Education International  EI quarterly magazine,    Double issue : March/June 1998    Selection of articles   The MAI: a carte blanche for multinationals ?  The Canadian Teachers’ Federation and the MAI  What higher education for the 21st century ?  Human Genome and Human Rights: Dignity first   Equality : Visibility and Vigilance  Indigenous People : A question of life and death Dossier : EI's Second World Congress  Introduction  Learning throughout life: myth or reality?  The Financing of Education  How to combine trade union interests with professional interests ?  Educators: Rights and Responsibilities  Building Coalitions for Reform

 

The MAI: a carte blanche for multinationals ?

 

The OECD  negotiations on a Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) form the latest development in a wide-ranging campaign for the liberalisation of trade. This worldwide economic treaty does not aim to regulate the behaviour of foreign companies; on the contrary, it gives investors rights and imposes no obligations whatsoever on any of them. This is an appropriate moment for trade unions to call for the insertion of a social clause as a means of regulating world trade.                                                1.3 billion people live on less than $1 a day. Over 200 million people are working in slavery. Over 250 million children of school age are in work. 80% of world trade is controlled by 40,000 transnational companies. In the last 30 years, the richest 20% of the world’s population have increased their share of world income from 70% to 85%. The share captured by the poorest 20% has declined from 2.3% to 1.4%. 95.4% of the largest transnational corporations in the world are based in OECD countries. Over the last decade, the foreign direct investment (FDI) engendered by multinational enterprises has grown four times as fast as GDP and three times as fast as trade.             "For the time being, the MAI is not dead, but simply in a comatose state; TUAC continues to have reservations concerning its final content”  Roy Jones, TUAC

The financial crisis that convulsed Asia in 1997 does not appear to have dissuaded the 29 OECD countries from easing control over the movement of capital. The MAI, the adoption of which has been postponed, could enable investors to establish themselves wherever they wish, to repatriate all profits, and even to lodge complaints against recalcitrant States.  The MAI will bring the current 1,630 bilateral and regional treaties together into a single agreement. By banning any form of 'discrimination' aimed at foreign investors, the MAI is expected to deal with weaknesses in the World Trade Organisation (WTO) agreement on investment. This also explains why, given the reservations that developing countries expressed about trade liberalisation in Singapore in 1996, Southern countries have been excluded from negotiations on the Agreement.  The United States has now been joined by the other industrialised countries in demanding, on behalf of 'their' transnational companies, that the GATT and later the WTO lay down rules restricting the ability of governments in receipt of foreign investment to issue instructions as to outcomes, including those affecting ownership of national assets, export sales and technology transfer. It is also proposed that restricted or regulated national markets should be opened up to foreign investment. As John Evans, General Secretary of the TUAC (Trade Union Advisory Council to the OECD) explains, "the core concept of MAI is non-discrimination between domestic investors and their capital, and foreign investors."  EI Deputy General Secretary Sheena Hanley, who represented the EI on TUAC working groups looking into the MAI, goes on, "MAI may seem abstract, but the impact on workers and their families could be very real. There is a possibility that such an agreement would encourage even more privatisation. In education, early childhood services, post-secondary education (both technical and university levels) and education support services would be increasingly vulnerable to privatisation as would health care and pension benefits."  Scope of the MAI  If initial projects are anything to go by, States will not be able, under the MAI, to turn down investment for social or environmental reasons. It will therefore be impossible to make a multinational employ local workers or use locally-produced goods. Nor will there be any way of limiting a multinational’s stake in an enterprise, or of forcing it to reinvest some of its profits in the area. Instead, if a country wants to reserve certain sectors for national enterprises and give them subsidies to help them start up, it will have to offer foreign companies the same facilities. The repercussions for developing countries are enormous.  The MAI extends to all investment sectors; and 'educational products' are no exception. This means that transnational companies could argue that the delivery of certain services, such as health care in the public sector and the subsidising of non-profit-making suppliers, is a 'discriminatory' practice. As Bob White, of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC-CTC), explains in an MAI brief, "These concerns are greatest when public services are not delivered directly by governments, but rather through the mix of public, private and non profit-making institutions which characterises the Canadian health and social services sector".  Another dubious privilege is the right of investors to criticise decisions made by individual States . This mechanism would enable private investors to lodge complaints against the host country if the latter did not fulfil its commitments, but a State, its people or civil society would have no right to take on a multinational in return; the Bhopal tragedy in India, which was blamed on the chemical group Union Carbide, shows how such a mechanism is overdue.  According to Sheena Hanley "the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) marks another important stage in the progressive dismantling of the power of democratic governments to regulate the market in the interests of citizens, workers and communities … It would give transnational corporations important new powers  to challenge government policies."  Jan Eastman, President of the Canadian Teachers’ Federation CTF/FCE, adds, "The MAI takes us even further down the road of extreme market liberalization … Our experience with NAFTA has taught us that agreements which are designed to secure and promote the interests of mobile capital do not promote the interest of workers and communities. Wages, working conditions and social standards have been subject to continual downward pressures." In a brief to the Canadian Government on the MAI, the CTF/FCE says the agreement should not be signed unless it contains guarantees giving complete protection to public and social not-for-profit services, particularly education, the health insurance schemes, as well as protection of the environment and labour standards. (see the CTF/FCE contribution on page 4).  Basic standards  Trade unions believe the MAI risks being an unbalanced document in that it is totally unreasonable that multinationals should be given more room for manoeuvre without workers’ rights being protected in exchange. As EI General Secretary Fred van Leeuwen says, "to achieve a balanced agreement, multinationals must undertake to abide by the UN Declaration on Human Rights and the basic ILO standards (e.g. on trade union rights, forced labour and child labour) at the very least; as regards the environment, there is a need to adhere to the commitments made at the Rio Summit. It is also necessary, van Leeuwen argues, to implement OECD and UN principles on the way in which multinationals should conduct their operations. In common with the rights that multinationals enjoy, their social and environmental commitments must be binding and their activities transparent."  The battle for the social clause has resumed, and at the heart of the discussions lies the importance of the respect for basic working and environmental rights being included in this trade agreement. Trade unions are striving through TUAC to ensure that the Agreement includes binding clauses which clearly recognise the ILO’s labour standards. The unions are also arguing that the MAI should contain clauses preventing governments from weakening social and environmental legislation in order to attract foreign investment. Should the trade union position, defended by the TUAC, be retained, the MAI could become the first international trade agreement which includes a social clause.  Such a positive outcome has been advanced by a certain number of European trade unions, based on their experience in dealing with the European Union.  Roy Jones, of TUAC, remains doubtful as to the chances that the final text of the MAI will contain an obligation to respect basic labour rights. The last TUAC plenary session, which met in April, held discussions on this subject with the outgoing chairman of the negotiating group, Frans Engering of the Netherlands.  Southern countries temporarily excluded  As soon as the MAI is concluded at OECD level, it will be thrown open to other countries. Five have already expressed an interest; they are Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Hong Kong (China) and the Slovak Republic.  According to the World Bank, only a third of foreign investment goes to developing countries, and three quarters of it is already cornered by no more than twelve countries. They are led by China, which receives 47% of investment directed at developing countries; the 48 least advanced countries attract only 0.5% of global investment flows.  Developing countries clearly wish to be party to the Agreement. With budgets for development cooperation under constant pressure, investment is not only a source of vital capital; it also means access to new technology and management and commercial skills. However, investment is not automatically a boon for the host country: if multinational corporations do import capital, it means they have adopted a philosophy based on profit rather than on development.  As the Swiss Coalition of Development Organizations  points out, the poorest countries have an urgent need for foreign capital and are often prepared to do anything to attract investors; this might include tax and excise duty exemptions and third-rate social and environmental legislation. The extremely harsh working conditions tolerated in certain Export Processing Zones demonstrate the deterioration that occurs if investors are attracted at any price.  A draft EI resolution on the ILO, the WTO and the globalisation of the economy will be submitted to the Congress for adoption. The draft resolution, while supporting the expansion of trade and investment provided that the objective is to stimulate growth, help end poverty, raise living standards of all peoples and ensure environmentally sustainable development, recalls that the right of access to markets confers the responsibility of ensuring that basic workers' rights be universally respected. EI invites its member organisations to continue to work to promote the inclusion of core labour standards in trade agreements.

