Today, Dr. Marquez discussed the strategies employed by small environmental justice groups in the Southwest. In his lecture, he gave us a schematic view of their fights, the actors involved and outcomes. Tomorrow's lectures and videos continue in this theme, and will deal heavily with the question of organizing and campaigns. So, for tonight let's think on a macro-level about these issues--particularly how they are reflected in the Williamson article assigned for tomorrow.
In the article, Williamson articulates the multiple levels, actors and positions involved in an international campaign for justice in a maquiladora. Who were those actors, and what were their tactics? Did some actors behave in unexpected ways? What type of relationship existed between institutions in the United States and the worker's struggles in Mexico? Considering the complexity of William's story, and the article's negative tone, were their successes? What were they?
Great work everyone!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 comments:
The story of the Han Young maquiladora that William tells is a rather confusing one that Williams says can be divided into two levels: those operating regionally and locally, and those operating federally and internationally. There was an excessive number of parties involved which only complicates the matters further. On one level are the workers, specifically Emintario, a disgruntled and injured worker who started the mobilization against the Han Young factory. Assisting Emintario in his case was Mary Tong, an organizer for a labor rights advocacy organization. Another obvious actor was the Han Young factory and its management officials who impeded the workers' fight for justice, especially shown when they refused to show up for a contract signing ceremony. Also involved were union officials, both corrupt and honest. An unexpected result came when the local chief of the government agency in charge of labor affairs gave in to the workers' request for a union election. On the other hand, there were government officials working against the Han Young employees such as Governor Hector Teran Teran who immediately fired this local chief that conceded to the workers. Another unexpected behavior came when state labor authorities with the JLCA board refused to make the results of a voice vote official despite a large number of witnesses being present. While there were many other parties involved in this case such as activists, the White House, Los Pinos, etc., these major players depicted by Williams illustrate the complexity of this issue.
There seemed to be both a strained and cooperative relationship between different groups and institutions in Mexico and the U.S.. Mexican labor officials felt the conflict was "the work of foreign subversives." They saw the situation as "an attempt by the United States labor movement to destabilize Mexico's maquiladora industry." In contrast, a cooperative relationship can be seen in the way the U.S. attempted to work on behalf of the struggling workers.
Despite a seemingly huge defeat for the workers in the Han Young factory, I think some success can be found in the coverage that this conflict received. It expanded outside of Mexico to make more people aware of the injustices going on. It is possible that companies will be less likely to violate labor laws for fear of bad publicity and lawsuits. Though there does not appear to be any great success resulting from the workers' struggles, it is better they mobilized and exposed the injustices they faced rather than letting the maquiladoras continue these practices behind closed doors.
Williams’ story is full of various actors, illustrating the complex networking of labor activism. I agree with Tracy that the many actors could be divided into two groups: local actors and global actors. For union activists and workers, the author suggests that the case was important because it was ‘typical’ and represented widespread corruption in the workplace. For foreign politicians, this was a unique case to assert concern and international political clout regarding labor rights.
Specifically, the workers organized themselves in a grassroots manner. Words of dissent spread throughout the factory, a house meeting was held, and then the protests began. Activists worked alongside workers as they fought for a legitimate union election and facilitated networking among other existing organizations dealing with labor issues. However, for every action various actors countered the work of the insurgents, including the labor authorities, police, local government (ex Gov. Teran Teran), and the thugs! Among others. Throughout the article, it became less clear to me why these actors insisted on asserting their corrupt, cruel power. Han Young was hands down more reasonable than these other people, and the maquiladora probably had more monetary issues at stake. On the more global level, Washington took it upon themselves to address the labor rights with Mexico City. The involvement with NAO is emblematic of this level of involvement. I loved reading about activists protesting Hyundai at the anti-World Trade Organization—on some levels supporting the workers, but otherwise participating without getting their feet wet. I also loved the ‘positively postmodern moment’ about the South Korean’s conspiracy theory.
The media was a ubiquitous actor, functioning on many levels.
I was surprised by the active role of ambiguous ‘thugs’. But I am also interested in the late judicial action by the Mexican government, and amazed by the police’s cruel and undemocratic response: telling the court to try to enforce their injunction themselves.
