. While groups such as these take the form of fluid networks, held together largely though online communication, they are not without leaders, and definitely not without power. Rather, Egypt's youth has found in online media a new mobilizing tool and a form of organization that is adequate to a situation of widespread repression and in tune with the cyberspace age.
Two other forces have received considerable media attention: the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood, and the liberal National Association for Change, particularly its leader, Mohammed ElBaradei. In addition to being the largest opposition organization in Egypt, the former has been highlighted because it raises the specter of radical Islam, particularly for the Americans. This despite the fact that it has, for several years, eschewed armed resistance in favor of working within the legal system and was largely tolerated by the regime until the last general elections. ElBaradei, Director General of the IAEA until the end of 2009, has received wide coverage because he became the official representative of the protesters in negotiations with the government and because his aspirations to the presidency are well known. In fact however, neither the Muslim Brotherhood nor ElBaradei played a central role in organizing or leading the January 25 Revolution. Both took a wary stance towards the original demonstration on January 25, ElBaradei saying that, while he supported the protests, he hoped they would not "degenerate."
There is another important agent in this struggle, one that has received much less attention than it deserves. This is Egyptian labor. Between February 9~11, tens of thousands public and private sector workers from a wide range of industries (textile, military equipment, postal, shipping, hospital, administration, etc.) went on strike. The labor actions were greeted with great enthusiasm by the protestors in Tahrir Square, who recognized their significance in putting pressure on the regime. In international labor circles, these strikes are credited with turning the tides decisively against the regime.
When we say Egyptian labor here, it is important to be clear about whom we are talking. We are not talking about the government-controlled Egyptian Trade Union Federation (ETUF). Since its establishment as the Egyptian Workers Federation in 1957 (it was later reorganized as the ETUF in 1961), the ETUF has been controlled by the government and used as a tool to quell labor unrest. It should be no surprise, therefore, that the ETUF took a stance against "the calls of destruction" and in "full support for legitimacy for President Hosny [sic] Mubarak.. .. as a great leader keen to the interests of his people and his nation" during the protests.
By law, all local unions in Egypt are required to affiliate to the ETUF. The workers who went on strike during February 9~11, however, did so outside of the ETUF structure, forming strike committees to lead and represent them. This sort of labor organizing is by no means without precedent. Since the mid 1980s, Egyptian workers have struck in reaction to the results of Mubarak's neoliberal agenda. Since the mid 1980s, Egyptian workers have struck in reaction to the results of Mubarak's neoliberal agenda. From 1984-1989 Washington Consensus policies, such as a doubling of mandatory wage reductions for healthcare and pension plans, were met with a series of protest actions, which involved tactics as radical as the blocking of traffic, arson and the destruction of train cars. From 2004 to 2009, over 1.7 million workers participated in more than 1,900 strikes and other actions, during which time workers electing strike committees similar to those that led the actions during February 9~11. These actions climaxed with the textile strikes in April 2008 that inspired the formation of the April 6 Youth Movement. Along with mass protests against the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, they are credited by some with having "inculcated a culture of protest in Egypt" and contributed centrally to "the formation of a consciousness of citizenship and rights."
Labor action over the last several years has developed into a nascent democratic union movement. A strike by 55,000 municipal tax collectors in December 2007 not only won its economic demands, but also led to the formation of the Independent General Union of Real Estate Tax Authority Workers, the first union completely outside the ETUF, in 2009. On January 30, in the midst of the early days of the Revolution, independent unions and workers committees declared the formation of the Egyptian Federation for Independent Unions (EFTU), an alliance complete independent of the ETUF.
While some workers who struck last week limited their goals to the achievement of economic demands, a substantial number called for the downfall of Mubarak's regime. Some have gone even further to make demands that suggest a desire for a deep political, social and economic transformation. Steel and iron workers, for example, issued a statement calling for: 1) Immediate resignation of the president and all men and symbols of the regime, 2) confiscation of funds and property of all symbols of the regime and everyone proven corrupt, 3) dismantling of the ETUF and the formation of independent unions, 4) confiscation of public sector companies that have been sold, closed down, or privatized; nationalization of the public sector "in the name of the people" with new management by workers and technicians, 5) formation of workers' monitoring committees in all workplaces to monitor production, prices, distribution and wages, 6) the convening of constitutional assembly with representatives from all sectors, to revise the constitution. The newly formed EFTU's demands include: a minimum wage of 1200 LE (roughly 4 times the official minimum set in 1984) and a maximum wage no more than 10 times the minimum, the right to adequate social security, healthcare, housing, education, pensions and benefits and freedom of association. The articulation of these demands indicate an important direction for the Egyptian democracy movement and suggest that workers and independent unions role will be as vital in the days to come as it was before Mubarak's resignation.

3) The Place of the Military
With Mubarak gone, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces is now in command of the country. The officer on top, Council Chairman Field Marshal Mohamed Hussein Tantawi was Mubarak's Minister of Defense until February 11. He is known to be strident opponent of political change, although he did gain favor with protestors by mingling with them in Tahrir Square and other populist gestures. The military authorities now in charge had strong ties to Mubarak's regime, and the United States, and gained considerably from these alliances. All of this makes one wonder why the majority of protestors were adamant that the military step in the days leading up to Mubarak's departure.
The army's restraint during the demonstrations was an important factor in winning protesters' approval. Moreover, the military has been granted a great deal of legitimacy since Nasser's time, when it gained respect for confronting Israel and the West. In addition, common soldiers and junior officers have watched their real wages fall in recent years, making their complaints very similar to those held by other Egyptian young people. In fact, however, the military elite benefit greatly from the established system. The military has been the beneficiary of nearly $40 billion in American aid over the last 30 years, which it has put to good use. It not only controls security and a growing defense industry, but also owns companies in several industries, including cement, construction gasoline, olive oil and water. It has developed huge areas of desert and coastal property into shopping malls, gated cities and beach resorts, which cater to local and international consumers and tourists. Clearly, therefore, the military authorities have a deep investment in a quick conclusion to the protests and a status quo, which may be one reason they have been reluctant to turn any authority over to opposition political leaders.
On the other hand, many demonstrators appear convinced of their ability to push the military, and any government that follows it, in the right direction. Asked by a reporter what the demonstrators would do if the military sought to impose its own brand of rule, one organizer responded, "We know the way to Tahrir Square."