 

The Canadian Teachers’ Federation and the MAI

by Harvey Weiner, CTF Deputy Secretary General

The MAI would be more appropriately named the MNI (Multilateral Negotiations on Investment). There is no agreement as yet and the Canadian Teachers’ Federation (CTF) is making its voice heard to ensure that Canada does not sign an agreement that would compromise public services in Canada and the sovereign right of governments to legislate on behalf of all people.

Key issues of concern to CTF are the implications for public education, health, social and cultural policies and programs as well as the impact on core labour standards and the environment. The draft MAI represents a major concern for educators in that it facilitates the encroachment of privatization initiatives in education and would weaken the fabric of public education. CTF’s brief to the Canadian Sub-Committee on International Trade states categorically that any MAI signed by Canada must balance economic and human resource development issues with strong provisions to address social progress, core labour standards, poverty alleviation and environmentally sensitive growth.

We pursue these objectives with the help of our Advocacy Strategy Team, composed of classroom teachers. These teachers meet and discuss issues with federal Members of Parliament. Our provincial/territorial affiliates are also raising concerns affecting sub-national governments and we participate in a broad-based pan-Canadian coalition on the MAI that includes representation from labour, culture, education, health and the environmental sectors.

CTF believes that trade agreements should serve the interests of people first, not those of corporations or investors. There are advantages to regulating investment and ensuring that international rules are established and applied consistently. However, such rules must be subordinate to the right of governments at all levels to maintain control of public policies affecting education, social, environmental, cultural and labour market issues.

Our efforts, in combination with actions taken in coalition, have been successful in raising public awareness of the issues at stake in the MAI negotiations. We recently succeeded in getting Canada’s Minister for International Trade, The Honourable Sergio Marchi, to go on the public record with the following statement: “I want to assure Canadians again that I will not accept an MAI that lacks any of the following elements, among others: ...iron-clad reservations -- at both the national and provincial level -- that completely preserve our freedom of action in key areas, including all the following: health care; social programs; education; culture; and programs for Aboriginal Peoples and minority groups.
In these areas we will not accept any restriction on our freedom to pass future laws, or any commitment to gradually move our policies into conformity with MAI requirements.”

This statement would have been inconceivable as recently as six months ago. However, there are still important issues to address. CTF would oppose a MAI that does not include core labour standards and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises as well as a binding clause that would prohibit governments from attracting investment by weakening domestic labour and environmental standards.

The MAI is just one of many trade treaties that CTF monitors. Vigilance is required to ensure that governments do not dilute their responsibilities by signing treaties that would limit their obligations to protect and enhance public services and to legislate in the public interest.

check information on CTF website

What higher education for the 21st century ?

This is the question that participants in the UNESCO World Conference on Higher Education - to be held in Paris (France) from October 5th to 9th 1998 – will attempt to answer.

For Federico Mayor, UNESCO Director-General, this conference “must be aimed at establishing the fundamental principles which will serve as a basis at world level for in-depth reforms of higher education systems around the world with a view to increasing their contribution towards the construction of peace on the bases of development founded on equity, justice, solidarity and freedom – which requires higher education establishments to be granted autonomy and responsible freedom”.

The three major objectives of the Conference are :

• enlargement of access to higher education systems
• improved management of higher education
• strengthening of the links between higher education and the manufacturing and service sectors
In preparation for this conference, regional conferences have been organised in all regions. These regional conferences have examined the different items on the agenda in the light of their specific characteristics and the major obstacles with which their countries are confronted. Declarations and specific action plans have been adopted in Africa, Asia and Latin America. In Europe, the Forum organised in Palermo merely approved a document reporting the debates and highlighting a number of action principles and proposals. Some additional meetings have also been organised or will be by the different UNESCO partners, to contribute towards the general deliberations.

The conclusions of the International Conference on Higher Education organised by Education International in March 1997 will represent part of EI’s contribution to the UNESCO conference .

Quality, relevance and international co-operation
… will be at the centre of the debates. These three themes will mainly be addressed and debated in working groups, from the most diverse angles such as mass higher education, management of higher education and staff training, diversification of higher education, higher education and the world of labour, technologies and information in higher education, etc.

Apart from the general interest themes, the conference will also look at the more particular interests of students, women and socially or culturally marginalised groups. An NGO forum and various round tables will also be organised.

In taking up the issue of the renovation of higher education and thus underlining this sector as a key element in sustainable human development, UNESCO hopes that after the conference new coalitions will be formed bringing together the academic community, students, decision-makers, institutional leaders, economic circles and numerous groups representing civilian society, in order to guarantee greater consultation for more effective co-operation to meet the challenges of development, for which production and the sharing of knowledge and know-how are crucial factors.

A “Declaration on higher education for the 21st century” and an action plan should be adopted, to guide deliberations and co-operation with a view to meeting the challenges and problems with which higher education is confronted and will be confronted in the third millennium.
 

Latin America : the conference was held in Havana (Cuba) from November 18th to 22nd 1996. The report, declaration and action plan can be obtained from the CRESALC, the UNESCO Office in Caracas  Tel.: + (58-2) 283 1474  - Fax: + (58-2)286 0326 and e-mail: cres@unesco.org  Africa : the conference took place in Dakar (Senegal) from April 1st to 4th 1997. The report, declaration and action plan can be obtained from the UNESCO Office in Dakar. Tel. : + 221.23.50.82. - Fax : + 221.23.83.93. - e-mail : uhkom@unesco.org  Asia/Pacific : the conference was held in Tokyo (Japan), within the framework of the United Nations University, from July 8th to 10th 1997. The report, declaration and action plan can be obtained from the UNESCO Office in Bangkok : Tel.: + (66-2) 3902565 - Fax: + (66-2) 3910866  - e-mail: bing@mozart.inet.co.th  Europe : the conference took place in Palermo (Italy) from September 24th to 27th 1997. The report, declaration and action plan can be obtained from the Centre Européen pour l'Enseignement Supérieur CEPES-UNESCO in Bucarest : Tel: + 40.1.6159956 - Fax: + 40.1.3125367 and e-mail: cepes@cepes.ro - http://www.cepes.ro  Arab States : the conference was held in Beirut (Lebanon) from March 2nd to 5th 1998. The report, declaration and action plan can be obtained from the UNESCO office in Beirut : Tel : + 961-1 82 40 39 - Fax: + 961-1 82 48 54 and e-mail: uhbei@unesco.org

Monique Fouilloux
Coordinator

source : EI Magazine June 1998, page 5

Human Genome and Human Rights: Dignity first

The emotion caused by the birth in 1997 of Dolly, a cloned ewe, has led to widespread debate on human cloning. The UNESCO Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights outlines the moral principles which should be applied to human genetics.

After four years of work by UNESCO's International Bioethics Committee (IBC), the 29th session of the General Conference adopted last November a Universal Declaration on the Human Genome and Human Rights setting out the ethical principles applicable to human genetics.

Ideas that surfaced during the 1980s about issues linked to living sciences led the Director General of UNESCO to set up an International Bioethics Committee in 1991. It was given a dual mission : firstly, to facilitate world-wide debate on the ethical, legal and social impact of the development of living sciences, and secondly to draw up an international instrument on the ethical principles that may be applied to human genetics.

