ACFTU and Trade Unions

ACFTU: neither a partner nor a counterpart

Below is a short article written by IHLO that appeared in the Spring issue of the Asian Labour Update (ALU Issue No. 59 , April - June 2006)

ACFTU: an ‘important’ player in the international labour movement?

Three decades of economic reform have placed China as one of the top players in the global economy. Seeing jobs and big companies moving to China and increasing trade with China, many unions outside mainland China realise that China is becoming too important to ignore. At the same time, in 2001, after a sharp decline in union membership during the state owned enterprise reform that began in the 1990s (1) , the All China Federation of Trade Unions (ACFTU), the only legal trade union in China, decided for the first time in its history, to admit migrant workers into the union. The motive was clear enough; to replace the SOE workers with migrant workers and to secure adequate income and potential influence for the organisation. Some unions outside China, though not all, faced with a declining membership back home are impressed by the ACFTU’s declared membership of over 150 million (2) and its claims to be the world’s largest national union organisation. The adoption and skilful use of rights-based language and the inclusion of migrant workers in recent years have earned the ACFTU a better reputation in the eye of some outside observers. The ACFTU, especially since 1989, has been carefully cultivating and promoting a glowing picture of its position in Chinese society and its alleged strength.

In the wake of the chaotic Cultural Revolution, the ACFTU did not benefit from the first wave of economic reform between 1978 and 1989, as the State decided economic performance was the top priority and removed the constitutional right to strike. According to a survey conducted by the ACFTU in 1988, less than 10 percent of workers believed the ACFTU could represent them while 25 percent commented that the ACFTU ‘only collected dues and conducted recreational activities’. At this time the ACFTU was not generally acknowledged by the western unions, as a cold war atmosphere and the uncertainty of China’s economic reform ensured western unions took a questioning attitude in dealing with ACFTU.
The 4 June 1989 democracy movement massacre and the ensuing crackdown on members of the Workers’ Autonomous Federations (WAF) shocked the world. The ACFTU clearly sided with the Communist Party and its international work suffered until the mid to late 1990s, when China’s economic influence and related reforms were too visible to ignore. Since then, the ACFTU and delegations from foreign unions’ began to visit each other and the ACFTU started to publicise its international work on a regular basis.

How valid are the contact arguments?

Firstly the ACFTU has made it clear that its international work is to keep in line with the government’s foreign policy priorities and to increase its presence in the international labour movement. However, such a presence does not necessarily lead to China’s support of workers in other countries, as the ACFTU rarely sends public messages of solidarity to workers inside and outside China. Wang Zhaoguo, president of the ACFTU and a member of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China, spoke in the 2004 International Forum on Economic Globalisation and Trade Unions saying, “All trade unions and international trade union organisations should respect every countries’ model for the operation of their trade unions and the national development policy based on their national reality.” (3) This helps ensure that exchanges with the ACFTU are limited to discussion of training and technical support, but never move into more confrontational issues, such as freedom of association, prisoner cases, and union organising.

Secondly, many unions overestimate the importance of the ACFTU. It may be tempting to build contacts with an organisation of 150 million members, and yet, how reliable is this figure and how do the numbers translate into industrial, political, or social power? In March 2004, the ACFTU set a target of recruiting 6.6 million members per year over the period of 2004 to 2008 and at the same time announced the launch of a massive programme to recruit migrant workers. (4) Official media have been heavily promoting the ‘successes’ of the ACFTU membership drive and in September 2003, the People’s Daily reported that 34 million migrant workers had already obtained union membership two weeks before the 14th National Congress of the ACFTU, when migrant workers were officially invited to join. In January 2006, the ACFTU announced that only 13.8 percent of the total migrant workforce (officially recorded) had been unionised. Although it did not give the number of the total migrant workforce, it is generally believed to be around 120 million, a figure given by the Ministry of Labour and Social Security in 2004. This means that only some 16.56 million migrant workers are members of official ACFTU unions. Disregarding the fact that the total migrant workforce was even higher in 2005, according to these figures it is impossible for the ACFTU to already have 34 million migrant worker members in 2003 as reported by the People’s Daily, unless there was a significant drop of union coverage between 2003 and 2004.