4) What comes next?
The military authorities have now dissolved the Parliament, largely deemed illegitimate, and promised to hold elections in 6 months in keeping with protesters' demands. They have also now convened a panel of legal expert charged with drafting amendments to the Constitution, after originally saying they would keep the task for themselves. Significantly, the panel includes members of the Muslim Brotherhood and other opposition groups and has been met with approval by protest leaders. On the other hand, the military authorities have announced a ban on meetings by labor unions, effectively forbidding strikes, and have maintained the Emergency Law. Many protesters are generally pleased with the clear timeline proposed for the transition to civilian rule. Strikes continue despite the, however, and a group of protesters has refused to leave Tahrir Square, claiming they will remain until all their demands are met.
With nothing to check the power of the military authorities aside from protests, the Egyptian people face the immediate task of forcing them to keep their promises. But even if they are able to do this and power is transferred to a democratically elected civilian government this will not, by any means, guarantee fundamental change. It will take determined efforts to dismantle the power of the business and military elite and a reversal of the neoliberal policies now entrenched in the Egyptian economy, to address Egypt's vast inequalities. It is unlikely that liberal politicians like ElBaradei have the political will to carry out such measures without strong pressure from below. As one Egyptian journalist noted, Elbaradei is "not the man for" a radical redistribution of wealth. Neither is he likely to break off the relationship with the United States, particularly while the military is still an influential player in Egyptian politics.
Some international commentators are rather skeptical about Egypt's future. John Weeks, a professor of economics at the University of London, for instance, comments, "Extremists are likely to come to power in Tunisia and Egypt, extremists of the neoliberal variety." He notes that this has been the case in Latin America, Central and Eastern Europe and South Africa, where the transition from dictatorship to democracy in the 1980s and 1990s led to rise of governments that were, "neoliberal to the core." "When progressive forces are weak," he writes, "the agents of capital are strong, and prepared as they always are to step into the power vacuum. . . The IMF is not far behind."
South Korea's experience says a lot about the difficulties that may lie ahead. The 1987 June Uprising, a movement of similar proportions to the January 25 Revolution, made possible the transition from military dictatorship to a liberal democratic form of government. This was a great achievement of the Korean people's struggle. One the other hand, the democratization movement was not able to set is sights far beyond the demand for the holding of direct elections, seeing this as the most feasible means for ending the dictatorship. When the government consented to direct elections on June 29, the movement turned its attention towards debates about which opposition candidate to support, rather than pushing for more fundamental change. In the end, the opposition failed to unite. Direct elections provided legitimacy for the presidency of military general Roh Tae Woo came to power the following year. Through this process, and the subsequent merging of political parties, the military reached a compromise with the opposition through which it maintained a good deal of its power. The socioeconomic system that supported this power remained basically intact. The presidents who have come after, including Kim Dae Jung, have pursued neoliberalism to the determent of workers' livelihoods and rights.
The June Uprising opened up importance space for Korean workers, represented by the massive strike waves that followed. July and August of 1987 brought not only determined struggles for wage increase, but also the advance of democratic unions. The development of democratic unionism was an important continuation of the democratization movement in South Korea, as it will be in Egypt. Unfortunately the Korean labor movement was not united or experienced enough to organize as a decisive political force. It was also regretfully unprepared to confront the IMF when it arrived in full force in 1997-1998. If the Egyptian democracy movement can learn anything from the experience of South Korea, it is the importance of a good understanding of history, a long-term perspective on revolution, a correct analysis of neoliberalism and the strength to work through internal divisions.

5) Not the end of the Revolution, but the Beginning
But for Egyptians, this should be a time not for pessimism, but for hope and renewed determination. During the days leading up to Mubarak's departure, the possibility of something different became clearly visible. Protesters in Tahrir Square got a taste not only of their own power, but of what democracy feels like. They set up their own clinics, sound stages, security teams and clean-up crews. Christians guarded Muslims while they prayed and vise versa. Women came out in surprising numbers and some played leadership roles. Workers began practicing democracy through strike committees and the establishment of an independent union federation. On top of all this, the people of Egypt have made far-reaching demands that aim, not only at the replacement of the regime, but also the eradication of a corrupt elite and economic equality. It is now up to them to articulate the relationship between the redistribution of wealth and real democracy and create a sustained long-term struggle-a revolutionary one-that can achieve both.
The international labor and people's movement can play a role as well. Throughout the last three weeks unions and left organizations have supported the people of Egypt, organizing solidarity protests and getting information out past Mubarak's censorship and putting pressure on home government that, in turn, put pressure on the regime. These efforts must not stop simply because Mubarak is gone. Exchange, solidarity and international protest must continue as Egyptians continue to demonstrate. The nascent independent union movement must develop into a real political actor and strong force for protecting workers' rights. Exchange with unions in other countries and the support international unions can greatly further this goal. Finally, the international left must take to heart the message of the people of Egypt, a message which is now resonating across Northern Africa and the Middle East: Revolution is not easy, but it is possible.

From Ratification to Empowerment: Reflections on the 11th International Migrants Day

Posted in articles, statements on December 16th, 2010 by pssp – Be the first to comment

16 December 2010

Wol-san Liem
Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements

This December 18 with be the 11th International Migrants Day. Founded in December 2000, International Migrants Day marks the anniversary of the General Assembly’s adoption of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of the Families (hereafter, the Convention) on December 18, 1990. Around the world, migrant workers and their supporters will use this day to demand changes in national policies, work conditions and social practices that are discriminatory and oppressive towards non-nationals, and call on governments to ratify the Convention, which sets minimum basic standards states must respect.

In the last several decades, recognition of migration as a global phenomenon and the importance of migrant labor to the global economy has increased significantly. Most governments now at least give lip service to the need to protect migrants’ human rights. Nonetheless, only 43 countries, the majority of which are countries of origin, have ratified the Convention. South Korea is among the countries that has not.