As its President, Noëlle Lenoir, stated a few months ago , the Committee "is unique. As an ethical body, it is pluridisciplinary, pluralist and fully independent of political, scientific or economic power. The freedom of expression of its 55 members, appointed by the Director-General for their competence and experience, has given the IBC's public debates at UNESCO's Paris Headquarters a truly participatory dimension  [...] And the rich diversity of opinion has paradoxically favorized consensus".

First and foremost, this closely argued document sets out to protect human rights and freedoms, while not ignoring the freedom to carry out the research necessary for the advancement of knowledge and the development of research in general. Three key issues are developed in the course of the document; they are the protection of individual human rights, a restated ban on all forms of discrimination based on genetic characteristics, and the promotion of knowledge.

The Declaration also urges member states to "take appropriate measures to foster the intellectual and material conditions favourable to freedom in the conduct of research on the human genome."

Following the Council of Europe Convention on Human Rights and Biomedicine, which came into force in April 1997, the UNESCO Declaration is the first global instrument to apply the great human rights principles to all interventions on the human genome. It also gives expression to the first world-wide consensus on the subject, and embodies the wish of member states to accept their responsibilities regarding one of the great moral and political issues.

It is, of course, regrettable that the document is only a Declaration and contains no binding measures. However, given the problematic nature of the issues covered, UNESCO has opted for the only possible course of action capable of achieving consensus. This course of action is based on reason, and incorporates a desire to guarantee the Declaration's durability by stating those principles of universal validity that will adapt to future scientific developments.

Member states are therefore urged to play their part, seek guidance in the provisions contained in the Declaration and take "appropriate measures", including any legislative and regulatory measures that may be necessary, "to promote the principles set out in the Declaration … and promote their implementation."

The document also places the Committee on an official footing; the IBC will be involved in monitoring the Declaration, and will be specifically charged with identifying practices, such as human cloning, that are contrary to human dignity.

This world-wide Declaration  strengthens UNESCO’s role as the moral conscience of the United Nations. As Director-General Federico Mayor  has stated, "it is an excellent illustration of the ethical strength of UNESCO, able to combine scientific rigour, intercultural dialogue and that forward-looking approach which is the only way of ensuring that when problems arise we already have solutions".

Monique Fouilloux
Coordinator

The Declaration contains a Preamble and 25 chapters set out in 7 sections dealing with human dignity and the human genome, the rights of the persons concerned, research on the human genome, conditions for the exercise of scientific activity, solidarity and international co-operation, promotion of the principles set out in the declaration and implementation of the declaration.
 

Equality : Visibility and Vigilance

Once again EI was present at the meeting of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women in order to defend a progressive vision of women's rights.

This year, trade unionists had a much higher profile at the 42nd meeting of the Commission, held from 2 to 13 March in New York. For the first time, the ICFTU Women's Committee decided to send a sixteen-person delegation, which was joined by EI 's Deputy General Secretary Sheena Hanley and EI's Equality Coordinator Marta Scarpato.

The Commission , which assists the Economic and Social Council, is responsible for monitoring the implementation of the Beijing Action Platform, whose aim is to empower women. On this subject, the UN Secretary General reported that to date only 85 countries have submitted a copy of their respective National Plan for the Advancement of Women, which means that less than 50 per cent of UN member countries have fulfilled the commitments undertaken in Beijing in 1995.

The discussions of this Commission meeting focused on four of the 12 strategic objectives comprising the Beijing Action Platform: the situation of girls, violence against women, women and armed conflicts and - coinciding with the 50th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights - women and human rights.

The Commission also has an 'ad hoc' Working Group, which is currently drafting the Optional Protocol attached to the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. It was hoped that the Working Group would complete its task this year, but this has not been possible due to the reluctance of some governments (including those of China, Algeria, Egypt, Cuba and, occasionally, India) to subscribe to a text which would enable women to have rapid, effective and safe access to the Commission in order to uphold their rights and combat discrimination.

The greatest difficulties and controversies centred on Article 2 (concerning the people who would be entitled to submit a complaint), as well as on the articles concerning the procedures for investigating a complaint, and Article 20, in which a number of countries wish to include reservations on the Protocol. Some governments reject the possibility of certain groups of people (for example, trade unions, women's groups or human rights groups) being entitled to submit complaints on behalf of victims. Other governments are opposed to the confidentiality provisions designed to protect women who have been attacked. Finally, some countries are making their acceptance of the Protocol conditional on the inclusion of a clause containing reservations, which would enable them to limit the full implementation of the Protocol.

The same reluctance to accept a positive language was apparent in the debates on the other issues, which the Commission tackled this year. This shows how much work still needs to be done.

Representatives from the European Union, Canada, Ecuador, Australia and several representatives from Africa (with some remarkable contributions from South Africa) argued in favour of a language which should not be any less forceful than that used in other previously adopted Protocols and which, above all, should not diverge from the approved text of the Beijing Action Platform. Powerful pleas were heard against those who invoke cultural reasons or "tradition" as reasons for limiting women's right to inheritance, reproductive health and full civil liberties.

EI carried out some intensive campaigning throughout the two-week meeting, particularly during the debate on the document concerning the situation of girls and the one on human rights, in order to stress the importance of a number of issues including equal, non-discriminatory and lifelong access to education for girls and women; the role of education as a means of preventing child labour and prostitution; and the role of teachers world-wide in upholding a quality public education system. EI also argued in favour of including ILO conventions in the legal instruments to be used.

However, the purpose of this note is not only to inform you about the results of the meeting. We also wish to stress how important it is that women in the teacher trade union movement resolutely take on the new roles demanded by the changes under way on the international scene. Every year, issues which directly concern women are debated in this UN Commission. Governments attend the Commission's meetings and take for granted that they will not be held accountable by anybody for the positions which they adopt there and which, as we have pointed out, are not always in our best interests, although the Commission's decisions (for example, as regards the Optional Protocol) affect the lives of all women.

This is why we urge women to find out who are the members of their national delegations and what positions they are putting forward on the various issues discussed.  Women must demand that their national delegations comply with the commitments undertaken in Beijing and through other human rights instruments.

Marta Scarpato
Equality Coordinator
 

Indigenous People : A question of life or death

Living in widely differing environments with distinct cultures and languages, Indigenous Peoples, with only a handful of exceptions, are struggling for survival. Their languages, traditions, wisdom and knowledge have disappeared or have been eradicated. Of those that remain, many are, even now, on the very verge of extinction. For EI, there can be no sustainable development for Indigenous Peoples without quality Indigenous education.

“While we know the answers are within us, part of the solution involves organisations like Education International helping Indigenous Peoples to work with those who control and manage the resources and policies”, said Bill Tehuia Hamilton at the first regional forum  on Indigenous People organised by EI. Bill Tehuia Hamilton is Matua Takawaenga (Assistant Secretary Maori Education) of the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI).

For most Indigenous Peoples, education has been used as one of the tools in the destruction of their culture. It has been part of the process of assimilation, a process that has denied them the right to be Indigenous. Around the world, children from Indigenous communities feature at the bottom of indicators of the educational achievement. For these reasons, educators and EI member organisations have a special responsibility to support Indigenous Peoples in their determination to ensure the survival of their knowledge, languages, cultures and the success of their children in their own world and in the world beyond their communities.

At the EI Regional Forums, Indigenous educators told the stories of the struggles of their peoples for survival and recognition in the education system. Ryoko Tahara, a Ainu representing the Japanese Teachers' Union (JTU), told the Asia-Pacific forum of the difficulties Ainu children face in schools, including discrimination and mistreatment. The Ainu are the original inhabitants of Hokkaido, Japan’s northernmost island; and of Sakhalin Island (Russian Federation) and the Kuril Islands (claimed by Japan and Russia).The 100,000 Ainu of Japan were denied any formal recognition until 1991. Yet their language is unique - it is linguistically unrelated to any other language. A report to the Japanese government in 1996 acknowledging their culture and “unique artistic nature” speaks of the destruction of the Ainu community and culture and the impact of discrimination and poverty.

