News
|
||||
Strikes
- a blow The recent spate of strikes that crippled the health and transport sectors, threats of strikes issued by various trade unions over a range of demands and scores of sit-in and death fast protests raise questions and cast doubts over the motives of certain trade unions affiliated to opposition political parties. Allegations regarding political backing stem from an observation that it is largely the government sector that has become vulnerable to strikes. Traditionally, trade unions in Sri Lanka are controlled or dominated by left parties. With the traditional left parties such as the LSSP and the CP losing their political clout over the years, the JVP has made inroads into trade unionism and today the JVP trade union movement is said to be a force to be reckoned with, analysts say. They point out that JVP-led trade union actions have contributed to the winding up of several companies and the job loss of thousands of people in the past. It is alleged that the JVP, which is pushing for a snap general elections, is behind the strikes that take place amidst a political crisis in the country. These strikes disrupted the day-to-day life of the people and gave rise to questions as to the government's ability to deal with the strikes and alleged ulterior motives of trade unions. Whether it was the health or the railway strike, the trade union action severely affected hundreds of thousands of people. As the railway strike prolonged the agony of 400,000 commuters for 11 days, the economy suffered with attendance at government offices dropping by 30 percent and absenteeism and late attendance contributing towards a dip in the overall productivity. Besides inconvenience to the commuters, the strike also caused heavy traffic jams on roads as train travelers took alternate transport means. While the government and trade unions locked horns on policy issues, party politics apparently delayed an early solution with affected commuters wondering why they were being held ransom for issues or disputes related to policy. The railway trade unions launched their strike in support of their demand that the government scrap the newly setup Railway Authority and restore the Railways Department. While the change of status was essentially a policy decision, fears expressed by trade unions over job insecurity and privatisation cannot be dismissed. But shouldn't these fears be allayed through means other than strikes, ask commuters. They say strikes should be the last resort, but the trend appears to be that they take place at the drop of a hat. The rail strike was launched when the government was negotiating an end to the health sector strike. The health sector strike was settled with the government agreeing to rectify a salary anomaly - a move that will push the government to raise additional Rs. 21 billion a year. While negotiations were on track for a resolution of the rail strike, farmers launched a protest campaign demanding a reduction in fertilizer prices. The farmers launched their protest in spite of a government explanation that already fertilizer had been subsidized to the tune of Rs. 1 billion a year. Another ongoing protest is against new labour legislation, which, trade unions say, sanction a hire-and-fire policy, though the Labour Minister says it offers handsome compensation packages and will improve productivity. But trade unions are not willing to buy the government's explanation. Even in the case of the railway strike, government efforts to allay trade union fears bore no fruit. While the government defended that the newly setup Railway Authority was aimed at improving efficiency and bringing down losses, trade unions saw it as a step towards IMF-directed privatisation. Instead of striking a balance between the aspirations of the government and the fears of trade unions, what came out was a crippling strike. With speculation of a snap polls gaining momentum, the government, apparently realizing the political cost of the prolongation of the strike, decided to act. First it tried to run a skeleton service with the help of retired railway workers and workers who did not join the strike. On the first day of the strike, the government in a show of defiance was able to run five trains. On Friday, it managed to put about 20 trains in operation it could not charge commuters due to the lack of manpower. With little or no maintenance of signals and tracks taking place during the strike, trade unions warned that traveling by train was not safe. On Friday, amidst differences of opinion among ministers, the government agreed to the union demands and signed a memorandum of understanding with union leaders. The government agreed to suspend the Railway Authority for two years and put the Railway Department back on track. The government also pledged to obtain Parliamentary sanction giving effect to the MoU within three months. Earlier, the questioned the legitimacy of the strike, claiming that the unions' main demand for scrapping the Railway Authority could not be met. However, it agreed to discuss fears raised by unions with regard to job security and privatization. The Railway Authority strongly defended the Railway Act, claiming that it was aimed at improving the country's railway system and reducing the losses which amounted to