If we look at South Korean policies towards migrant workers, this fact is not surprising. The Convention states that, &Migrant workers and members of their families shall be entitled to effective protection by the State against violence physical injury, threats and intimidation, whether by public officials or by private individuals, groups or institutions& (Article 16, clause 2) and that they &shall not be subjected individually or collectively to arbitrary arrest or detention& (Article 16, clause 4). The South Korean government’s sole method for dealing with undocumented migration, however, is to carry out indiscriminate and often violent immigration raids, detain all of those arrested and deport them with out trial. The tragic death of a migrant workers as a result of these policies last month, shows just how brutal they are. On October 29, immigration officers raided a factory in the Gasan district of Seoul during a concentrated immigration crackdown carried out ahead of the G20 Summit. When Trinh Cong Quan, a 35-year-old Vietnamese worker and the father of a 4-month old daughter, found all exits blocked he tried to escape through a second story window. Quan fell and was severely injured. After lying in a coma for several days, he passed away on November 3. Far from taking responsibility, the Seoul Immigration Service simply claimed it had followed legally prescribed procedures and therefore owed nothing to Quan’s bereaved family.

In the area of labor rights, the Convention states that migrant workers shall not be discriminated against with respect to work conditions, remuneration, rest, health and safety measures and termination of the employment relationship (Article 25, clauses 1-3). In contradiction to these principles, the South Korean government’s Employment Permit System, maintains strict restrictions on the freedom to change workplaces and gives the power to employers to terminate labor contracts at will. By exacerbating the unequal relationship between employers and workers, this system enabling a wide range of rights violations, including under and non-payment of wages, forced overtime and lack of respect of health and safety standards.

Ratification of the International Convention on the Rights of Migrant Workers signifies acknowledgement by states of their responsibility to work actively to eradicate this sort of discrimination. Thus, demands for ratification have important symbolic meaning. Ratification, however, does not guaranteed change, only a general acceptance of the need for change. Moreover, the standards prescribed in the Convention are highly limited, given that they represented the lowest common denominator to which the General Assembly could agree. Even more important, therefore, than demands for ratification are the struggles of migrants themselves to gain recognition as workers, as members of society and as the subjects of rights.

Many times the demands made in these self-determined struggles go beyond the rights guaranteed in the Convention. The Convention, for example, guarantees the right to basic education for all migrants (Article 30), but acess to educational institutions equal to that of nationals only to documented migrants (Article 43). In the United States, undocumented migrant youth are demanding more. They have fought for several years for passage of the Dream Act, which would guarantee them the right to attend college, access to financial support for higher education and pathways to legal permanent residence. This fight has not yet been won and the legitimacy of the Act has recently been tarnished by its attachment to the National Defense Authorization Act for the Fiscal Year 2011 and the inclusion of a provision that would require young people who could not go to college to serve in the military to achieve permanent residence. Nonetheless, the Dream Act struggle has empowered undocumented migrant youth as a real political force in American society and made their situation impossible to ignore. It has already given birth to dozens of talented young activists who will lead the fight for migrants rights in the United States well into the future.

In South Korea, migrant workers have been fighting for the right to freedom of association since 2005 through the Seoul-Gyeonggi-Migrants Trade Union (MTU). The Convention only protects the migrants’ rights to freely join trade unions and participate in their activities (Article 26). Since its founding, however, MTU has insisted that migrants have the right not only to join but also to form their own unions, a right which under the South Korean Constitution applies to all workers, regardless of social status. Through their persistent organizing in the face of government repression, the members of MTU have demonstrated that they are in fact the subjects of this right regardless of what the South Korean government says. Their efforts, in conjunction with the efforts of migrant worker in other countries, have led to international recognition. In November 2009, the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association (CFA) and the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (CESCR) issued recommendations to the South Korean government, clearly recognizing the right of migrant workers, documented and undocumented to form and join trade unions of their choosing and calling on the government to immediately recognize MTU’s status as a legal union.

In addition to these unequivocal statements, the ILO and UN recommendations also recognized the South Korean governments’ continued targeting of MTU officers for arrest and deportation under the pretext of immigration law violations as contrary to the principle of freedom of association, and called for an end to such attacks. Despite these recommendations, however, the South Korean government has not stopped its efforts to undermine MTU. Following the arrest and deportation of MTU officers in 2007 and 2008, the Immigration Service is again after the union’s leadership. It has issued a summons to MTU President Michel Catuira, a documented migrant worker, claiming he has not maintained a legitimate employment relationship and has engaging in political activities prohibited under the Immigration Control Law. In the meantime, the East Seoul Branch of the Seoul Regional Ministry of Employment and Labor has cancelled the employment permit granted the President Catuira’s employer clearly seeking to give credibility to the Immigration Service’s charges.

These measures are an obvious effort on to undermine MTU. If President Catuira is found to have violated the Immigration Control Law, he will lose his visa and become immediately deportable. It can only be assumed that this is precisely what the Immigration Services has in mind.

Sadly, the pressure being placed on President Catuira has received very little attention in the wider South Korean labor movement. Perhaps this is because of the general weakness of the movement at present, or perhaps its is because such attacks on MTU’s leadership have become so commonplace. Whatever the reason, the lack of response is unfortunate for several reasons. First, given that MTU is an affiliate of the KCTU Seoul Regional Council and President Michel a KCTU officer, these actions by the government represent an assault on KCTU as a whole and the freedom of association rights of Korean workers in general. Second, as migrant workers make up an increasingly significant part of the South Korean labor force organizing them becomes ever more important if the labor movement is to regain its power and ability of to defend workers wages, conditions and rights. MTU, as a union organizing migrant workers, must therefore be protected. Finally, the attack on President Catuira is representative of the racist nature of the South Korean state, whose policies reproduce the low social and economic status of non-white foreigners. In that racism serves to divide us--to keep us from uniting as workers and common people--it is a structure of oppression that victimizes all of us.

Migrant workers and migrant support organizations will mark International Migrants Day with a protest at Marronnier Park on Sunday, December 19. Labor and social movement actors can show their support for the rights of migrants by coming at in force. As we celebrate the day and call for ratification of the UN Migrants convention, we should also make a strong demand for an end to the attack on President Catuira and the continued violation of migrant workers freedom of association rights. In the long-term. if we are to reverse the entrenchment of racial hierarchy in South Korean society and enable the unity of all workers and common people, migrant and non-migrant activists must use our collective wisdom to find new ways to organize and empower migrant workers as a social and political force.

