|
|
LABOUR
UN Staff Riled Over Proposed Job Privatisations
By Haider Rizvi
UNITED NATIONS, Feb 10, 2006 (IPS) - Employees at the United Nations headquarters in New York are up in arms over proposals to hand over certain jobs and services to private businesses.
At a meeting attended by nearly 1,000 UN staffers Thursday, union leaders said they would reject any move aimed at reducing existing medical and pension benefits.
"This is very, very disturbing. This is not a private organisation," Staff Union president Rosemarie Waters told employees.
The controversial proposal on privatisation is part of an internal review of the management reforms process, which the UN has undertaken as part of a decision by the World Summit held here last September.
At the meeting, the Union adopted a unanimous resolution urging Secretary General Kofi Annan and the General Assembly to ensure that concerns of all staffers are taken into account when considering changes in work rules.
"There should be meaningful consultations from start to finish," Waters told IPS after the meeting. "When a proposal goes to the General Assembly that affects the working life of staff members, each of us has a right to know the content of the process."
The Secretariat is due to submit its report on the reform to the world body's General Assembly by the end of this month.
The administrative and management reforms are ostensibly aimed at rooting out corruption and fraud in the UN system, however, the way the Secretariat is moving ahead is not only being questioned by the UN staff, but many member states as well.
"We do not want to throw overboard our achievements of the past," said Austrian Ambassador Gerhard Pfanzelter in statement on behalf of the European Union.
"We want to keep in mind that the UN is an organisation of unique character, and cannot be transformed into a privately run company," he added.
The Group of 77, a bloc of 132 developing countries plus China (and the largest coalition of UN member states), has also voiced similar concerns over the management reforms review process.
"It seems to reflect a move towards a more corporate approach," said South African envoy Dumisani Kumalo representing the G77 and China. "(This is) not appropriate given the unique nature of the organisation."
Last November, tensions escalated between the Secretariat and the G77 over the question of reforms as the latter released a report without submitting it first to the relevant bodies of the General Assembly.
Annan tried to portray the Secretariat as a neutral organ, but many believe that his office is tacking too close to the United States in its efforts to repair ties with Washington that were damaged in the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq and the "oil-for-food" corruption scandal.
Last year in October, for example, the G77 sent a letter of protest to Annan criticising the Secretariat's efforts to appease right-wing U.S. politicians who have rallied against the organisation in and outside of Congress.
The letter was sent in connection with the visit of Annan's chief of staff Mark Malloch Brown to the U.S. Congress in Washington.
During his appearance at the Capitol Hill, Malloch Brown briefed the House of Representatives International Committee, while seeking U.S. backing for the proposed UN reforms.
"To help achieve this, we rely on our friends not only in the administration, but also here in Congress," he told the lawmakers. "You, after all, have the power of the purse, and that ensures you an attentive audience wherever you go."
In an attempt to address the Staff Union's concerns, Malloch Brown sent a letter to Waters in which he denied reports of proposed privatisation of the pension fund.
However, despite this assurance staff members remain wary of losing benefits.
"I am going to retire in June. I will be 60 years old," says Michael Pysarenko, a 36-year UN security veteran, who is worried about his pension benefits.
"They are going to change the rules? Are you crazy? Every little dollars counts, you know."
Meanwhile, the Staff Union is waiting for response from Annan about its request for a dialogue with management about proposed changes in staff rules and regulations.
"We will be vigilant if anything damages our rights," says Waters.
(END)
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
What is RSS?