Ryoko Tahara highlighted the complete absence of Ainu history, language and culture in the official curriculum. The JTU has supported the campaign for recognition of the Ainu.

Japan is not the only place that has failed to formally recognise its Indigenous Peoples. The EI North American/Caribbean Forum heard that on Saint Lucia and a number of other Caribbean islands, the Indigenous Peoples are regarded as almost extinct and no provision is made for the survival and support of the community, its language or culture. Children from the tiny Carib community of Saint Lucia are simply absorbed into the mainstream education system. On Dominica, where the Carib language has almost been lost, Carib teachers are beginning to organise themselves for the inclusion of Carib history, language and culture in the official curriculum as well as for greater Carib control over the education of their children.
Damaging effects of forced assimilation

In some countries, the long-term damaging effects of forced assimilation are finally being recognised. Royal Commissions in Australia and Canada have acknowledged the evil that was done to Aboriginal children by removing them from their families and putting them in boarding schools and, in some cases, having them fostered by non-Aboriginal families. The Canadian Royal Commission on Aboriginal People recently concluded that schooling continues to be an alienating experience for Aboriginal students.

Indigenous Peoples of Canada include the Indian (First Nations), the Metis and the Inuit Peoples. According to the 1996 census, 799,010 individuals, approximately 3% of Canadians identified themselves as members of at least one Aboriginal group. Rita Bouvier, a Saskatchewan Metis representing the Canadian Teachers' Federation (CTF) explained that while some attention is given to First Nation and Inuit cultures, languages and histories, the same can not be said for the Metis.

A recent study on child labour in a number of Latin American countries highlighted the vulnerability of children from Indigenous communities. This vulnerability was exacerbated by a lack of access to local schools that used the Indigenous language and which reflected Indigenous values, skills and knowledge in the curriculum. In Latin America, as elsewhere, there are nevertheless exciting examples of successful Indigenous education. All involve Indigenous initiatives and active participation in decision-making. While there is, of course, no one model appropriate for all, the key to success is that Indigenous Peoples are able to determine what is appropriate for them and their children and grandchildren.

The challenge for EI member organisations is to make a space within their structures where Indigenous educators are welcomed as members, are able to participate through all levels of the organisation and, most importantly, are able to make decisions on issues relating to Indigenous education and be supported in those decisions by the organisation as a whole. Already a number of EI members have developed such structures and have reported the benefits that have flowed to the organisation as a whole.

Rosslyn Noonan
Human and Trade Union Rights Coordinator

INTRODUCTION

 
Education: Building the 21st Century

"Choosing a type of education means choosing a type of society. In all countries, such choices call for extensive public debate, based on an accurate evaluation of education systems. The Commission invites the public authorities to encourage such debate, in order to reach a democratic consensus, this being the best route to success for educational reform strategies." Learning: the Treasure Within, Report to UNESCO of the International Commission on Education for the 21st Century, Jacques Delors, 1996.

Education International has taken up this challenge by inviting delegates to the Second World Congress to discuss, throughout the Congress, issues that lie at the heart of the education debate world-wide. This dossier is asking questions, in some cases putting forward ideas for discussion that may be rejected or endorsed. Further discussion on all issues will take place in the Congress during the Round Table Meetings and during the debates.

In the last decade, if not for a longer period, the education systems around the world have been rocked by change. Some say the only constant has been change. Some believe we are only on the periphery of the changes that will require our attention. As educators we can choose to be buffeted in all directions and be the subjects of reform or we can help focus discussion on the issues we believe are important.

Education systems and education unions have always been subject to change. Those with long enough memories may remember the debates on academic versus comprehensive secondary schools. Would education ever be the same if we included both the opportunities for academic and technical vocational education under the same roof ? Should teaching methodology be whole class, group or individual ? The corporal punishment debates were often divisive. Some remember the debates on the rights of primary and secondary teachers to earn the same salaries or even the heated discussions that pre-dated the right for women and men to earn the same salaries. Others recall the discussions on where higher education personnel belonged in organisational terms.  Were they or were they not part of the education sector ? Should education unions open their membership to non-teaching personnel ? In their day, these were all issues of hot debate.

In the last few years what has been different has been the pace and extent of change and the resulting contradictory demands on educators to respond to ad-hoc, short-term initiatives to deal with the educational issue of the day. Societal transition always brings change at an accelerated rate and we are now in the midst of such a transition.

What society are we being asked to prepare students to live in? None of us really knows but we can help define the society we believe should exist and the type of education that will help make it a reality. The education systems we think of must operate within the context of an increasingly global socio-economic and political environment while making education systems relevant to communities.

The speed with which economic change can take place can throw economies into a tailspin virtually overnight. Such economic fluctuations can wipe out the efforts of years of educational initiatives very quickly. While coping with this reality we still struggle with population growth that cannot be sustained, with the wastage of natural resources and environmental damage, with chronic poverty, and sadly even in this year of the 50th Anniversary of the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights, with oppression, violence and injustice.

What is critical in the education sector is that we get the strategies right. Social exclusion, a growing feature of our globalised societies, too often has the face of women marginalised through lack of education. And what about ethnic minorities whose rights, including their education rights, are respected on paper and denied in reality ? What about children who endure the savagery of conflicts and then are left to fend for themselves ? What about Indigenous Peoples whose knowledge and traditions find no place in the mainstream of education ? Will we remember some 250 million children subjected to backbreaking, mind numbing labour from their earliest years ? What society will be thrust on them? Will the society we help define through the education systems we envisage include them?

Studies looking at the creation of a positive relationship between school and community should be based on a sense of shared purpose; respect for differences, agreement on core values; acceptance; participation; trust; communication; collaboration; commitment; reciprocity; conscious choice; accountability; shared responsibility; efficiency; equity; perceived skill; openness and cohesion. These requirements are not addressed only to those who work in the education sector alone but to all who believe that quality education is a right. Governments, parents, educators - from pre-school to those who provide opportunities for life-long learning - and all of those in between, must accept this challenge. The advent of the 21st century receives great media coverage. In education, the 21st century has already arrived through the presence of every student in every classroom. We hope this dossier will raise some issues for debate.

Sheena Hanley
Deputy General Secretary
 

Learning throughout life: myth or reality?

"The concept of lifelong education is one of the keys to the 21st century. It goes beyond traditional distinctions between initial and continuing education."

145 million children aged 6-11, 85 million of them girls, receive no education despite a commitment from all governments at Jomtien  to make basic education universally available by the year 2000. Close to 885 million adults (65% of them women) are illiterate.

Issues and obstacles
As we approach the end of the 20th century, the evolution and globalisation of technology, changes in the organisation of work, and the development and dissemination of information are ensuring that employees, workers and all citizens have a capacity for ongoing adaptation. Today, we must all be prepared to accept geographical mobility, undergo periods of unemployment, and perform a number of different jobs in the course of our lives.

Basic education can no longer meet these demands as well as it used to. The updating of knowledge and the acquisition of new knowledge throughout our working lives has become an obligation and a requirement. However, it is not just a question of a 'vocational' vision and economic imperatives; lifelong learning must also enable every individual to control his/her future and exercise what the Report of the International Commission on Education for the 21st Century calls active citizenship, in other words responsible citizenship.

Experts are unanimous in believing that basic education will have to play a key role if this process of learning is to be successful. In fact, research and statistics show that, when basic education is of high quality, it arouses a wish to learn and a desire to continue doing so.

