GREAT BRITAIN: An increasingly bitter dispute is taking place in North Wales where two-thirds of the workforce at the Friction Dynamics plant in Caernarfon have been locked out for the last nine weeks in a dispute over working conditions. The workers are members of the IMF-affiliated Transport and General Workers’ Union.
In late April 2001, workers at the company, which is also known as Dynamex Friction, a car parts manufacturer, took industrial action for one week in a dispute over health and safety working conditions, impossible work targets, and attempts by the employer to break existing workplace agreements. Upon their return on the job, the workers were locked out by management which said it would only sanction a return to work if the workers accepted a 15 per cent pay cut and changes in conditions.
On June 29, the 87 workers at Dynamex were fired and became the first to be dismissed under employment legislation which was initially aimed at giving protection to anyone taking industrial action. This Employment Relations Act, passed in 1999 to “give protection” to workers engaged in lawful industrial action, stipulates that strikers cannot be sacked for eight weeks. The case in point, however, proves the legislation gave “no protection”.
Commenting on this dramatic turn of events, IMF general secretary Marcello Malentacchi said “the IMF fully supports the dismissed workers and the TGWU in their struggle against Dynamex. The dismissals prove this legislation is inadequate.”
A rally is being organised on Saturday, July 7, in Caernarfon.
A special website – http://www.frictiondynamex.co.uk – has been set up to give information about the dispute and to promote the rally. Messages of support can be posted in the guest book on this site and would be greatly welcome.
For further information, contact Tom Jones, TGWU, on the following e-mail address: [email protected]

SOUTH AFRICA: Close to 21,000 workers will lose their jobs if the unbundling of Iscor Ltd, a major resources company, into separate mining and steel entities proceeds. If the proposed process goes forth, the workforce in the mining section will be cut by 6,000, and in the steel division all 15,000 workers will lose their employment.
According to the IMF-affiliated National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (Numsa), which represents the majority of the workers, the steel industry is at great risk if the proposed unbundling of the company fails to produce a sustainable steel industry. Many engineering companies would collapse because they are dependent on Iscor for survival, and it is uncertain whether the unbundling will make Iscor profitable. Numsa is not convinced that the process would yield positive results. Although the steel division has not been making a profit, the mining group made substantial profits over the years and has helped to subsidise the steel division.
Numsa also believes that the unbundling could be seen as a way to undermine the unions in the steel industry.
“The South African economy is shedding jobs particularly in the manufacturing sector, and the loss of close to 21,000 jobs at Iscor will be a great disaster for the South African economy,” states the union, asking “Who is to purchase goods and services in the country if the majority of the workforce is losing jobs?”

ARGENTINA: According to the IMF-affiliated autoworkers’ union SMATA, workers at ZF, the German multinational which mainly produces supplies for the auto industry, learned in April 2001 that the company intended to cease its production activities in Argentina. The decision was made even though earlier ZF had signed an agreement with the union that employment would be maintained at least through December 31, 2002.
The union said the company had promised job security in return for employees accepting to work at its new plant 100 km away from the previous one and to devote over 75 extra hours a month in commuting time.
Now, not only are the workers losing their livelihood, but the company says it will only offer them 50 per cent severance pay.
Among the various initiatives taken by SMATA and its general secretary, José Rodriguez, to seek a solution to the situation have been meetings with Labour Ministry officials, plus a protest organised in front of the German Embassy in Buenos Aires, during which a list of claims was submitted for German government authorities.
When workers staged a peaceful attempt to prevent dismantling of equipment at the plant, ZF changed the name of the facility to Pilar Partes S.A., then claimed it was a new company and fired all 128 workers.
The IMF has forwarded this information to its metalworkers’ affilate in Germany, IG Metall, along with SMATA’s request to persuade the German-based transnational to lean on its Argentine subsidiary to respect the job security agreement it signed with the union in Argentina.

