In 1989 Chinese workers stood up and for the first time since 1949
organised Workers' Autonomous Federations
to oppose the
dictatorship. They were repressed and charged with setting up illegal
organisations and spreading counter-revolutionary propaganda.
In 1992, the underground Free Labour Union of China
(FLUC ) was
established but ended in the arrest and heavy sentencing of its
members on charges of establishing a counter-revolutionary group and
secretly plotting to overthrow the government.
In 1996, Liu Nianchun, founder of the League for the Protection of
the Rights of Working People
, was sentenced to three-year
re-education through labour.
In 1997, Li Qingxi, a laid-off worker from Shanxi province, put up a
handbill appealing for the right to organise trade unions and was
sentenced to one-year re-education through labour
.
In 1998, Hunan worker Zhang Shanguang applied to the local government
for permission to register a laid-off workers' organisation, the
Association for the Protection of the Rights of Laid-Off
Workers
and was sentenced to ten years. In the same year, Sichuan
worker Li Bifeng was sentenced to seven years after reporting strikes
and demonstrations to foreign news organisations.
In July 1999, Gansu workers Yue Tianxiang and Guo Xinmin were sentenced to ten and two years respectively after representing colleagues at a Labour Disputes and Arbitration Committee in a dispute over wage arrears. In August 1999, Guo Qiqing, a worker at a chemical factory in Hubei province, was sentenced to one year for disturbing public order after he led workers in a demonstration demanding that the company pay back capital borrowed from the workforce.
In these cases of workers' leaders being locked up, we can see a direct link between the setting up of the workers' federations in 1989 and the arrests that have followed in the ten years since then. The thread that links these cases together reveals a steady deterioration in the condition of the working class: from 1989 when workers took part in the Democracy Movement; to the attempt to organise underground; to trying to register a legal organisation with the authorities; to today, when workers are being suppressed at shop-floor level simply for struggling for the right to survive. The government's policy is simply that workers can go hungry but they cannot unite together and protest their plight. CLB made a call to the trade union at Guo Qiqing's enterprise expressing the hope that the local trade union would do something to defend Guo. However the chairperson of the union replied that without the support of the higher levels of the ACFTU the local trade union could do nothing. Clearly, if the ACFTU had energetically intervened on behalf of the workers' leaders mentioned above, their fate might have been different. Such a course of action has yet to be undertaken by the ACFTU. The fact is that the mere existence of grassroots workers' leaders with local support, such as Yue Tianxiang and Guo Qiqing, is a threat and a challenge to the system where the official trade union is totally under the Party's domination. As such it is in no way a surprise that the ACFTU refuses to assist these workers' leaders.
Faced with the fact that Chinese workers do not have the right to
organise, the international trade union movement has placed its hopes
in the fact that constructive
contact will influence the ACFTU
and encourage it to reform. But the crucial point is does this
opportunity for reform exist? CLB has paid great attention to this
problem and is continually looking for signs of a change in attitude
from the organisation.
In March 1999, the ACFTU's Labour Movement College published a
collection of essays entitled Guidelines for Chinese Trade Unions
in the 21st Century
. The book sets out the future policy
direction of the ACFTU. There are three important points in the
guidelines concerning the ACFTU's international work. First is to
assist the Chinese government's foreign policy, especially in areas
where the government faces difficulties in foreign relations. Second
is to use exchanges with foreign trade unions to develop the ACFTU's
own business enterprises, especially its tourist activities. Third is
to increase the ACFTU's influence and standing in the international
trade union movement.
ConstructiveEngagement's Failure in the Face of ACFTU Principles
It is clear to see that the aspirations of the international trade
union movement and the international work of the ACFTU stand contrary
to each other. International trade unions seek to unite with Chinese
workers and trade unions, while the ACFTU seeks to supplement Chinese
foreign policy and achieve effective results where the government has
been ineffective. International trade unions hope that their contacts
and co-operation with the ACFTU will bring about some improvement in
working conditions in China, while the ACFTU seeks to improve its
business operations, especially in the tourist industry. International
trade unions hope that constructive dialogue and exchanges will help
the ACFTU to gradually accept the concept of independent trade unions,
while the ACFTU hopes that this process will persuade their guests to
understand the position of the Chinese government in not allowing
independent trade unions. These entirely contrary aims of both sides
lead us to doubt whether anything positive can come out of these
exchanges. Moreover, if we look at how this situation has developed,
to date the ACFTU has not made any concessions in its approach to
constructive
dialogue while the international trade union
movement has abandoned its principle of insisting on the right to
visit detained independent trade unionists and labour activists. We
feel shock and regret at this development. We do not believe that this
form of constructive
contact will advance the Chinese workers'
right to organise anymore than it will improve working conditions or
safety at work.
Although the unchanged position of the ACFTU towards the
constructive
contacts with the international trade unions
raises embarrassing questions, CLB certainly hopes that such contacts
will lead to some progress. We believe that the most important target
of such contacts should be workers, including shop floor level cadres
of the ACFTU. Through our radio programme, CLB has come into contact
with many workers struggling for their rights. We are also having
increasing contact with shop floor level union cadres. These often
develop into discussions on how best to defend workers' rights in the
current environment. The amount of common ground between us is
definitely increasing. We believe that contact with workers can put
pressure on and improve the work of ACFTU shop floor-level cadres and
this process can spread upwards through the organisation, increasing
the pressure on the ACFTU to reform. Furthermore, we believe that this
is the only way the ACFTU will ever transform into a genuine trade
union. At the same time, encouraging workers organising activities
remains the most effective foundation for the development of an
independent trade union movement in China.
Finally we sincerely hope that the ICFTU delegation will demand that the ACFTU facilitate visits to detained independent trade unionists and workers' leaders, particularly, Yue Tianxiang, Guo Xinmin, Guo Qiqing and FLUC leaders. We also demand that the ICFTU provide urgently needed humanitarian assistance to the families of these labour leaders.
![[Documents menu]](../bin/bk.gif)