Building on solid foundations
We all agree that basic education must be made widely available, if possible, from infancy onwards. The Education for All Forum  noted that "although it is now increasingly accepted that education and stimulating activities carried out in early childhood have an enormous potential and a particular role to play in the development of children's ability to learn, their well-being and their general development, there are still many countries where the sector is still something of a poor relation and continues to be seriously under-developed."

Pre-school education and early intervention programmes in OECD countries  are key components of a strategy aimed at giving everyone an equal chance to begin with, and helping children in danger of academic failure. Most European Union countries share this objective of teaching children to live in society: some, such as Denmark, Germany, Ireland and the Netherlands, see pre-school education as complementary to a child’s family life; others, like Belgium, France, Italy and Spain also aim to initiate children in the techniques of learning at school .

Reducing inequalities or creating new ones?
There is a feeling that the inadequacy, not to say the absence of initial training and basic education is seriously undermining the potential of lifelong learning. People with a good basic education are more able to take advantage of complementary forms of education or training, and there is a danger that the development of continuing education might widen the gap between those who do have a satisfactory standard of basic education - and those who do not.

There is an even greater risk of the creation or accentuation of a split between, on the one hand, a small number of people who are able to move around in a continuously changing society and, on the other, the majority who feel increasingly marginalised, accept events passively, and are totally powerless to influence their collective destiny. We cannot ignore the danger of a weakening of democracy and an uprising on the part of those who feel excluded. There are many such signs of marginalisation, and they are backed by recent figures; they may be observed both within countries and in comparisons between industrialised and developing countries.

A recent comparative study  published by the Hamburg-based UNESCO Institute for Education (UIE) contains data relating to Canada, the United States, the Netherlands, Poland, Sweden and Switzerland. Its conclusions show that these countries are experiencing what might be referred to as a "silent explosion" of organised adult education activities, but that the benefits are unevenly distributed. A disproportionate percentage of the educational provision made available to adults is aimed at people who already have an education and a job, and are relatively young. Significantly, the beneficiaries are mostly men, and men are most likely to have their training paid for by the employer.

The authors also report on the emergence of a "two-tier education society". The study concludes that participants accumulate benefits, although adults who do not have access to extended basic education also tend to participate less and have to overcome major socio-cultural barriers. They also say we are "undergoing a period of cumulative educational practice".

The authors of the OECD report "Lifelong learning for all"  also say that a growing proportion of the economically active population in OECD countries is managing to join "the high-skill, high-wage learning economy [but] the division between those who are included and those are excluded are sharp and could deepen."

The same trend is to be found in the European Union. A survey undertaken for the European Commission as part of the European Lifelong Learning Year (1996) clearly indicates "the relationship between the wish to learn throughout one’s life and the standard of education".

This leads naturally to the question of unequal opportunities referred to above: unequal opportunities in basic education, unequal access to continuing training, and academic failure. Energetic measures must be taken to reduce these inequalities, particularly by giving a real "second chance" to those who have not properly had the benefit of a "first chance"; this especially applies to girls and women, as well as children and adults belonging to minority or marginalised groups, or living in rural areas.

Adult education in today’s world
The key issue for adults in developing countries is the importance of responding to fundamental educational needs. However, these needs evolve over time. We must step outside the narrow conception of basic adult education, and identify a more "relevant" education that both prepares them for the realities confronting them and provides them with the wherewithal to carry on learning as their living conditions improve.

The volume of adult continuing education, and particularly continuing vocational training, in industrialised countries has grown substantially since the early 1970s. Their main current objectives are to enable people to enter, or resume, employment, accept vocational mobility, and acquire a better standard of living.

Boosting human and financial resources
Lifelong learning is designed to facilitate individuals’ vocational and personal development so that they can more effectively integrate into economic activity and society. To achieve this, as the Hamburg Declaration on Adult Learning  reminds us, we need "a rethinking of content to reflect such factors as age, gender equality, disability, language, culture and economic disparities".

Against such a backdrop, the active involvement of teachers and the public education system is crucial. The transformation of education and training through social and economic processes and the use of information and communication technology will naturally mean that education employees receive better training, that is to say both basic education and on-the-job training. However, it is important to bear in mind that, although teachers’ initial training has now become a matter of concern for education authorities, the same cannot be said for on-the-job training; this is often poorly organised, where it exists at all, and is inadequately funded.

The public education system needs to organise itself in such a way that it fosters lifelong learning; in fact, the latter should be articulated in ordinary educational missions. However, such missions run into several difficulties in industrialised countries, mainly because continuing education has become a lucrative activity governed by the laws of the market place. The public sector therefore has to adapt, and meet this challenge in a competitive setting. It must also respond to criticism from employers concerning the failure of education and training to match the requirements of the workplace.

In these circumstances, there has to be appropriate funding to allow public sector institutions and staff to play their role, and respond more effectively not only to the requirements of employers but also those of individuals themselves.

Although lifelong learning is seen as a long-term investment, the question of funding has been ignored in most quarters. Yet it is of crucial importance. Funding is what allows us to move from a recognition of the entitlement to education to an effective exercise of that right; a major effort must therefore be made by the main 'funders', that is to say the State and the employers, although consideration will be eventually given to the possibility of individuals financing their own studies.

This should not blind us to the crisis that has forced the governments in some countries to cut education budgets and allocate derisory amounts to adult education, in some cases even abolishing it altogether. A UNESCO estimate suggests that adult education accounts for less than 2% of the entire Latin American education budget and that overall budgets themselves are falling. As a result, governments in some parts of the world are now handing the delivery of basic adult education over to the informal sector, mainly NGOs and voluntary organisations.

If lifelong education is a passport to the 21st century, the world community has to make up its mind. Either we stand back and allow military spending to top 800 billion dollars a year, or we identify the funds necessary to invest in education and training.

Monique Fouilloux
Coordinator
 

The Financing of Education

This article is based on a report from EI's Standing Sectoral Committee on Secondary Education on the financing of education and does not necessarily reflect EI's policy. The contributions to this dossier aim at exploring a variety of issues and as a result raise questions, which could be viewed as provocative. These questions will be discussed in the Round Tables at the Congress.

Spending on education boosts economic growth. No doubt about that. Countries experiencing levels of high economic growth have spent large sums on education. World Bank analyses show that investments in education can explain up to 30% of GDP growth in Sub-Saharan Africa from 1956-1983. In East Asia, investments in education have been credited with fuelling the economy. State spending on education must therefore be seen as a necessary medium and a long-term investment. Failure to provide a quality public education system could lead to a flight into private schools and increasing social inequalities.

While there should be no debate about the need for all countries to allocate sufficient funds for a high-quality public education system, it is not easy to establish international norms regarding the proportion of state resources, which should be allocated to education. It can at least be agreed that the actual levels of funding must be consistent with the development needs of the nation, and it could be proposed that up to 7.5% of GDP should be targeted for education funding: costing between 18 and 25% of tax revenue.

As regards sources of funding, a number of proposals can be discussed. One option is a specific tax to fund the education system. Other means of increasing the funds available to education could be an “Education with Production” model, in which institutions build in the capacity to generate income by coupling a student’s training with production. However, there is a danger of this approach becoming more focused on production than education. Another proposal includes the possibility of significant tax incentives for contributions to education. This can assist, provided the contributions are made to a general fund.

Problems with the financing of education
It is clear that in most countries, developing or developed, education budgets are shrinking in relation to what is expected from the education system. Society demands more of schooling, but expects to get it for less. Conservative agencies place additional pressure on teacher employment, and electronic resources are looked to for more cost-effective delivery methods.

A strong and unified demand must be made for adequate budgets for the provision of quality education. This factor is not always considered when determining or comparing education budgets, although it makes a significant difference. Developed countries have, on average, between 10 and 15% of their population at school, whereas developing countries have a much higher proportion. In South Africa for example, nearly 60% of the population is below the age of 18, and 25% of the total population is in education. More than half of the population of Brazil is (or should be) enrolled in schools. This places an enormous burden on the limited tax base, and constrains the provision of adequate resources for effective teaching and learning.
 