ITALY: The FIOM-CGIL metal union has declared strike action for tomorrow, July 6.
Over the last few months, collective bargaining for salary increases in the national contract has been taking place involving two major contracts with two different employer associations: one for the larger companies and the other for small and medium-sized firms. The three metal unions concerned — the FIOM-CGIL, plus the UILM-UIL and FIM-CISL — outlined together a common base for both sets of negotiations.
After much bargaining and a couple of strikes, the last one on May 16, 2001, the three unions and Confapi, the employers’ association for small and medium-sized enterprises, reached an agreement which was signed on July 3. Regarding negotiations with Federemeccanica, which represents the larger companies, however, the deal was signed by only two of the three unions, the UILM-UIL and FIM-CISL, with FIOM-CGIL deciding against it. The main reason for its rejection and subsequent decision to take industrial action is over the sum of 13,000 Italian lira per month ($5.60, Euro 6.70) that Federemeccanica is ready to give, but only as an account on coming increases.

When the powerful economies of the West found that it was much easier to reach decisions when only the wealthier were present, they agreed to form the G-5. “G” stands for Group, and 5 for the USA, Japan, Germany, France and Great Britain.
Later, because of pressure from Italy, the G-5 was expanded to G-7, to include both Italy and Canada. Then, to make sure that Russia, after the collapse of the Soviet system, would not escape any control, the G-7 became G-8. The decision to include Russia was not motivated by its economic strength but rather by its weakness, which represented a danger for the whole of the West.
Following the example of this gathering, other groupings have been formed, with the common denominator to defend a smaller or larger number of countries against other groups.
The G-8 has no rules. It meets and decides the agenda without any kind of democratic process or transparency.
Undoubtedly, when political leaders meet to discuss matters that concern everybody it is a good thing. Both bilateral and multilateral contacts are necessary to create and maintain a balance in the world and its different regions. Such contacts, however, can only be fruitful and apply to everybody if they happen in a global context.
If decisions are made over the heads of the people concerned, they will never be accepted, even if they are good ones. The riots in Gothenburg, Prague, Davos, Nice, Washington, Seattle and Sydney etc. are a clear signal of this.
International institutions for world governance are too weak today and should be strengthened. Reforms to make them transparent and to incorporate an effective social dimension in their rules are badly needed. It is well within their scope to give the answers to the many questions which the so-called “people of Seattle” – but also others – are asking, and they must be given the necessary tools to do it.
By institutionalising self-nominated powerful groups like the G-8, the work of internationally-recognised agencies such as the UN, ILO, UNCTAD, UNDEP, FAO etc. will be further undermined.
Officially, the G-8 does not make any decisions, but there is no doubt about the effect their discussions have on the global economy. One should not forget that the countries of the G-8 together control the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
Why not have the G-8 within the framework of the United Nations and under the chairmanship of its General Secretary?

GENEVA: The riots such as the recent ones in Gothenburg, plus those in Prague, Davos, Nice, Washington, Seattle and Sydney, clearly show that decisions made without consulting the people concerned will never be accepted, even if they are good ones, says Marcello Malentacchi, IMF general secretary in his new opinion column. “The G-8,” continues Malentacchi, “has no rules. It meets and decides its agenda, without democratic process or transparency.”
Reforms are needed for such powerful institutions of world governance, he insists, or agencies such as the UN, ILO, UNCTAD, etc. will be further undermined.
Read the entire opinion by clicking on the associated link.

KOREA, REP: The Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) has called a political strike for July 5, and the main force to lead the strike will be the Korean Metal Workers Federation (KMWF).
The decision for the general strike was made after Mun Sung-hyun, president of the KMWF, strongly called for general strikes to stop the neoliberal drive of the government and to attain the KCTU’s demands. Mun also added that auto industry workers from Hyundai, Kia, and Ssangyong are already taking procedures for the general strike on July 6, and union representatives for shipbuilding industry workers made resolutions to organise strikes. In response to Mun, members of KCTU Central Committee demanded leaderships to declare a general strike with the participation of all 600,000 KCTU members on the same day.
After the unanimous decision for the political strike was made, the second agenda to step up the KCTU’s campaign for the resignation of the government was discussed. At the end of the discussion members of the Central Committee requested to call a KCTU emergency National Congress to decide a possible Seoul rally with the participation of 100,000 KCTU members from all over the country in case the government continues oppressing the KCTU.
These are the KCTU demands:
– stop neoliberal restructuring plans and projected layoffs;
– stop discrimination against casual and irregular workers;
– secure the rights to form a union of public service workers and university professors;
– extend the public education system and public medical system;
– abolish the National Security Laws;
– drop the warrants of arrest against the KCTU leadership and stop oppression against the KCTU;
– resignation of the Kim Dae-jung government.