In other words, there was either a dramatic drop among the unionised migrant workers or the first announced number - 34 million - was a deliberate error. Even an investigating team from the National People’s Congress (NPC), whose aim was to evaluate the implementation of the Trade Union Law, revealed and publicly criticised the fact that by the end of 2003, only some 321,000 unions with 29.6 million members had been established in the private sector. (5) The difference between the reported unions and members is 813,000 fewer unions and 13.29 million fewer workers. The ACFTU was reportedly required to discuss the variance in statistics at a special panel held by the NPC.(6)

When the ACFTU targets enterprises to meet its self-set quotas and when the majority of workers and especially migrant workers have little interest in forming unions themselves, the ACFTU must depend on the support of the enterprises to meet their quotas. In order to gain support from the factory management when negotiating the establishment of a union, very often the ACFTU has to give favourable terms to the enterprise often including giving the presidency of the union to the factory management. Sometimes the company is offered an initial period where they do not have to pay the ACFTU the two percent union dues from the payroll. Another common practice is to require an enterprise to pay the two percent union dues, once the company is established. By doing this, the local ACFTU secures its income, fulfils part of its quota and quite a number of companies agree because they want the union cadres to stop visiting the enterprises to urge them to set up unions.

This type of union is essentially a paper union and often they have no active participation in factory governance. In blunt terms, through forcing enterprises to set up unions and luring them with the promise of senior positions inside the union, the ACFTU violates the fundamental principles of the Trade Union Law (Article Two), namely their voluntarily establishment by workers and the representation of workers’ interests and rights.

It explains why Wal-Mart is reportedly on its way to establishing unions in its China outlets while its strong anti-union behaviour is well known to the rest of the world. In autumn 2004, mainland media reported that the Shenzhen, Dalian, Kunming, and Nanjing municipal trade unions tried to discuss with Wal-Mart managements in these cities about the establishment of ACFTU branches but they were all rejected – the mainland media took delight in reporting that in Nanjing for example the municipal trade union visited Wal-Mart six times and got rejected each time. After the ACFTU publicly criticised Wal-Mart in late 2004, Wal-Mart issued a statement: ‘Should associates (staff-members) request formation of a union, Wal-Mart China would respect their wishes and honour its obligation under China’s Trade Union Law.’ This ‘give-in’ attitude was expressed when it announced at the same time its wish to open not less than 11 new branches in China in 2005, including Shanghai, a city that had previously rejected its expansion ostensibly due to its anti-union behaviour (although debate in China is growing on how local companies should and can compete with foreign enterprises like Wal-Mart). The Shanghai branch of Wal-Mart opened in August 2005 but since the media coverage in autumn 2004 and the reporting of the ACFTU’s ‘success’ in getting a climbdown from Wal-Mart there has been no news of the actual establishment of any union.

All these examples show that the ACFTU, from many aspects, is not as powerful as it wants the international labour movement to believe.

ICFTU’s policy towards ACFTU

The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions’ (ICFTU) present policy towards the ACFTU was adopted in November 2002 and states, ‘The ICFTU, noting that the ACFTU is not an independent trade union organisation and, therefore, cannot be regarded as an authentic voice of Chinese workers, reaffirms its request to all affiliates and Global Union Federations (GUF) having contacts with the Chinese authorities, including the ACFTU, to engage in critical dialogue.’ In practice, the ICFTU chooses to support Chinese workers by operating on key trade union principles, i.e. promoting freedom of association and calling for the release of detained labour activists.