 

Distribution of funds within education  One of the most heated debates pertains to the levels of spending in different areas. Each position is backed by a particular perspective, in part shaped by the working context, but also by a view of the world and the place of education in it.  a) Rich and poor  The budgetary constraints imposed upon almost all education systems around the world have had serious implications on the attainment of social equity in the classroom. In many countries, differences in enrolment rates explain one-third of inequalities in income distribution. The higher the average level of schooling, the more equal the income distribution. Coupled with the benefits of education in non-economic domains (health, fertility and so on), and the inter-generation effects of such benefits, education is a means for a society (or parts of it) to escape from poverty.  Unions in developing countries, inspired by this analysis, have developed a policy calling for positive discrimination in favour of the poor, as well as incentives to attract good teachers to rural areas. Special opportunities for minority groups, and education counselling for all who are peripheral to the system, should be provided. Others argue for a position of “fairness” in the distribution of funds, possibly based on an index of needs.  b) Basic - higher education  An unbalanced funding of higher education - to the detriment of basic education - is apparent in many developing countries due to international trends and also to a quest for status. This has been based on the belief that higher education presented a better return on investment, in that higher education provided the specialised skills needed for economic development. This argument has since been criticised, and comprehensive data that suggests otherwise is available.

c) Personnel to other costs  It is often argued that when personnel costs exceed 70% of education spending, resources are inefficiently allocated. In some countries, this figure exceeds 80%, which can make for inefficiencies when teachers are employed without the necessary educational resources or facilities. However it is equally true that a teacher teaching for 12 hours a day in three shifts cannot be regarded as an efficient worker. The same applies to a teacher who is responsible for over 600 students.  World Bank research reviews have ranked class size as the last of ten variables which affect the quality of education. The World Bank also argues for the allocation of funds towards other resources (including teacher development) based on calculations regarding the contribution of various developmental measures to the improvement of quality. However, the macro-research of the World Bank reviews does not seem to accord with the actual experience of teachers, and these inconsistencies need to be fully researched by teacher unions.  A central question is whether the teacher-pupil ratio (or class size) is a negotiable matter, or the consequence of a budgetary decision taken by government. Clearly it cannot be both. The relative size of the personnel cost in an education budget is a factor of two variables: the total number of teachers and the average cost of each teacher. If ratios are negotiated, then salaries must be consequential. If salaries are negotiable, then only a certain number of teachers can be employed within budgets. These trade-offs are made in every industry, and education is no different. Lower ratios can only be “bought” by lowering the relative cost of educators.  d) Decentralisation  A move towards the decentralisation of financial allocations to education is apparent in almost all countries, in line with the principles of a democratic devolution of power. A “bottom-up” approach to budgets, with local districts being involved in drawing up budgets and in controlling these, is desirable in principle. However, it is clear that, under a decentralised system, the central state is unable to intervene in ensuring equity within the system, and wealthier communities become protective of their privileged positions.  There are two aspects related to the decentralisation process. One is the decentralisation of financial matters: the collection and distribution of education spending. The other pertains to the decentralisation of decision-making concerning the use of funds. It is clear that these matters are linked, although at different ends of the spending cycle.

 

Local funds for education
With respect to obtaining funds for education, the dominant discourse seems to be one of “partnership”. This partnership is conceived as being between government, the private sector, parents, and other “users of education”, and contradicts the popular understanding of free education. It is grounded in a paradigm of the minimalist state, employs concepts like “user fees”: and “cost recovery”, and is sometimes a euphemism for the State not meeting its fundamental obligations. To protect education budgets from other “urgent priorities”, some countries have legislated that funds earmarked for education must be immediately transferred from central to sectoral and local government accounts.

At the same time, many communities have historically contributed towards education costs, sometimes at great sacrifice. Although there may be no legal obligation on parents to pay for education other than through taxes, there is still a persistent habit in many countries of paying school fees and making “voluntary contributions” which illustrate the willingness among local communities to supplement the funding of education.

Decentralised decision-making in respect of the use of funds is an appropriate model for a democratic state, although it has inherent dangers. What is clear is that, for the purposes of equity, it is essential for the national government to play some sort of redistributive role in education financing. Local government becomes an active allocator of funds, also in pursuit of equity.

Parental involvement in education
This facet of the decentralisation debate is related to the matter of funding, and pertains to parental involvement in the governance of schools and the use of funds. In this area, there seem to be far greater grounds for decentralising authority in education to the level of parents. Local management of schools, within a national framework, would seem to accord with democratic principles. In some cases it is taken that autonomy should be commensurate with contributions - that the more the parents pay, the more decision-making power they should have. It is important, however, to ensure that it does not mean that democracy can be bought, and that only the wealthy have the right to participate.

Many developing countries have argued that parents in particular should be more involved in education, but that in many cases they lack the skills for meaningful participation. In some cases parents have taken part in all stages of educational development, including the choice of site for a school, involvement in its construction, as well as buying the necessary teaching resources. Parents also participate in drafting the school calendar, with due respect for the involvement of children in seasonal activities. With regard to developed countries, it is also argued that some form of co-determination gives other role-players formal power in policy making. A further caution must however be appended, and that is to draw a clear separation of powers between that of governance of schools, in which parents participate, and the management of education, which is the prerogative of professional educators.

Capacity building among teacher unions
The need to build capacity among teacher unions is obvious. The lack of organising capacity is a serious factor which prevents unions from engaging in educational issues, and must be addressed. The employer sector is growing in sophistication, and unions must ensure they keep up to date with new trends and developments in the education field.

Strategies for capacity building include far more effective communication methods, the use of traditional and electronic methods, as well as seminars and programmes. This will enable ordinary members of a union to engage in all aspects of a union’s work.

How to combine trade union interests with professional interests ?

How to strike a balance between trade union interests - covering salaries, employment conditions and working environment - and professional interests - educational policies and pedagogical matters - has been one of the topics recently discussed by the EI's Standing Sectoral Committees.

As long as there have been teacher organisations ... they have been confronted with the dual task of taking both trade union concerns and professional concerns into account.

When teachers in Oslo in Norway formed their first teacher organisation in 1821, the main purpose of the organisation was to provide in-service training for teachers.  Swedish teachers formed their first national organisation in 1880 with three main demands :

1. recognition of the right of teachers to have an influence on policies concerning schools,
2. the creation of a system of comprehensive basic education for all, and
3. the right of all teachers to receive in-service training.

When the Malaysian teachers came together to form the first national organisation in 1926, the aim of the association was to look after the professional, social and economic interests of all teachers.  The legendary former General Secretary of the British National Union of Teachers (NUT), Sir Ronald Gould, wrote in his autobiography; “As a group, we in the NUT stressed duties rather than rights in our struggle for better children’s reading material, running refresher courses and educational exhibitions, producing films about school life, fighting the block grant, submitting progressive proposals to the Plowden Committee and defending the right of the child at all times. I must admit, however, that at times, when we were fighting to improve salaries, it was somewhat difficult to think of duties.”

Shifting priorities
Over the years, teacher organisations have shifted their priorities. On occasion it has been considered important to emphasise professional interests and a trade union approach has been considered too narrow. On other occasions, focusing on the working conditions from a trade union perspective was more crucial. In many countries, there has been almost endless discussion between the teacher organisations which have adopted a trade union approach and those taking a professional approach.

Historically, teachers have always demonstrated a broad interest in improving educational systems. Teachers and their organisations have discussed the suggested educational reforms and they have also introduced ideas for reforms. On occasion teacher organisations have rejected reforms considered by them as educationally unsound. It is however true that most reforms seem to be initiated by governments, sometimes without previous consultation with teacher organisations.