First Seoul Women Union Members’ Assembly held on December 11

Posted in activities on December 14th, 2010 by pssp – Be the first to comment

On Saturday November 11 a historic event took place. Roughly 300 women workers from the Seoul area gathered at Yeonsei University's Widang Auditorium for the first ever Seoul Women Union Members' Assembly. This event was organized by a coordinating committee composed of the women's committees of several unions and progressive political parties. PSSP is proud to have participated on this body and contributed to making the Women Union Members’ Assembly possible.

During the assembly, which lasted for several hours, participants shared their experience as women in the workplace with one another. The women were diverse in terms of occupation, including: public servants, educators, office workers, service workers, factory workers, care workers and cleaning workers. While the details of their jobs differ, however, the women found they have a common experience of oppression and discrimination as women living and working in a patriarchal society. The majority were irregular workers, suffering from low wages and lack of job security. Many shared experiences of being discriminated against, belittled and/or sexually harassed by colleagues or bosses who saw them simply as easy victims. Rather than remaining silent about these experiences, the women at the assembly chose to raise their voices to condemn the maltreatment and call for change.

The Assembly program also included speeches by women from unions currently on strike, including KEC Semi-conductors and Jaeneung Education. Performances by women union members, including singing by cleaning workers and a dance by care workers, were received enthusiastically by the audience as was a skit that illustrated the realities of women workers' lives.

By the end of the assembly participants had made a firm commitment to one another to work together to overcome discrimination and improve their work conditions. The also vowed to leave the periphery of their unions to become central actors in the workers movement and proclaimed the importance of a feminist perspective to union revitalization.

While the first Women Union Members' Assembly was held in Seoul many people have suggested that it be expanded to a national scale in the future. PSSP agrees with this proposal and hopes to work with other organizations and unions for its realization.

Hyundai Irregular Workers’ Factory Occupation Ends after 25 Days

Posted in articles, statements on December 10th, 2010 by pssp – Be the first to comment

10 December 2010

Wol-san Liem
Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements

Yesterday (December 9), members of the Hyundai Motors Irregular Workers Chapter of the Korean Metal Workers Union (KMWU) left factory 1 of the Hyundai Plant in Ulsan. Their departure marked the end of a 25-day long occupation, which they had endured without adequate food, water or bedding.

Today, representatives from the Hyundai Motors Irregular Workers Chapter, the Hyundai Motors Local Branch (regular workers), and the KMWU sat down with representatives from Hyundai Motors and its in-house subcontractors. In accordance with an agreement reached between the President of the Irregular Workers Chapter, Lee Sang-su, President of the Local Branch, Lee Gyeong-hun and President of the KMWU, they presented the following 4 demands: 1) Cancellation of damage suits and charges against workers who participated in the occupation, and payment of medical bills; 2) guarantee of reinstatement for those who participated in the occupation, 3) protection for strike leaders, and 4) a plan for negotiations concerning the regularization of illegal dispatch workers.

While negotiations have begun, it will be an uphill battle to get demands met, and take even more determination before the ultimate goal of regularization for illegal dispatch workers is achieved. Past experience including a similar struggle in 2005, has shown that without the pressure of a factory occupation it is not likely that Hyundai Motors will yield much ground. For this reason many of the striking workers had not wanted to leave factory 1 until after their demands were met in full, and originally pledge to continue the occupation until Hyundai agreed to employ them directly as regular workers.

In reality, however, the striking irregular workers have faced increasingly difficult conditions in the last several days. In addition to repression at the hands of Hyundai Motors, they have been put under growing pressure by the leadership of the Hyundai Local Branch to bring their struggle to a speedy conclusion. While the KMWU Delegates Assembly voted in favor of a general strike in support of the irregular workers struggle on December 22, it had not set a firm date. Meanwhile, President Lee Gyeong-hun of the Hyundai Motors Local Branch determined to put the general strike to a second vote at a Branch general assembly, despite the fact that the KMWU Constitution gives the delegates assembly the right to call for a general strike. When the Hyundai Motors Local Branch leadership could have been educating its members on the importance of regular-irregular workers solidarity and preparing for the general strike, it was instead suggesting to its members that it was time for struggle to be over.

With knowledge of the negative result of the Branch general assembly, and the reality that the second vote signified the cancellation of general strike plans and the loss of support from the Branch, the irregular workers set to heated debate within the factory about whether to go one with their occupation or agree to leave and begin negotiations with a set of less than satisfactory demands. In the end, they chose to accept the demands listed above as a basis for negotiation and entrusted the decision to continue or end the occupation to the Chapter leadership. After meeting with the KMWU and Branch presidents, Lee Sang-su declared an end to the occupation.

Sadly, the conclusion of the occupation demonstrates clearly the limits of the solidarity between regular and irregular workers developed in the beginning of the strike and, even more so, the lack of will on the part of the Hyundai Motors Branch's leadership to support a strike that it should have recognized as the struggle of all Hyundai workers.

Nonetheless, there have been important victories through this struggle. The consciousness and daring of a few irregular workers quickly spread throughout the Irregular Workers Chapter and from Ulsan to Asan to Jeonju. The hundreds who participated in the strike have been transformed through the experience, coming to recognizing their common cause and developing the power and courage to demand their right to be treated equally. They constructed and made use of democratic decision-making structures even in the midst of the cruel conditions of their factory occupation, and formed a still growing sense of class-consciousness. Despite the fact that they will return to work on December 13, Hyundai irregular workers have vowed to continue organizing among their colleagues and preparing for the next phase of the struggle for regularization. As one reporter commented, the end of the factory occupation at the Ulsan plant represents, "a victory for the Hyundai irregular workers themselves, but a loss for the labor movement as a whole."

It is the power of class-consciousness and unity that makes struggle possible. The struggle, therefore, will surely go on.

The Hyundai Motors Irregular Workers Strike Continues!