I don’t know what it’s like to feel this magnitude of defeat after two years of fighting the system. But on paper, it looks like they succeeded in creating a struggle for those in power.
This brings up that idea of self-determinism. In the end the workers no longer worked for Han Young and they didn’t get their independent union, which could be a sign of failure. However, the workers succeeded in altering the political and cultural environment of their maquiladora. It also seems like if we follow Ben Marquez’s three steps for successful organizing, the Han Young workers got to step two—negotionation—many times. Unfortunately each time, the person in power used corrupt tactics to trick the workers and deny them their union contract.
Williams describes two types of actors: regional/local and federal/international.
Main actors in the Han Young factory struggle included the workers, who allied themselves with multinational corporations and organized from the ground up to form protests, the press (both international and domestic), which informed the local and international community of the atrocities, labor unions and their PRI loyalist corrupt officials, which served as a way of silencing the workers’ demands for a legitimate union, Mary Tong and the Support Committee for Maquiladora Workers and the Authentic Labor Front, which linked the workers’ struggle to the international labor movement, local police, which served as the muscle for the local government’s suppression, the US and Mexican federal governments, which passed legislation and applied pressure to negotiate with the workers, state governments, which defied federal decree and continued the suppression through false concessions, lies, fear, and violence, and also the Han Young factory management, The National Administrative Office, Hyundai, and more. Over time, this issue grew and grew into a complex stew of issues, actors, and consequences. I have learned about transnational solidarity networks before through Keck and Sikkink’s “Boomerang Model” in terms of international human rights. The Boomerang Model explains how local people, powerless on their own to pressure an authoritarian government, for example, team with international networks in powerful states which can aid the powerless people and create pressure from above and below for the violators. This article showed how this system could backfire. Reliance on the international community can lead to eventual defenselessness, for the international community has a short attention span. Also, some of the more ruthless violators of rights will use the press as a way of scaring future activists out of attempting anything.
Although the workers’ struggle failed in the short term, there may have been some long-term successes. For example, The Authentic Labor Front, the workers, and their allies were able to reverse decisions like the unwillingness to hold union elections. Negotiations occurred with great success, only the concessions were never actually made. While getting to the stage of negotiations did not help the Han Young workers, their ability to get that far is inspiring to a certain degree, and future activism planners can look at how the Han Young workers got even that far and replicate it, or alter it as needed. Also, this experience acts as evidence of NAFTA causing harm to the poor on the border. It works in “exposing” labor guarantees as “frauds.” A US citizen buying a shirt that was “hecho en Mexico” can no longer with a clear conscience assume that because good labor laws have been signed, her purchase of that shirt does not contribute to a human rights problem. She must accept the possibility that those laws have been broken, and so the free trade that got her that cheap product may very well be tainted with the suffering of others. Perhaps she will think twice before purchasing with this knowledge. This struggle also led to anto-WTO protests in the US against Hyundai, in one day making the company lose thousands of dollars.
Most of the tactics used did not surprise me; however, a few amazing acts of arrogance did shock me. After a federal ruling that a strike was legal, local authorities stormed the maquiladora and suppressed the protest without any attempt at subtlety. The NAO of NAFTA took to trial and denounced Han Young, but by the time the ruling came out, the company had already illegally fired its workers, packed up, and moved. With incredible gall, Han Young opened up again in Tiajuana in violation of the law, and operated throughout three federal court rulings against it. Clearly, the federal government has no real power against this company, and Han Young knows it. The Labor Board also shows a great amount of arrogance. CTM outright claimed that the workers had voted for it as their union representative, and did not even take the effort to support those claims with believable evidence.
As stated above, some benefits did come from this short-term disaster. What is does demonstrate, unfortunately, that international networks do not work as well in reality to promote human rights as they do on paper. People lose interest, federal governments (domestic and international) cannot sign an ideal into reality, and ruthless people will exploit the media to instill fear into anyone who even thinks about challenging them.