The growing interest in education reforms in general  has forced teacher organisations to reflect on how to deal with these changes. Should the changes be seen from a professional angle, from a trade union angle or can these two perspectives be combined. This has been the starting point for a discussion in Education International’s Standing Sectoral Committees on the means by which teacher unions can bring together trade union and professional concerns in order to influence and implement education reform.

Teachers have to influence education reforms
The increased interest in educational reforms contains three challenges for teachers and their organisations :
1. have the right to be part of the decision-making process of educational reforms recognised;
2. find ways to involve teacher unions in discussions on educational reforms; and
3. find ways to work within teacher unions to organise broad discussions on education reforms.

Basically there are three reasons for teachers and their organisations to try to influence education reforms. And these reasons also make it clear why governments and education authorities should consult teacher organisations about proposed reforms :
1. Teachers have a far-reaching knowledge and experience of the needs of the situation and the life of educational institutions ;
2. Decisions taken about education affect the conditions of service of the teaching profession ;
3. No educational reform can be effective without the agreement and active partnership of the personnel who will ultimately be responsible for its implementation.

The Sectoral Committees have stressed in their reports that teacher organisations should be recognised as a force contributing to educational advance and which therefore should be associated with the drafting of educational policies. Organised teacher participation involves the expression of views through a democratic process. In order to achieve a fruitful discussion between the organised teaching profession and governments, there must be structures where consultations and negotiations can take place.

What to do?
Establish mechanisms for consultation and negotiation is not enough to influence education reforms and teacher unions also need to clarify their positions. This kind of long-term programme must be both visionary and realistic. Visionary in the sense that it formulates long-term goals and objectives. Realistic in the sense that it strives to improve the present situation in the desired direction.

Essential elements in such perspectives are likely to be education for all; equal opportunities; improved quality; an education that improves economic and democratic development in society. Such a vision must also make it clear what role the teachers and their organisations can and would like to play in this process.

The Sectoral Committee on Pre-School and Primary Education concludes:
“To start realising visions, it is important to analyse where unions and employers might have common interests. One such interest could be improving the quality of education. From this perspective it is crucial to start discussing what the government and the union can do to improve quality and what they think the other party should do. Through discussions between government and unions, other measures that could contribute to improving the quality of education could be discovered and elaborated.”

The Sectoral Committee on Secondary Education is asking for “more research to be conducted by teacher unions, and for positions to be formed in terms of research rather than by preconceived dogma. Research, properly conducted, and grounded in action, builds capacity in the union, and enables it to take well presented issues to the public in their quest for popular support on issues. The days of mass struggles on the streets are not yet over, but it also has to be recognised that the modern world requires sophisticated proposals to be put as alternatives in any contest. Such alternatives cannot be generated through imagination - they must be theoretically sound, well analysed and budgeted, and grounded in practice. The ability of unions to conduct organic research must be investigated and supported.”

In a report to the Standing Committee on Vocational Education and Training, Paul Cole (AFT, USA) suggests that: “One important way that teacher unions can bring together industrial and professional concerns in order to influence and implement education reform is by supporting the implementation of industry-recognised skill standards. Skill standards are the specifications that identify the academic, occupational/technical and employability/transferable knowledge, skills and abilities and individual needs to succeed in the workplace and which are required by employers for hiring and promotion.”

In another report to the same Committee, Luis Beamonte San Agustín (FETE-UGT, Spain) said : “As teacher unions, we have to work to ensure that educational reforms are designed and implemented in order to successfully deal with the basic problems of our time: the globalisation of social and economic phenomena, the crisis of social cohesion, the increasing differences between different countries, and the feebleness of governments in the face of the demands of the monolithic ultra-liberal ideology that in many countries is imposing policies of drastic cuts in public spending, causing the public services to be privatised and exposed to the voraciousness of the laws of the market.”

Ulf Fredriksson
Coordinator

Educators: Rights and Responsibilities

Whether we refer to our rights and responsibilities as two sides of a coin or as standing on two legs, the favourite analogies of education unions on this topic, our professional and union rights and responsibilities are intertwined.

Can we speak of quality in education without referring to what makes such quality possible? Class size, support programmes, the qualifications needed to be able to teach effectively, the time necessary to allow teachers to plan, to meet with parents, to discuss with each other, to evaluate students, are all inseparable from the debate on effective quality schools. Traditionally, the route open to educators to influence decisions concerning their conditions of work, and the conditions in which students learn, has been through collective bargaining. Given the changes that are taking place to bargaining structures, are traditional avenues sufficient or do we need to find other ways of functioning?

The removal of collective bargaining rights is cause for concern in itself. Such rights have been dearly won and have improved the situation of educators. In many countries they have provided a better standard of living and brought an end to many paternalistic practices that permeated the education sector. Through collective bargaining, equality rights have been addressed in a highly feminised profession. The fact that women still represent the minority in positions of higher responsibility in education is indicative that much remains to be done.

In many countries, full collective bargaining rights have not been achieved. The introduction of structural adjustment programmes, which excluded input from education unions, was only possible where such rights were removed. In many developing countries where collective bargaining was beginning to emerge, it was crushed in a barrage of legislation that effectively stripped educators of many of their rights.

Historically, education unions have evolved either from associations, corporations or institutes whose aim was to improve the education system, or from unions whose major focus was the welfare of their members. The “single aim” of unions has expanded to include both welfare and professional responsibilities. These developments have taken place at different times in different countries. There have also been times when one aspect of our work as education unions has been emphasised over others, depending on the circumstances facing teachers and education personnel.
 
 

ILO Key Conventions   87 Right to Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise  98 : Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining  111 : Discrimination (Employment and Occupation)  135 : Workers' Representatives  151 : Labour Relations (Public Service)  154 : Collective Bargaining

In addition to the ILO conventions that help safeguard teachers' rights, the UNESCO-ILO Recommendation Concerning the Status of Teachers and the recently adopted UNESCO Recommendation on the Status of Higher Education Personnel are intended to give educators a genuine charter specifying their rights and professional responsibilities.

Time and again it has been noted that there can be no constructive and durable solutions to problems facing education without respect for the basic rights and principles applicable to educators. Availing educators of full trade union rights is not a goal in itself. The rights to organise and to bargain collectively are tools used to provide teachers with the basic rights guaranteed under international conventions that include:

• a standard of living that will allow a family to live with dignity, and not require education employees to work in more than one job in order to be able to feed, house and educate a family;
• conditions of work that permit quality education to be provided for all children and youth.

One would expect that society would require that those who prepare future generations for productive lives be fairly compensated. Reality, however, shows that 70% of EI members live at or below the poverty level.

There is no longer a debate on the difficulty of the work to be done. The growing demands on educators due to the increasing complexity of the job mean that, more than ever, conditions of work and remuneration must allow them to focus all of their energies on teaching as recommended by both UNESCO and the ILO.

But educators surely have the right to expect more from their work.  They should have the right to job satisfaction, something that is critical if governments are really interested in retaining qualified personnel. What job satisfaction can be had in education systems which “name and shame” schools located in poor socio-economic areas and which are deemed to be failing? Will the provision of lesson plans on the Internet really reduce the bureaucratic burden on educators? Surely the development of successful lessons is part of what provides job satisfaction.

There is no doubt that the proliferation of paperwork and meetings required by the management of schools adds hours of bureaucratic red-tape to the workload of teachers. The "Let Teachers Teach" campaign being promoted in Britain has been introduced to remove some of this red-tape and has struck a chord with many teachers who would prefer to spend time designing their own lesson plans, suited to the students in their classes, while others fill in forms.

A survey analysing the concerns of young people in the workforce has observed that, while they are concerned with their salary level they are equally concerned with:

• upward mobility,
• career advancement,
• employment security,
• quality of life on the job,
• skill development,
• having some say in how their jobs are done.