Posted in articles on December 5th, 2010 by pssp – Be the first to comment

4 December 2010

Today, December 4, was the 20th day of the Hyundai Motors irregular workers occupation of factory 1 at the Hyundai plant in Ulsan. The struggle has grown since it began on November 15. Yesterday, the Korean Metal Workers Union (KMWU) carried out a work slowdown, with members of the Hyundai and Kia branches (regular workers) refusing to work overtime. Regional branches of the KMWU also refused overtime or carried out two-hour strikes. In addition on December 2, two laid-off members of the GM Daewoo Irregular Workers Chapter climbed the arch above the front entrance to the Daewoo plant in Incheon demanding to be reinstated as regular workers. They have vowed to continue their "high altitude" sit-in protest until their demands are met despite the fact that it is now the middle of winter in South Korea, and Daewoo hired thugs have blocked efforts to lift food up to them.

While several hundreds of Hyundai irregular workers continue to stay day and night without adequate food, cloths or bedding in the Ulsan factory, others have traveled to Seoul to make their struggle known more widely. Today, after a mass protest at Seoul Station Plaza, they and their supporters set up camp in front of the Hyundai-Kia headquarters in the Yangjae district of Seoul. The strikers will remain there with only plastic tarp for shelter until Hyundai Motors agrees to follow the decision of the Supreme Court and regularizes the in-house contracted workers it "indirectly" hires.

This morning, at 8:00am, Hyundai Motors' hired thugs used a forklift and crane to attack the occupied factory in Ulsan. They managed to smash in part of the wall and the window on the third floor of the building, but the protesting workers held their ground. According to the decision reached at the KMWU"s delegates assembly on November 23, the KMWU should have gone on general the moment the factory was attacked. But this has not happened. Rather, under pressure from the Hyundai Motors (regular workers) Branch, KMWU has lowered its goals, and is only planning partial for a partial strike in the next several days. KMWU needs to do the work now to make a real general strike possible!

The Hyundai Motors and GM Daewoo irregular workers struggle is not only about winning job security for a few individuals. It is a struggle against labor flexibilization being carried out by capital and the South Korean government, which affects the entire working class. As such, this struggle has great significance for the lives and working conditions of all workers in South Korea. In that precarious work and labor flexibilization polices are increasing across the globe, the Hyundai and GM Daewoo irregular workers struggles are, in fact, the struggle of workers all over the world.

Yeonpyeong-do: The Tragic Result of Aggressive Military Exercises and Escalating Antagonism North and South

Posted in statements on November 29th, 2010 by pssp – Be the first to comment

The peace movement must gather its strength to oppose all further actions that threaten the peaceful existence of the Korean people.
24 November 2010
Policy Committee
People's Solidarity for Social Progress

On November 23 at 2:34pm North Korea fired more than a hundred artillery shells in the vicinity of Yeongpyeong-do, an Island of the west coast of the Korean peninsula that is home to roughly 1, 300 South Korean citizens. Many of the artillery rounds landed on Yeongpyeong-do in an area populated by civilians. The South Korean military responded, firing roughly 80 of their own shells. The back-and-forth, which lasted over an hour, left two South Korean marines and two civilians dead, and fires burning across the island.

The South Korean government, while stating it will do its utmost to stop the situation from escalating, has, at the same time, promised a resolute response in the event of further provocation. North Korea, broadcasting its official position on the incident through the Korean Central News Agency on the evening of the 23rd, claimed that the South had persisted with artillery exercises in North Korean territorial waters despite repeated warnings, and that the North had, therefore, "responded with an immediate and forceful attack." It also promised to "respond without hesitation with a continuous merciless military attack" if South Korea intrudes "even 0.001 mm" into North Korean territorial waters.

This incident reveals clearly the tragic nature of South and North Korea's on-going military standoff and spiraling antagonistic actions, a conflict that affects, not only the Korean peninsula, but the entire region, stimulating militarization by neighboring countries and thus escalating tensions in the entire East Asian region. North Korea's shelling of a civilian area cannot, in the end, be justified. At the same time, was must recognize this incident as a demonstration of the extreme extent to which the conflict between North and South Korea has escalated, egged on by a policy of antagonism and supposedly defensive military training staged by the South. The South's antagonistic policies and military exercises must be halted immediately.

The Tragic Result of Aggressive Military Exercises
Based on reports by the Korean Central News Agency, it appears that the North's artillery attack was a response to South Korean maritime artillery drills carried out as part of "national defense" military training. The South Korean military began these exercises on November 22, and they were scheduled to go on until November 30.
According to news reports, immediately after the plan for national defense exercises was announced, the North Korean Committee for Peaceful Reunification of the Fatherland issued a statement referring to the exercises as a "military provocation" and again on the 22nd, referred to them as an "intolerable criminal action against the Korean people." After the exercises began, the North again sent a memo of protest to the South suggesting that the drills were being carried out with an attack on the North in mind and demanding that they be stopped.

South Korean military authorities responded to reports of these warnings sent by the North by claiming that that the shelling was not a response to national defense exercises, but rather a planned provocation. They added that the drills carried out in the waters around Yeonpyeong-do on the 23rd were regular periodic exercises, not national defense training, and that the North had simply used them as a pretext to attack.

Even if we are to believe this explanation, it is clear that the military authorities on both sides acknowledge that the South's military exercises are a strong stimulant to the North. In addition, even if the drills were not national defense drills, this does not change the fact that they included artillery practice in the waters right next to North Korea. The farthest distance from North Korean territory to Yeonpyeong-do is less than 12 km. Joint army-navy artillery exercises were carried out on the 23rd is an area directly south of Yeonpyeong-do. Carrying out "periodic" shelling right in North Korea's front door is unjustifiable, and is clearly a threat.