The China Working Party of the ICFTU’s Human and Trade Union Rights Committee developed a plan of action in late 2003, which acknowledged the growing trend of contacts with the ACFTU and recognised the need for affiliates and GUFs to be properly informed on the nature of the organisation so as to achieve the best possible results during such meetings, notably as regards international labour standards and the situation of detained labour activists. Many union delegations have limited time to get themselves familiar with the workers’ conditions in China, and so are sometimes not aware of the nature of the ACFTU. Their visits are usually restricted to prosperous cities such as Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen, Dalian, and Guangzhou. They are unlikely to be allowed to meet freely with ordinary workers and are likely to be carried away by the propaganda on the ‘Chinese economic miracle’. To address to these needs and limitations, the ICFTU/GUF/HKCTU/HKTUC Hong Kong Liaison Office (IHLO) (7) , whose task is to inform the international trade union movement on developments in China, undertook the task of producing a guide to trade union contacts with China/ACFTU (the Guide).

The Guide covers the history and structure of the ACFTU, trade union elections, membership, its international relations, areas of work, China’s labour law reform, privatisation, and prisoner issues. It is designed to make delegations well informed before visiting the ACFTU or receiving an ACFTU delegation. The Guide is not designed to encourage contact with ACFTU; its aim is primarily to ensure that those unions that have decided to engage with the ACFTU can do it in a professional manner and be well prepared with background materials for critical dialogue.

For unions that want to maintain a clear policy on non-engagement with the ACFTU, the materials in the Guide can help them to develop research projects and campaign materials, for example, on prisoners or privatisation in a certain industry - there are still labour activists imprisoned because of their involvement in the WAFs in 1989 (8) and the number of detained labour activists increases every year. (9) The Guide also includes details on the many active and genuine labour groups in Hong Kong; the Hong Kong Confederation of Trade Unions (HKCTU), one of the few independent trade unions in China, is a good partner for them to turn to.

Learning about the conditions of Chinese workers is highly welcomed and linking Chinese workers with the international labour movement is enormously important. However, seeing the ACFTU as a partner or a legitimate counterpart for these missions is potentially fraught with difficulties – such contacts can be used as propaganda by the ACFTU and may also disappoint workers inside China who seek to see western unions take a stand in supporting their struggles and not siding with the ACFTU. Union efforts should be put into supporting workers in need, instead of befriending a union which is essentially part of the power structure of the Chinese government (albeit a limited partner). The choice then for many unionists is one between treating the ACFTU as a partner or legitimate counterpart for union missions to China or taking a position to continue isolation of the ACFTU. The reality however is far from simple and many unions are faced with the growing pressure to engage in China while trying to maintain a principled stand on the ACFTU, a state controlled body. One middle way therefore is to support worker movements inside China through the support of groups in and outside of China and Hong Kong while continuing to monitor the – as of yet – very limited reforms within the ACFTU.

Notes

1 Union membership dropped from 103 million to some 87 million between 1995 and 1999. http://news.xinhuanet.com/fortune/2002-01/14/content_236653.htm 14 January 2002.
2 On 1 June 2006, the ACFTU released a Blue Paper on the Chinese Union’s Right-defending Work in 2005. The Blue Paper announced that by the end of 2005, ACFTU had a membership of 150.29 million. http://big5.xinhuanet.com/gate/big5/news.xinhuanet.com/legal/2006-06/02/content_4636070.htm
3 http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-10/11/content_381430.htm
4 http://www.acftu.net/template/ 10001/file.jsp?cid=582&aid=3107
5 Workers’ Daily, 2 November 2004, also posted at http://zg.people.com.cn/BIG5/33832/33855/2959912.html
6 A more detailed discussion on the ACFTU’s misleading statistics at http://www.ihlo.org/LRC/ACFTU/000306.htm
7 To learn more about the IHLO, please visit: http://www.ihlo.
org/index.html
8 http://www.ihlo.org/DLA/POCS_040606.htm
9 Updated list on 4 June 2006: http://www.clb.org.hk/public/contents/article?revision%5fid=38204&item%5fid=38202