Worldwide, as social inequality escalates in liberal democracies, it has become widely accepted that independent trade unionism is essential in protecting the interest of working people and that the union’s capacity to strike is vitally important.
Commenting on the British government’s Labour Bill, The Equality Trust stated that after years of ambivalence, over three quarters of the British people now believe that ‘trade unions are essential to protect workers’ interests’ and that if what was being proposed by the British government ‘reduces the strength of union membership or removes the ability of unions to conduct industrial action, this may well reduce the bargaining power of unions. Given their importance in reducing inequality, this would be an extremely damaging development’ (https://equalitytrust.org.uk/blog/what-influence-do-unions-have-inequality).
From the inception, the major political parties in Guyana have had extremely close relations with trade unions. The archetypical example is the relationship between the Guyana Agricultural and General Workers’ Union (GAWU) and the People’s Progressive Party (PPP). This relationship has remained close to this day. Throughout all the social/political turmoil, GAWU, because of its partisan affiliation, has caused untold damage! Both in theory and practice, the PPP now appears to be having second thoughts about trade unions and their rights. Only a few weeks ago, I observed that a close associate of that party has been recommending that the model of governance in Singapore should be adopted by Guyana notwithstanding that Singapore is authoritatively classified as an autocracy: trade unions are banned in the public sector and independent unionism is effectively destroyed (SN: 25/12/2023).
This kind of recommendation fits well with  the PPP’s practice of governance, which is literally based upon controlling every significant social organisation in Guyana. Indeed, had Guyana been a dominant ethnic society such as Singapore, where the 74% Chinese majority, nurtured in ethnic political antipathy has over many decades supported the ruling ethnic Chinese party, like Singapore, Guyana would already have suffered a similar democratic fate. What is saving Guyana is that it is not a homogeneous or dominant ethnic society: it is a multiethnic bicommunal society and so one racialized ethnic party cannot and should not be allowed to dominate the political space as the PPP is set upon doing.
Particularly in this hemisphere, in this era of heightened ethnic awareness, where the major geopolitical struggle is between liberal democracy and autocracy, and an even economically developed autocratic country like Singapore has been officially politically ostracized, the PPP’s attempt to establish an ethnic autocracy in Guyana is amoral, undemocratic, impractical, unnecessary and should be confronted in all available arenas.
This is the context in which the Guyana Teachers Union (GTU), which is broadly associated with the People’s National Congress, finds itself and this is also dictating the PPP’s responses to both the union’s request for negotiations and to the strike it has called. Anyone who has stayed marginally abreast of current affairs did not have to wait for the General Secretary of the GTU to inform them of the number of times the union has made genuine attempts since the PPP took office in 2020 to get the various arms of the government to become seriously involved in negotiations, all to no avail. But the slap in the face must have come when in the presence of much poverty and  national resources, the PPP regime set upon breaking the union by offering a miserly 6.5% increase to those most vulnerable in the public sector and the teaching profession.
It is well known, and the PPP has clearly calculated, that the GTU has a significant number of Indians, and that whether or not they personally support the union’s actions, they will not strike. The general secretary of the union has indicated as much. ‘Our members from all across the country have expressed their support for the strike action. Of course, there are some teachers on the Essequibo Coast and some districts that are government-aligned who have expressed their support but noted their reservations owing to threats on their lives and families.’
It is well known and is being demonstrated in Berbice as I write that the PPP’s communist organisation inheritance has been well politically policed ethnic communities.  Added to this, the regime has shown no compunction in sending out its henchmen to threaten teachers by reminding them that the government, not the union, is their employer and so is able to affect their promotion, and it follows, even arrange their dismissal! This is an important threat, particularly for African communities.
Because, of the enormous transference of wealth from the public to the private sector, African communities are now more economically vulnerable. I have argued before that while between 2020, when the APNU+AFC coalition left office and 2023, central government expenditure as a percent of GDP has declined from 28.4% to 24.6%, current expenditure declined from 21.7% to 10.8%. Importantly, wages and salaries of public sector workers declined from 6.3% to 3.1% but capital expenditure moved from 6.7% in 2020 to 13.4% in 2023 (VV: 17/12/2023). Continuing this trend, the 2024 budget has increased the recurrent spending by 109% but capital expenditure by 905%! We know that Indians control the private sector and gain the bulk of government contracts. In the context of a teachers’ struggle, some Indian teachers will suffer, but the discourse also need to take into consideration family and not simply individual income and wealth.
Of course, the pittances the regime is throwing about in African communities – organizing all manner of part time jobs, petty contracts, etc. – to buy votes do not equate with what has been denied to the public officers living in these communities. Indeed, as the communities become poorer, they succumb more readily to these short-term interventions and give the PPP more opportunity to intervene to buy votes!
Because of its political/ethnic context, almost every area of social life in Guyana requires different rules of engagement. The general membership of the union must have been following the subterfuges of the PPP regime, from which even a request for arbitration has not materialized. Therefore, notwithstanding the enormous obstacles mentioned above, the GTU has rightly determined that it must take a stand to protect the interest of its members in a timely manner. Whatever the outcome, it is time to strike!