The South has consistently carried out aggressive military training since the Cheonan incident. Military authorities have clearly stated that these exercises are a "show of force" against North Korea, which have including joint training with the U.S. involving an American nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, and PSI maritime interception drills carried out with the Japanese Self-Defense Forces. Our peace movement has continuously warned that these military exercises not only cannot prevent a war but, in fact, provoke the deepening of military competition among neighboring countries and an escalation of tensions. The current South Korean national defense exercises, in which the United State participates, were begun as the replaced for the Team Spirit War Games, which North Korea protested strongly in the past. Currently on-going exercises are scheduled to include amphibious landing drills. Such landing drills are carried out in an area that approximates the North Korean coastline and, as such, have been criticized as actually being practice for an invasion against the North and been the target of intense opposition by the North. Nonetheless, joint military exercises involving the United State's nuclear-powered aircraft carrier began on November 28. This move represents a denial of the central role similar military exercises have had in escalating tensions on the peninsula and threatens to further deteriorate the situation to a state of crisis.

The Vicious Cycle of Militarize Response
South Korean President Lee Myung-bak has responded by announcing that the rules of engagement for the South Korean armed forces have been changed to allow for a more forceful response to North Korea, while the conservative South Korean media is calling for armed revenge. These are highly troubling developments.

The governments of both South Korea and the United States have demonstrated their plans to escalate militarized pressure on North Korea several times well before the Yeonpyeong-do incident. The joint communiqué from the recent U.S.-ROK Security Consultative Meeting (SCM), for instance, made the first reference to a "state of instability" in North Korea, clearly suggesting the two government's intentions to intervene in the event of an emergency situation. Such a measure would mean the actualization of the scenario called for in OPLAN 5029, in which the U.S. and South Korea use joint military force to destroy facilities housing weapons of mass destruction in 30 places in North Korea and land marines on North Korean territory in the event of instability arising during a transfer of power. What is more, on November 22, South Korean Minister of Defense Kim Tae-yeong told the National Assembly that the new Proliferation Policy Committee, established at the recent SCM, would consider the possibility of redeploying American tactical nuclear weapons in South Korea. These statements show clearly that the U.S. and South Korean seek to respond to rising tension on the peninsula through military means only.

U.S. and South Korean military operation plans that aim at attacking or occupying North Korea, the aggressive military exercises that aim to make these plans realizable and ceaseless military build-up all only serve to make peace on the Korean peninsula more distant and plant the seeds for the explosion of an even more dangerous incident. An aggressive response on one side of the border only becomes the basis for an even more aggressive response on the other, with the situation escalating in a disastrous chicken fight. We must wake up to the simple fact that in a chicken fight there are only two possible conclusions: One side gives up first or both are destroyed.

The Need for a Mechanism to Stop North-South Military Clashes
The West Sea is becoming a powder keg capable of driving the whole Korean peninsula into a state of crisis. Three have been numerous military clashes in the area, including three in June 1999, June 2002 and June 2009 that led to dozens of casualties. These clashes continue to occur because of conflict over the military demarcation line in the West Sea, which North and South Korea have never agreed upon. The Armistice Agreement concluded in 1953 set the terrestrial border between the two sides, but did not designate a corresponding border in the nearby waters. No agreement on this line was reached in the aftermath of the armistice. The South sees the Northern Limit Line (NLL) it set unilaterally as the legitimate boundary, while the North has set a different border it refers to as the West Sea Military Demarcation Line. South Korea's responses to any movement by the North across the NLL as if they were a provocation only deepens the conflict, as do statements by the North that it will response to an intrusion of even 0.001 mm across the South Sea Military Demarcation Line with a "continuous merciless military attack."

Repetitive clashes between North and South Korea make it impossible for the two sides to develop even a basic level of trust and only induce increasingly aggressive responses.
The creation of an institutionalized mechanism for de-escalation is urgently necessary. Efforts must be made to supplement the Armistice Agreement and a set a military demarcation line to which both sides can agree. Concrete and diverse actions must be taken by both sides to develop basic mutual trust before the ultimate conclusion of a peace treaty is possible. It is time that we put our collective wisdom towards developing means to protect the peaceful existence of the people of the Korean Peninsula.

North Korean Attack's is not Justifiable
The Yoenpyeong-do incident demonstrates that the chicken fight occurring on the Korean Peninsula has taken on an even more brutal form. This is the first time since the end of the Korean War that either side as made a direct attack on the other's territory
No matter the circumstances, it is not possible to condone a military action that threatens common people's peaceful existence and steals away lives. As such, we cannot justify North Korea's shelling of an area populated by civilians. We must state clearly that such military actions cannot be repeated in the future. This is the stance that all people who wish for peace on the Korean Peninsula must take.

The Need for a United Peace Movement
Conflict on the Korean Peninsula has implications for the security of not only North and South Korea, but all of East Asia. We are gravely concerned about the state of tension in the East Asian region due to disputes among neighboring countries over the resources, territory and hegemony of China, Japan and Russia. We are concerned that further conflicts on the Korean Peninsula will only exacerbate this situation. As such, we will resolutely oppose any action that stimulates military tensions on and around the peninsula by even 1%. We cannot allow the Korean people's lives to be held hostage to a deadly chicken fight. We must choose a future for ourselves that is free of military conflict.

The Yeonpyeong-do incident has showed us the following things: 1) The Korean Peninsula is engulfed in a state of instability in which military clashes can occur at any time. 2) These military clashes are taking more and more severe forms 3) 'National defense' exercises and mutual policies of antagonism cannot lead to peace. 4) This situation has and will continue to lead to the loss of life.

We must use this incident as a chance to stop North and South Korea's antagonistic policies towards one another and move towards the establishment of a peace regime. Let us be clear about just how destructive and terrible antagonistic and threatening military actions are. In order to prevent a war of mutual destruction we must begin by building a movement in South Korea against all the stimulants to military tensions. In other words, we must build a movement calling for arms reductions, an end to aggressive military exercises and dissolution of the U.S.-ROK defense alliance.

Will our future be that of a peaceful Korean Peninsula or a peninsula engulfed by the smoke of artillery fire? The answer to this question lies in whether we mobilize under the banner of peace, or allow the South Korean government to continue to respond with antagonistic policies and shows of force. We must resolutely denounce the logic of aggressive militarize response and unite in a powerful peace movement that can build a peace regime and protect the peaceful existence of the Korean people.