KOREA, REP: On June 6, the Volvo Construction Equipment Group (VCEG) announced worldwide layoffs which would cost about 950 jobs. According to the plan, Volvo Construction Equipment Korea will eliminate up to 120 jobs, or nearly 9 per cent of its total workforce.
Labour and management at Volvo Construction Equipment Korea (VCEK) held 12 rounds of wage negotiations between April 30 and June 4, but the situation has worsened since the announcement of the layoff plan. Even though the collective agreement is still in effect and the company is recording a surplus for a second consecutive year, management unilaterally notified the union of the layoff plan and threatened it would close plants if the union goes on strike.
In the 16th round of negotiations, on June 26, the union made considerable concessions but management insisted that the issue is non-negotiable.
It is the official position of the Federation of Korean Metalworkers’ Trade Unions and the VCEK union that VCEK management has clearly violated the collective agreement. The gap between the two bargaining parties was so wide that the VCEK union had no choice but to go on strike.

The last few years front pages of the newspapers and TV- and radio news have been dominated by the so called. new economy. What’s that?
It is simply the way stock markets brokers call new companies in the electronics, computers and telecommunication sectors. It is also a definition of companies which values at the stock exchanges around the world have been boasted artificially through speculation.
The worse is that the value of the companies concerned is not a real one but is just bubble that has now busted leaving thousands and thousand of workers both blue and white collars out of job.
News about easy money in “new-economy” companies, Microsoft, Compaq, Nokia, Ericsson, Vodafone etc, have created the wrong perception that the traditional strong manufacturing industries such as steel, automobile, white goods-companies or textile, chemicals etc are out of fashion.
The message is simply that manufacturing is not the future of a modern economy. But, this is just nonsense.
Or as the new secretary of trade and industry in UK expressed at the AEEU conference in Blackpool, UK, on June 13th 2001:
“There are not two economies, one old and a new one, there is just one economy.”
Manufacturing remains the most important factor in the economy of a modern country. While it is true that service sector of the economy is growing faster than manufacturing, bear in mind that services are linked directly to manufacturing.
For example, physical goods need maintenance, their production and distribution requires transport, information, communications, insurance and real estate services, etc. In other words much of the growth of the services sector is result of growth in manufacturing.
It is true that number of jobs in the manufacturing is shrinking and will shrink even more.
New technologies and new products will constantly change the way things, necessary and less necessary for our life, are manufactured. But the total value of this in the economic system will not be less. On the contrary it will be higher.
The demand must increase if we want to create a sustainable growth over the whole world. To satisfy that, enormous amount of funds are to be invested in production of goods.
At the same time the investment will create jobs and purchasing power for the workers and their family to enable them to buy what they produce and a little more.
Economist, brokers at stock exchanges, neo-liberal politicians, they tend to forget sometime that manufacturing is needed to make necessary goods to make easier for every body to enjoy the life.
Speculations on the other hand only create problems and wealth just for few.

GENEVA: News about easy money in “new-economy” companies – like Microsoft, Compaq, Nokia, Ericsson, Vodafone, etc. – have created the wrong perception that the traditional, strong manufacturing industries such as steel, automobile, white goods, textiles, chemicals, etc. are out of fashion, says IMF general secretary, Marcello Malentacchi, in his column under IMF Opinion.
“The message is simply that manufacturing is not the future of a modern economy. But, this is just nonsense.”
Click on the associated link to read the entire column.