Hong Kong

Bar Benders return to work after securing pay rise and work reduction : Implications for Hong Kong industrial relations and the ACFTU

A short update on the situation of the Bar-benders strike in Hong Kong who began their strike on 6 August - the strike ended late on 12 September after many rounds of discussions and accusations.

[The ITUC issued a short Online on the end of the strike here]

More than two decades ago, workers, in order to avoid competition amongst themselves agreed to set a standard wage for their trade. The employers also wanted to ensure a stable supply of workers, and therefore, both the Hong Kong Construction Industry Bar-bending Workers’ Union (BWU), and the contractors and real estate developers agreed that on every 1 August, they would meet and negotiate the wages for the coming year.  However, their daily wages had dropped from HKD 1,300 in 1997 to the present rate of HKD 800. Many contractors employ illegal or unlicensed workers and only pay around HKD 500, making their situation worse. 

The BWU, an affiliate of the pro-Beijing Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions has always avoided pushing for wage increases and increased benefits and has generally taken a low key non-confrontational attitude to their members and they err heavily on the side of the pro-business argument of keeping wages down for the sake of “economic prosperity”. This year, the postponing of the annual negotiations until November trigged the strike amongst fears of continued salary stagnation or reductions.  The significance of their strike – which lasted over 36 days – one of the longest ever in recent Hong Kong history, is manifold.

Firstly the strike is significant because it attracted widespread public support and a massive influx of public (and union) donations for the strike fund. Secondly it is significant in its length and the unity of the workers. A month with no pay has a serious impact on most workers and especially to these low paid workers in a city like Hong Kong with little public funds and social security to fall back on for their families.
Perhaps most importantly however the strike revealed very publicly the essential differences between the pro-Beijing, pro-government Federation of Trade Unions – the ACFTU in Hong Kong – and the Confederation of Trade Unions. After the BWU and the FTU’s public criticism of the workers initial actions the CTU stepped in to help the workers. The CTU gathered the funds and supported the worker demands.

Despite this the developers refused to negotiate with them and the worker’s representatives stating instead that it would only negotiate with the BWU and the FTU – the union which apparently suited their interests best. [The ITUC wrote to the government directly asking for negotiations.] For the sake of the workers the BWU was allowed to continue negotiations despite the massive criticism of the BWU from the workers themselves. A pay deal was finally reached which was only a modest success in terms of the pay demands but crucially gave the workers their eight hour day – a long term sticking point.

The result has been to reveal the FTU and its affiliated unions as passive arms of the pro-business community and as the union most willing to give up on workers for the sake of “social harmony”. Industrial relations in Hong Kong may never be the same after this and perhaps workers will think twice about accepting the welfare and social benefits of FTU membership over the real support for worker struggles offered by the much poorer but dynamic CTU.

The influence of the strike may also be seen over the border in mainland China. The Chinese authorities are particularly hostile to the HKCTU who they see as a threat to their ongoing push to delay universal suffrage and repress the introduction of adequate labour legislation on basic issues like minimum wage and maximum hours. They now have a clear example of the choices workers make when faced with a trade union who recruits them in name only and one which is prepared to support and organize workers in need. The ACFTU should also be watching the case closely. While the ACFTU, as the only legal “trade union” has the government support and will to suppress those independent worker groups which emerge during industrial disputes - and they are not therefore forced to lose members to what is seen as an” illegal organization” - they should be paying attention to the differences between workers union and a government union and the obvious choices workers make.

For background please see the IHLO article: Metal Workers on Strike

_______________

Two interesting articles are reproduced here from the Hong Kong South China Morning Post – not generally well known for its analysis of industrial relations.

CTU gained ground over rival in strike

SCMP: 14 September 2007

The Beijing-friendly Federation of Trade Unions may have secured its right to represent bar benders during their 36-day strike, but it has lost support from construction workers to its rival, the Confederation of Trade Unions.

Wong Hung, assistant professor of social work at Chinese University, said he believed the marathon labour dispute offered the pro-democracy CTU an opportunity to extend its influence in the construction industry. The CTU has very little influence in the construction industry. It is a good chance for a breakthrough as they did quite well in uniting the bar benders, he said.

The workers have two choices on union membership. They can join the bar benders' union under the Hong Kong Construction Industry Employees General Union, which is part of the FTU, or they can join the CTU's Construction Site Workers' General Union.