This case represents an ensemble of actors that used multiple tactics to beseech what they wanted to attain. A main contributor to this case although indirectly was the media, who at first had strong influence in what was portrayed to the public, but after the arduous case, lost much steam in terms of effective and accepting news coverage. This makes a lot of sense, just as with any story, even those dealing with social liberties, such as the Jena 6, are huge in the news at the onset of the incident, but once these matters reach long trials, many stories become those of yesterday. Other contributors were CROC who proved to be very scandalous, there main tactic was to make promises they would not keep. The workers whose efforts were very brave in their striking and taking over the plant, voting for an independent union, and testifying, were still silenced. The main reason being that despite hard work from various U.S., Mexican, and Canadian unions and institutions, the Mexican government refused to grant rights that would affect all other matters with the same “issue of worker democracy”. Factors leading to this were the adverse response from Washington to blow the issue up from a typical case to an extraordinary case to get appropriate attention. This surely angered President Zedillo, to create an stalemate which he did through black mail to the Hundai plant, who although it was in their best interest as far as press is concerned to heed whatever the laborers asked, contended to the terms of CROC and Zedillo.
The case was a flop in terms of any goals being reached, but the issue proved useful. Positives that resound from this case are that there is an indication that there is an increasing opportunity for activist networks to speak out about in uniform ways. Also, the case indicates the ability of activist to mobilize actions across borders. Although strikes and unrest may be observed by other parts of the world, this case involved networks from the U.S, Canada, Mexico, and Korea. A plant of less than 100 became an issue that effected thousands, and even more today.
The actors of the issue involve international press, domestic labor union, a multinational corporation, state government, U.S. and Mexican governments, lobbiers, District court,regional and national media in U.S. and Mexico,and presidents of the U.S. and Mexico.
The tactic the workers took was establishing the workers' connection by talking directly to each other to build social tie for walkouts and demonstrations. This is exactly the same strategy as Prof. Marquez discussed yeasterday about cold anger and hot anger because Erminitario had strong motivation to endure difficulties to make social change. The organizer saw passion and will to commit to the issue to make improvement in Ermintario. They used reachable available resources such as lawyers guild, community organizers, and power of collective individuals to make the working conditions better. Workers intentions of raising public awareness was mainly to improve the conditions in maquiladoras, but the U.S. institutions intended to raise public awareness to pressure from top to bottom by consumers and companies to protect their brand images.
They were successful in publicizing the workers' working conditions in maquiladoras through international, national, and regional media interventions especially in U.S. The case brings the issue of corruption, but it also discusses the issue of general public and people involved in the issue become reluctant to make change due to long duration of dealing with the problem. As the time goes by, people tend to shift their interests because the process does not bring immediate success after certain period of time to keep them motivated. It is also a success that workers in Han Young factory and others found more precise interests to puesue activism because the organization is present to serve what they need the most the moment of actions.
This reading by Williams reflects a prime example of how small groups in the SW do make change in the environmental justice struggle. Many times it is thought that only transnational help can bring big change because the small groups are not powerful enough but what is overlooked is that change must come from within. I think that the reason that the Han Young case got so much attention was largely because these were workers who cared about their lives, their jobs, and their rights. It made it very easy for national organizations to come in and help progress the movement and the fight against the maquiladora they were against.
This article clearly shows the different levels on which challenging authority can operate. As we see here it can operate on a local level as well as on a global level. The small group of 100 workers started it when one realized that they probably all share a similar view on their treatment in maquiladoras. The large scale gets put into effect when the word gets spread and people realize that this is an injustice and that they can help. One thing that helped a lot was that currently there is a large and growing concern for injustice. There are more activist groups that are vocal and mobile.
In this reading the actors are the local organizations, the national organizations, and the maquiladora. There are also probably small groups that helped from other places that might not necessarily be labeled national organizations. The small group, the local one, comprised of the people directly affected chose to strike and demand. When the larger organizations were brought in they donated money, organized letter writing that filed cases with NAFTA, and etc. It is easy to see that the large groups helped, but they worked from an outside safety zone which may have limited the overall success in the end. I actually think this is why there was no implementation of the agreements. No one followed through. If these national organizations were going to make a difference, this is something vital to the outcome; solving problems requires more than just confrontation and support, you also need the social demands to be executed, put into practice, and maintained. I guess this would be unexpected in my opinion because I would assume that if they got involved they would follow through until the change was evident. Unfortunately, this didn’t happen.