Illegal Dispatch, Labor Flexibilization and the Hyundai Irregular Workers Strike

Posted in articles on November 23rd, 2010 by pssp – Be the first to comment

Wol-san Liem,
Researcher
Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements
23 November 2010

On November 15, some 40 temporary workers at the Hyundai Motors Plant in Ulsan City, Southern Gyeongsan Province, began an occupation at the seat factory, one of five buildings on the plant's premise. These workers were formally employed by the in-house subcontractor Dongseong Inc., which had announced it was closing down the day before. Hyundai Motors had told the workers they would only be allowed to sign new contracts with a different in-house subcontractor if they renounced their membership in the Korean Metal Workers Union (KMWU), Hyundai Irregular Workers Chapter. Choosing neither to cave to labor repression nor to continue to accept precarious indirect employment, the workers took action, demanding that Hyundai hire them directly as permanent, or 'regular', workers.
Management reacted quickly and violently to the occupation, forcing the workers out of the factory and sending twenty to the hospital in the process. Far from silencing their demands, however, the repression sparked a tide of collective action. With Hyundai claiming it had no responsibility to negotiate with workers employed by in-house sub-contractors, the Hyundai Irregular Workers Chapter called a strike. The struggle spread across the Ulsan plant, with workers in factories 1, 2 and 3 stopping production, and then to the Hyundai plants in Jeonju and Asan. While occupations and work stoppages have been temporary in most sites, hundreds of workers continue to occupy factory 1 in Ulsan as of November 22. Over 70 workers have been arrested and dozens injured, with riot police and company-hired thugs continuing to use violent tactics against the strikers.

The Violence of the State and Capital
In South Korea, the violence of capital and the state manifests itself in more ways than one. We see it, not only in clubs and shields, tear gas and pepper spray, but also in the desperate choices workers sometimes make--tragic acts of protest that give public expression to the deadly nature of the exploitation they face on a daily basis. 40 years ago the young worker Chun Tae-il clutched a copy of the Labor Standards Act and light himself on fire seeking in the flames a new world that would respect work and human dignity. Since his death there have been countless other cases of self-immolation: Bae Dal-ho, Lee Hae-nam, Lee Yong-seok, Pak Il-su, Jeon Eung-jae, Heo Se-uk, Kim Jun-il, and on and on and on. On November 20 another name was added to this list. At roughly 4:30pm Hwang Inha, a temporary worker who had worked at the Hyundai Ulsan Plant's factory 4, set his own body ablaze in the midst of a KCTU-sponsored solidarity rally at the plant's main gate. By some great fortune, rally participants were able to put the flames out quickly enough that Hwang, while badly burned, will not lose his life. This is an important comfort. But the strikers, their supporters and the general Korean public must come to terms with the reality Hwang's heat-wrenching act seems to confirm: Hyundai irregular workers' struggle is a matter of life and death, not only for each individual involved, but for all irregular workers, and in the end, all workers in South Korea.

In-house Subcontracting--- or Illegal Dispatch Work
To understand the significance of this message requires context. First, it is necessary to understand the conditions under which Hwang and his comrades work. What I have called "in-house subcontracting" above more properly goes by another name: illegal agency, or in South Korea 'dispatch', work. Dispatch work refers to the situation in which a worker is hired by an outside agency but is 'dispatched' to work for a different company. Workers employed in this manner are most often paid low wages and their contracts are always of a temporary nature. Moreover, dispatch employment allows the actual capitalists for whom workers produce avoid responsibility for their wages and working conditions. Hwang and his irregular worker colleagues work inside Hyundai factories making Hyundai cars, and yet they are technically employed by someone else. They can be fired at any time and make only a faction of the wages the directly employed workers who work alongside them make. South Korean law currently prohibits dispatch work in the manufacturing sectors, precisely because of these problems. In-house subcontracting has been away to get around this prohibition, and it is widely practiced.
In South Korean there are now two opposing tendencies with respect to dispatch work. On the one hand, the Lee Myung-bak administration is attempting to modify the law to make it formally legal in manufacturing, while at the same time making plans to completely revise the Employment Security Law to "strengthening employment services" or, in other words, to promote the proliferation of dispatch and temp agencies. These and other measures aimed at expanding precarious work are central to South Korea's "2020 National Employment Strategy," through which the government seeks to provide a flexible labor force for capital under the guise of job creation.
On the other hand, on July 22 the South Korean Supreme Court ruled that a worker employed by an in-house subcontractor at Hyundai Motors was, in fact, an illegal dispatch worker. The Supreme Court also ruled that, as a general principle, comparable cases of illegal dispatch work should be treated as "assumed direct employment." While the case has been sent back to the High Court to be retried based on the Supreme Court decision, the ruling has wide implications for workers employed by in-house subcontractors at Hyundai and, indeed, all manufacturing companies in South Korea. Under South Korean law, employers must give directly employed irregular workers regular status after 2 years of employment. The Supreme Court has told Hyundai that this is what it must do: take responsibility for in-house subcontract workers, employ them directly and granting them the same job security, wages and benefits as other directly employed regular workers.
The July 22 Supreme Court ruling provides important background for the demands made by the workers who carried out the initial occupation on November 15 and the central demand of the Hyundai Irregular Workers Chapter's strike that has unfolded since. In essence, these workers are demanding Hyundai do only what the country's highest authority of justice has told it do, an order which Hyundai is, of course, ignoring. But their fight is about much more than simply their employment status or one Supreme Court decision. It is a fight against the system of illegal dispatch work and all indirect employment. In the end, it is a fight against the government and capital's efforts to expand these employment forms as a means to increase labor flexibilization and secure labor power and profits at the expense of the wages, work conditions and job security of all Korean workers.