billions of rupees a year. Railway Authority Chairman W. Manatunga said the offer made under an attractive Voluntary Retirement Scheme (VRS) was worker-friendly though it placed an additional financial burden on the government. According to the scheme, a worker who retires before reaching the age of 55 will be entitled to his monthly salary until the retirement age in addition to the immediate payment of one year's cumulative salary. If the worker has served more than 10 years, he or she will be entitled to a pension after completing 55 years. In addition, Rs. 24,000 will be waived from loans he or she has taken. Mr. Manatunga said one of the reasons for establishing the Railway Authority was to eliminate corruption. "Some railway employees draw salaries without coming to wok. Some collect 24-hour a day overtime claims, showing concocted records. Some labourers get a take-home salary of Rs. 22,000 a month, while some engine drivers draw nearly Rs. 50,000 a month with overtime which they never do," Mr. Manatunga said. He lamented that the strike had thwarted the Railway Authority's efforts in improving the services and providing best facilities not only to commuters but also to employees. He charged that certain political parties for cheap party gains were manipulating the trade unions and added that the strikers were behaving like criminals with little or no concern for public property. But, trade unionists tell a different story. Station Masters' Union President K.V. Jayasena charged that after the Authority was set up, Railway land was being sold to ruling party supporters. He also claimed the Authority was planning to send about 10,000 of the 17,000 workforce home on the retirement scheme. This may be a cause for concern from workers' perspective, but from the commuters' perspective, all what is required is an efficient railway service sans corruption.
Golden handshake: 50+9 months' salary There were numerous protests against the earlier compensation formula announced by the Ministry, which offered compensation upto 30 months's salary. The proposal to offer upto 50 months salary as compensation will be in addition to nine months' salary they will be entitled under the safety net put in place by the Labour Ministry, the minister said. The 50 months' salary compensation will apply to companies that have an annual turnover of Rs 100 million or more. If the company and the employees are unable to decide on the quantum of compensation to be paid within two months, then the Labour Commissioner would decide on a fair compensation package after hearing representations from both the parties, Mr. Samarasinghe said. Those workers bound by collective agreements will not come under this scheme. In their case, the compensation sum will be decided after negotiations between employees and their employer. However they will also be entitled to the nine months' pay package guaranteed by the safety net. Mr. Samarasinghe said this is the best compensation package in Asia and would help retrenched employees find another job or start self-employment. Fertilizer:
facts, figures and fiasco In the last budget, the government decided to increase from January 1 fertilizer subsidy from Rs. 300 to Rs. 450, thus incurring an additional expenditure of Rs. one billion. The total cost of subsidies as a result has gone up to Rs. 3 billion, the Office of the Government Spokesman said in a statement. It said the recent price hike of Urea was largely due to an increase in prices of petroleum products in the world market. the price of a bag of urea has risen to Rs. 1,050 from Rs. 800. "In order to protect the farmers, the government decided to absorb totally the incrase in price in addition to the subsidy of Rs. 450 a bag. This was announced by the Minister of Finance on January 29. The farmers' interest has therefore been fully protected by the government," the statement said. Finance Minister K. N. Choksy said that in spite of restrictions placed by the \Fiscal Responsibilities Act, the subsidy was given at a cost of a great burden to the Government. The Minister said the Government had taken every step to safeguard the farmer and he saw "no justification" in the fast carried out by some farmers who were "provoked by a political party" But farmers say the price increase has negated the effect of subsidy. Disputing government figures, the farmers say the bag of urea is sold at Rs. 900 and as a result the subsidy effect was Rs. 150, not Rs. 450 as the government claimed. The JVP-backed All Ceylon Farmers Federation began its protest fast on January 19 in Anuradhapura and Polonnaruwa and brought it to Colombo this week, putting forward six demands, including a reduction in the prices of fertilizer. JVP Parliamentarian and federation secretary S. K. Subasinghe said the fast would continue till the prices came down to Rs. 500. Commenting on the government statement, Mr. Subasinghe said the minister should not not make statements, misleading the public and farmers in particular but give a chance for them to meet him and discuss the issue. He said that although he had personally handed over a letter to Deputy Finance Minister Bandula Gunawardena on February 3 for a meeting, he was yet to receive a reply. |
||||
Copyright © 2001 Wijeya Newspapers
Ltd. All rights reserved. |
