LABOUR: IMF Accused of Union-Busting

By Emad Mekay Reprint | | Print |

Emad Mekay

WASHINGTON, Mar 30 2004 (IPS) - Two security guards at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were recently suspended indefinitely by contracting firm Wackenhut for attempting to organise a labour union at the institution, a move the company says it made because a union would violate its contract with the lender.

Two security guards at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) were recently suspended indefinitely by contracting firm Wackenhut for attempting to organise a labour union at the institution, a move the company says it made because a union would violate its contract with the lender.

The two employees filed a complaint to the U.S. government, prompting two congressmen to write to Anne Krueger, the IMF’s acting managing director.

Representatives George Miller and Robert Andrews, both opposition Democrats, said they were alarmed at the events that allegedly occurred at IMF headquarters in downtown Washington over the past month.

“At a time when it is the expressed policy of the United States government to encourage the formation of labour unions as a means of promoting and evaluating the strength of democracy in developing nations, these complaints raise very troubling questions about IMF labour policies,” the congressmen said in their letter.

“If these kinds of violations of workers’ rights are occurring at the IMF, we would consider such activities to be extremely harmful to the IMF and unacceptable to the U.S. government,” they added.

“The IMF now faces the very real threat of concerted action by labour unions demanding the right to organise in Washington, DC,” said Soren Ambrose from one of the IMF’s strongest critics, the Washington-based advocacy group, 50 Years is Enough.

“The ironies are deep, given the IMF’s occasional efforts to pretend it believes in labour rights at the same time as it has been instrumental in squashing them all around the developing world,” he added in an email interview.

The alleged violations at the IMF head office range from illegal interrogations and scrutiny of employees to the firings of the two men, Anderson Carter Sr, 60, and Terence Purnell, 57, because of their support for a union that was attempting to represent employees before the company.

Both men are veterans of the U.S. Armed Forces and former corrections officers.

“The IMF should be setting an example for labour standards in the United States and around the world,” said Tom Kiley, a spokesman for Miller. “So when we heard these allegations, that they were instructing a contractor of theirs to actually violate U.S. labour principles, we were obviously very concerned about that.”

The two employees have filed federal labour law charges against Wackenhut, claiming they were suspended without pay because of their involvement with the union.

According to their account, security officers working at the IMF have been trying to have a union represent them in employment matters with Wackenhut.

More than one-half of all the security officers had signed cards in support of joining the Washington-based Service Employees International Union (SEIU). The employees formally asked Wackenhut to recognise the union earlier this year, but it refused.

The congressmen say the company told the former employees that its contract with the IMF contains a clause forbidding unionisation of the Wackenhut workforce, and that the lender has rules against unions.

An IMF spokesman denied those allegations, adding that the institution asks its contractors to adhere to local labour laws.

“We do not prohibit unionisation,” said William Murray.

He said the IMF was preparing a response to Miller and Andrews.

Wackenhut Corporation is a U.S.-based division of Group 4 Falck A/S, a Copenhagen-based company and the world’s second largest provider of security services.

Based in Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, Wackenhut has 40,000 employees in the United States.

No one from the company returned calls from IPS on Tuesday.

According to the SEIU, one of the IMF guards who spoke in support of the union drive was told that Wackenhut was bidding to renew its contract with the lender, and that he should avoid his pro-union activities until after June, when the contract would likely be renewed.

When the employee continued to back the union, he was suspended indefinitely without pay “pending investigation”, says the union.

Company management then told employees that anyone seen talking to a union organiser at work risked being fired, according to the congressmen’s’ letter.

Labour unions are among the vocal critics of the IMF and its sister organisation, The World Bank. They argue that two decades of economic policies and austerity programmes imposed by the organisations have led to declining labour standards in many parts of the world.

Privatisation, for example, one of the staple conditions that borrowing countries must adhere to in order to receive funding, has resulted in excessive dismissals of workers and non-respect of union rights, they add.

In the United States, at least one-quarter of all organising attempts end in employers illegally sacking union supporters. In 1998 alone, 24,000 U.S. workers suffered unlawful anti-union discrimination, according to SEIU figures.

The union says Wackenhut has a record of anti-worker actions and of fighting unions both inside the United States and overseas.

From 1991 to 2000, Wackenhut employees and their unions in the United States filed 95 charges of federal labour law violations against the company.

Since 2000, at least 91 charges have been filed, one-fourth of them in the five months immediately following Group 4 Falck’s acquisition of Wackenhut in May 2002, according to the SEIU.

Accusations against the company include meddling with employee rights to organise and bargain, and discriminating against employees because of their union activity or membership.

The SEIU says it is launching a campaign against both the IMF and the company to reinstate the two employees.

“It is concerning that a leading, global institution like the International Monetary Fund would continue to do business with a company whose labour practices suggest a fundamental disregard for its workers’ basic rights,” said the union in a statement.