However, despite the failure for those workers that protested, I think there was success that evolved from this case and this struggle. It clearly showed how international support does not always mean success will follow. I think that the success made depict how small groups that are directly involved draw large support and can incur change. I think in this case they got unlucky. But, clearly there was something special that evolved from the ashes of this case. Hopefully it can be a story that inspires other workers who want to challenge maquiladoras or colonias or any injustice. What more people need to do is use failures as fuel for their campaign. They need to embrace stories and learn from mistakes so that they can construct a strong campaign with few weaknesses and they will be able to increase the likelihood of success.
Heather L. Williams “Of Labor and Legal Farce: The Han Young Factory Struggle in Tijuana, Mexico”
The actors in this article were primarily composed of international and local groups and organizations: the Han Young Factory, Ermintario and other workers at the plant as well as Mary Tong and the Support Committee for Maquiladora Workers, international media, national labor unions, a multinational corporation, state governments, the U.S. and Mexican congresses, powerful private-sector lobbies, Mexican district courts, labor secretariats, national and regional media in Mexico and the United States, and eventually then Mexican president Ernest Zedillo and then U.S. president Bill Clinton. Though there were a plentitude of powerhouses involved with this case the actors who controlled the decisions ended up being the local authorities of Tijuana, not federal or international actors as one may have expected, but the supposedly lesser authorities who easily became bigger authorities with many bribes, threats, and physical assaults given to others.
Local authorities used tactics to stop all efforts by the independent union to gain financial benefit from worker violations by forming a union such as health and safety problems, low wages, and anomalies in seniority and job classification as well as other poor working conditions and receiving severance pay. Blatantly corrupt methods were involved to stop any form of arbitration extending this fight for justice for two years without any monetary evidence of success. The ‘War of Attrition’ or the action or process of gradually reducing the strength or effectiveness of someone or something through sustained attack or pressure was used very effectively in the Han Young Factory Struggle in Tijuana, Mexico. This case made it obvious that the private sector had become more seasoned in countering labor protests as they countered every single effort made in support of the Factory workers of the Han Young Factory.
Various actors in this case study behaved in unexpected ways such as the media immediately and strongly covering this case and then when the workers received constant corrupt defeats not covering the case and helping in making success impossible and showing the limitations of maintaining campaigns across national borders. Mexican government officials not certify election results in favor of the workers not once, but twice, and also threatening the Han Young factory saying that they would never let them run their factory again if they negotiated with the independent union was completely and publicly corrupt. It seemed like unnatural authoritarian behavior, especially since no consequences were given and the corruption continued. Not allowing the factory workers to sell the remaining industrial equipment for distribution in lieu of severance pay which was a normal practice and hiring thugs to act as workers and then moving the factory to a different part of Tijuana and hiring new workers from Veracruz who end up becoming a part of the case against the Company shows the cycle of almost fanatical behavioral corruption.
The relationship that existed between institutions in the United States and the worker’s struggles in Mexico were many. Institutions in the US wanted to help the worker’s struggles in Mexico, but by helping they just added fuel to the fire. The author mentioned that transnational social mobilization and the institutional arrangements that bring various groups together like treaties, and bodies that attend to rights-based grievances also heighten repressive forces that weaken such networks over time. It was argued by Mexican officials and the attorney for the South Korea-based Han Young Company that foreigners were trying to put pressure on Mexico and this was a major standing point the local Mexican government took in fighting against the cause of the workers. I believe the argument had a bit of truth because I feel the US will hardly every get involved without having our country’s benefits in mind, but in this cause many were just fighting for worker autonomy and union democracy. Under no circumstances did the local corrupt government officials want the first independent union in Tijuana to become a reality.
The successes were few in this case. Williams says that“ After nearly two years of conflict, the case ended with all the insurgent workers fired, the factory relocated, and numerous court and government agency decisions in favor of the workers flatly unenforced”. Maybe the only success was the beginnings of some very Cold Anger and resentment.
Post a Comment