During the final negotiations late on Tuesday night, the popularity of lawmaker Lee Cheuk-yan, general secretary of the CTU, and his union clearly grew as 200 workers gathered outside the Labour Department headquarters, listening patiently whenever he spoke. But they booed the FTU's Choi Chun-wah, who represented the workers in negotiations with contractors, before he even spoke. Workers called FTU members traitors, and accused them of trying to take advantage of the hard work done by striking bar benders and the CTU, which organised the strike.
Worker Ng Chan-wing said: The FTU's bar bending workers' union only provides us with a place to play mahjong ... They do not help much when we have labour disputes. Another bar bender, Wong Wai-man, said: The [FTU] abandoned us after the chaos in Central in which some of the workers lay on the road.

The bar benders called off their strike on Wednesday night after being offered HK$860 for an eight-hour day.
Mr Lee said many had told CTU members they wanted to establish a bar benders' union to represent their interests and fight for their rights. They have matured after surviving the strike and series of negotiations. They have learned their rights and how to fight for them.
“The biggest gain for our union is that we have finally aroused workers' awareness about the importance of collective bargaining rights and the power of unity. “

Mr Lee agreed the strike had helped strengthen the image of the CTU and believed it could also boost his and the union's power when talking to the government. I can loudly tell the government to stop saying we have harmony and stability in society when we have discussion about combatting poverty in Legco. I can tell the government to look at the strike and ask, if our workers are sharing in Hong Kong's prosperity, why do they have to go on strike?

Asked about the possibility of the bar benders setting up their own union, FTU legislator Wong Kwok-hing said: Workers know well which union is working for them wholeheartedly. The FTU has always tried hard to fight for workers' rights and their interests.
FTU leader Cheng Yiu-tong said the union mainly focused on serving workers and less attention was paid to co-operation with other labour unions.

Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung dismissed concern of a possible wave of industrial action following the strike. There is no need to feel worried, as the industrial action by bar benders is just one isolated incident and I do not see a wave of strikes will follow, he said.

Copyright (c) 2007. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved

Editorial: Strike casts shadow over Beijing-friendly forces

SCMP: 14 September 2007

There was nothing unusual about the demands of bar benders who staged the longest strike in Hong Kong since the handover: They wanted higher wages and a shorter working day. But politics turned a straight-forward labour issue into a five-week marathon that was even discussed by President Hu Jintao and Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen when they met on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation Forum meeting in Sydney last week.

Demands for higher wages are to be expected with our economy performing well. Civil servants have been awarded a pay rise and now work a five-day week and it is natural that workers in other economic sectors should want better terms. Social workers and nurses are among those who have joined bar benders in calling for a bigger share of the prosperity. But the construction industry has peculiarities not usually found in other sectors. The property developers behind the buildings that are the face of Hong Kong are our wealthiest people. Those who put their buildings up are not among the lowest paid, but given the unpredictability of the construction industry, are grouped with the more vulnerable. A system of contracting and sub-contracting, tied in with the construction industry being at the mercy of economic ups and downs, means that few workers on building sites have full-time jobs. They work on day rates and are not assured of further employment when a particular project is finished.

Hong Kong does not have a history of labour disputes despite our free-market system. Employers and workers generally agree on terms and conditions between themselves and, where they cannot, the Labour Department has a mediation mechanism.
The process has largely served us well, as the minimal amount of previous industrial action has shown. This time it faltered as the Beijing-friendly Federation of Trade Unions and the pro-democracy Confederation of Trade Unions fought for the right to represent the bar benders in negotiations with employers.

For a while, it appeared that employers were trying to wear down the workers and CTU unionists, who are seen as more militant and less willing to settle. They would rather reach a deal with the FTU, which is perceived as more ready to compromise in line with Beijing's overriding objective of preserving social harmony in Hong Kong.

When an agreement was finally reached on Wednesday night, the bar benders achieved only a modest pay rise and slightly shorter working hours. But what matters greatly is that the CTU has dealt a big blow to its arch-rival, the FTU. The CTU's success in demonstrating leadership in representing the bar benders has boosted its standing among the working class.

Politically, this is likely to enhance the chances of CTU leader and legislator Lee Cheuk-yan of getting re-elected in next year's Legislative Council election. While the FTU is expected to maintain its grip over one of two Legco seats representing the labour constituency, its poor showing in representing the bar benders is likely to cast a shadow not just on its own image, but also that of the wider pro-Beijing camp.

Copyright (c) 2007. South China Morning Post Publishers Ltd. All rights reserved

IHLO
September 2007