Regular-Irregular Worker Solidarity and the Role of Social Movement ForcesThe message and demands of the Hyundai workers' struggle concern the entire Korean workforce. The battle must, therefore, be waged with the strength of irregular-regular worker unity. In many instances, regular workers, who are the colleagues, friends, and relatives of irregular workers, are already showing their support. They have staged solidarity work stoppages and other actions and are channeling food and water to those occupying the factory in Ulsan. And while this response is not even (the leadership of the KMWU Hyundai Branch has been tepid at best), there are strong signs that the solidarity is growing. On November 22 the KMWU Delegates Assembly voted to hold a mass protest in front of the Hyundai Ulsan plant on November 23, to coordinate with the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) to hold another on November 27 and to stage a general strike in the beginning of December, immediately in the event that riot police or company-hired thugs raid the occupied factory. This plan offers Korean metal workers the chance to make the Hyundai irregular workers struggle a struggle for the rights of all workers against the designs of the government and capital&--- and a successful one at that.
Social movement organizations, left political parties and all progressive elements in South Korean society also have an important role to play. The Ulsan factory occupation has brought to light Hyundai's exploitative and repressive character, which is representative of the attitude of South Korean conglomerates in general. Social movement forces can use this opportunity to organize mass resistance against conglomerates' abuse of irregular and subcontracted workers and the government's support for them by publicizing Hyundai's defiance of the July Supreme Court decision and the administration's efforts to expand dispatch and other forms of precarious work. They can and must also give mental, spiritual and material support to the striking workers. As the struggle unfolds in the upcoming weeks it is up to the South Korean left as a whole to recognize its wider significance and come out in force.

Solidarity from abroad means a lot to the workers occupying the factory in Ulsan, who have gone days without rest or adequate food. If you wish to send messages of support please email them to the Research Institute for Alternative Workers at psspawm@gmail.com and we will deliver them. You may also send messages directly to the Hyundai Irregular Workers Chapter of the Korean Metal Workers Union at: hjbtw@jinbo.net.

Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements Workshop, Nov. 8

Posted in activities on November 1st, 2010 by pssp – Be the first to comment

On November 8, the Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements will host a workshop on union responses to transnational corporations as part of the International People's conference, held in Seoul in timing with the G20 Summit. If you are coming to Seoul, please attend!

International Responses: TNC Structural Adjustment during the Economic Crisis and Labour's Strategies for Resistance

Workshop No. 3 of the International People's Conference, Seoul, November 7 ~ 10, 2010

Background
Workers around the world have been facing massive layoffs and wage cuts since the start of the global economic crisis in 2008. According to ILO statistics, the global unemployment growth rate increased 18% between May 2008 and May 2009.

Layoffs and relocation of production by transnational corporations have played an important role in the deterioration of working conditions around the world. In response to the economic crisis, transnational corporations have closed factories and enforced layoffs in countries were consumption levels have stagnated, such as the U.S. and European countries, and moved to countries that might serve as new sources of consumption, such as China and India. Transnational automobile producers, such as GM and Toyota, who have close their plants in the U.S. and Europe and expanded investment in China, are typical of this trend. Because these types of structural adjustment are carried out through the transnational movement of capital, it is highly difficult for nationally-based unions to respond effectively. What is more, the activities of TNCs have great impact on the structural adjustment and worsening of labor-management relations in other companies in effected regions. This can be seen in South Korea where, over the last two years, labour repression by the Valeo and Parker Corporations has significantly influenced other companies and led to the general deterioration of labour-management relations. Needless to say, it is extremely important that unions develop an effective strategy for resistance.

The proposed workshop is meant as a space in which unions from various countries can share their experiences in responding to transnational corporations, and discuss mid to long-terms strategies for collective resistance. Leaders from around the world will gather in Seoul for the G20 Summit from November 11-12. To response to the Summit, labour unions and social movement forces are preparing a People's Week of Collective Actions (November 6 ~ 12), during which time an International People's Conference will be held from November 7 ~ 10. These events offer an important opportunity for unions and social movement forces from around the world to build a collective vision, develop strategies for responding to various aspects of the economic crisis, and begin to discuss alternative solutions. The proposed workshop will be an important part of this process.

Venue: Kim Dae Gon Hall, Sogang University
Date and Time: November 8, 16:30 ~18:30

Program
Moderator: Wol-san Liem, Researcher, Research Institute for Alternative Workers

16:30 ~ 16:40 Welcome Hasoon Park, Executive Director, Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements
16:40 ~ 17:00 Korean experiences in fighting transnational corporations Jiwon Han, Research Director, Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements
17:00 ~ 17:40 Brazilian experience in fighting transnational corporations Quintino Marques Severo, General Secretary, CUT Brazil
17:40 ~ 17:55 break
17:55 ~ 18:05 Summary of presentations and proposal from the Research Institute for Alternative Workers Movements Moderator
18:05 ~ 18:30 Q and A and Discussion Moderator

Translation: Consecutive translation Portuguese-Korean, Simultaneous translation Korean-English

PSSP Participates in National Care Workers Rally

Posted in activities on October 18th, 2010 by pssp – 2 Comments

On October 16, demonstrated our support for nurses’ aids, childcare workers, workers who assist the elderly and disabled people and other care workers by participating in a National Care Workers Rally. The protest, held in front of Bosingak (bell tower), a historic site in downtown Seoul, was attended by care workers and many of their allies, including social movement organizations, progressive political parties, student organizations and labor unions. All together roughly 200 people attended.

The main goal of the day were to demand that the government and public take responsibility for ensuring care workers’ work conditions and that care workers’ labor rights be guaranteed. Specifically, we called for 1) a living wage and job security for care workers, 2) an end to marketization of social services, 3) government efforts to strengthen the system for care service provision, 4) an end to the government’s plan for confronting South Korea’s low birthrate through marketization of social services and the consequent victimization of care workers.

Care work is a relatively new issue in South Korea. Until recently, care work services were performed mostly by women in the home as an element of unpaid reproductive labor. Recently, however, care work is being performed more and more as a form of low-paid wage labor, and has become and object of government policy. Rather than recognizing care work services as essential to social welfare, the government seeks their marketize, a policy which will result in further deterioration of the conditions in which care workers work. PSSP recognizes that in order for care workers’ to win proper work conditions and respect for their labor rights, social awareness of the importance of care work must be raised. For this to happen care workers themselves must organizing and come forward themselves to claim their rights.

It is with this understanding that PSSP has been supporting the struggle of care workers.
We not only participated in the National Care Workers’ Rally, but also assisted in planning and organization ahead of Oct. 16. Our new movement dance team also performed for the first time on Oct. 16. In the future we will continue to support care workers empowerment and leadership, and work in solidarity with their struggle