How can these desires be reconciled with current trends in the education sector to employ temporary staff with limited, if any, rights and benefits? When combined with the perception of many in education that de-skilling rather than improving skills is now in vogue, the consequences for attracting highly qualified personnel are important.

The extent to which governments in many industrialised countries have become involved in the daily minutiae of teaching is a cause for concern. Governments have the responsibility to decide on a level of funding for education that will provide the conditions allowing the approved curriculum to be implemented successfully. Ensuring accountability at all levels of the education system is a responsibility that must be shared, as is the responsibility for setting realistic standards.

Additional components necessary for equipping educators to exercise their rights and fulfil their responsibilities include high quality pre-service teacher education programmes as well as opportunities for continuing education. In some countries, efforts are being made to develop a career path for teachers that will recognise excellence in classroom performance and will equate this within promotional structures. This will change the traditional route for promotion in education that was in effect school management. Once again, can such measures be reconciled with the increase in part-time work, with new employment patterns that emphasise temporary work and a frequent redefinition of skills?

The attributes that characterise a profession are high standards for entry, rigorous training to acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to practice, evaluation of practitioners against set standards, counselling for those experiencing difficulty, and participation in the decisions that affect the working environment. In the case of schools, this includes the learning environment.

The involvement of educators and their unions in all aspects of educational decision-making is critical if teachers’ rights and responsibilities are to be equally balanced. When there is an imbalance in any aspect of the conditions that apply to teachers, there will be a focus by the union on correcting that imbalance.

Education unions are coming to terms with the changing context in which they operate. This requires that we review the basic principles that have guided our organisations, identify the key issues that have a decisive impact on educators’ rights and responsibilities and determine how, as unions, we are going to respond.

The fundamental questions that we must address fall into several categories. These include the extent to which education unions must:

• consider what regulatory role they wish to assume for certification and de-certification, professional ethics and criteria for competence. There are those who believe that if education unions do not accept such responsibilities, other agencies will. Recently renewed interest in teacher colleges or other similar regulatory bodies indicates that the issue is of increasing importance;
• review their socio-political role, which has been characterised by the adoption and implementation of policies on human rights and social justice, general philosophies of and policies for education, on social questions affecting the well-being and educational prospects of students. Some may choose to have a broader socio-political role, while others choose a more limited framework. What is important is that this is reviewed in the current context of the changes facing education and the societal context in which it operates;
• ensure a strong pedagogical role in areas of educational research, curriculum development, and professional development of all employed in the education sector;
• play a pro-active role in the defence of individual and collective rights, including the rights of children;
• ensure a bargaining role which addresses - in addition to questions of salaries and conditions of work, pensions and benefits - issues that make it possible for quality education to be provided. Such rights would include participation rights on all aspects of government policy on education, including the resources required to provide meaningful education for all students.

These challenges have to be juxtaposed with the reality in many parts of the world. Educators' rights are being trampled on. The most basic right of being paid for one's labour is regularly violated in education. When governments have bills to pay, an increasingly expedient option is to withhold salaries in education. Many violations are evident in the intrusion by governments into the affairs of education unions. Dismissals, transfers, imprisonment, harassment, disappearances, and even murder still affect our colleagues. Challenges to government policies, no matter what rationale is presented, are frequently stamped out with violence.

Structural adjustment programmes have decimated the education sector in many countries. Funding limits are so inadequate that the choice becomes either a teacher in a class or materials essential to do the job. You cannot have both. Yet we constantly hear that teachers cannot perform their duties properly if working conditions and pay are inadequate. Such statements are quickly forgotten when rights are demanded. In industrialised countries many examples exist of governments using economic difficulties, real or imagined, to reduce the likelihood of direct action by education unions.  This strategy usually develops with an announcement that an economic crisis is imminent. Special legislation is therefore required that limits wages or curtails the allocation promised for education. Collective bargaining cannot be allowed to the education sector because of the looming crisis. Rights gained through collective bargaining are then stripped away through legislation. This increasingly common scenario is generally met with resistance from unions who are then disciplined through legislation controlling union procedures, limiting the use of union funds or imposing new working conditions.

While operating within such an atmosphere, education unions must continue to find ways that will guarantee educators their rights and ensure conditions enabling them to fulfil their responsibilities.

Sheena Hanley
Deputy General Secretary
 
 
 

Building Coalitions for Reform

Trade unions wishing to make their ideas on education reform move forward need allies. Their strength alone - even their representativity – is not enough. Positive strategies which often help to modify the image of trade unions include the building of alliances with parents, discussions with employer associations, and the seeking of support among intellectual and scientific communities.

In her union’s response to the EI questionnaire on partnership practices, Grete Roth, International Secretary for DLF Denmark, said,: "The union believes that a binding partnership is the precondition enabling the party implementing the agreement/reform – in other words, the teachers – to ensure that the result is more than a pipe-dream and empty words on paper." In November 1997, the Danish teachers’ union, the National Association of Local Authorities and the Danish Ministry of Education announced a joint two-year programme called "The Folkeskole 2000".

Jean-Pierre Valentin, National Secretary for International Relations for the French Federation FEN, explains, "We have observed both a change in the government’s basic policy following our proposals for structural reform, and an improvement in the functioning of schools and in employees’ working conditions; this is due to the development of “round tables” to which the Ministry of Education invites the unions and other partners like the parents of pupils, students and a variety of associations."

Teachers’ unions in Sweden are justifiably pleased with a new five-year agreement which formalises the commitment made by the Laraforbundet and LR unions and the Swedish Association of Local Authorities in 1995 to work for pedagogical renewal and to improve working methods in pre-school, compulsory and upper-secondary school.

Broader partnerships
When one tries to think of ways of bringing about positive reforms of the education system, the first thing that comes to mind is a partnership between teachers, represented by their trade unions, and the authorities responsiable for education. Other partners, particularly parents, pupils and students, and employers, are also involved in such initiatives. Public education has got to meet the needs of the whole of society, and a subtle balance therefore has to be found between the varied (and sometimes contradictory) interests of the social, economic, cultural and political groups for which the provision of high-quality education is of major importance.

In Japan, the JTU union has developed a collaborative system of 'school councils' whereby parents’ associations and civic associations discuss the problems that children encounter at school. The JTU has also formalised its relations with the authorities through a seat on the Central Education Deliberative Council.

According to Josianne Thevoz, President of the Swiss SPR, "Partnership with the authorities is now second nature. We do not even talk about it any more. Partnership with parents is more difficult, but great progress has been made."

The development of relations with other groups in society calls for flexibility, as some partners occasionally adopt positions that are neutral, or even opposed to trade union ideas. As in all relationships, mutual respect and the search for consensus must guide those involved.

It is equally true that coalitions can vary according to their objectives; these may include awareness, action and defence campaigns, and the establishment of institutional networks at different levels. For example, the Austrian trade union GOD has begun to collaborate at the local level with parents’ associations and local education committees with a view to integrating disabled children into normal primary education.

Forces for change
By involving themselves in partnership practices, particularly at the local level, trade unions are fostering in their members a creative attitude completely opposed to the way in which certain governments would like to pigeonhole practicing teachers.

This strategy is helping teachers to feel valued and to re-discover a moral dignity that has come under heavy attack in recent years. They now have an opportunity to take part in institutional relationships with other partners, and explain the complexities of their jobs more clearly.

The trade union movement wishes to be seen as a force for change in national talks. Does this ambition mean that trade unions need to re-think their raison d’être? Some people think so; others do not. For their own reasons, unions have often restricted their activities to a corporate defence of jobs. Others have gone further, often because the national structure made it possible; they have sought to play a role in improving the functioning of education systems, and to defend not only their members’ interests, but also those of young people and society as a whole.

The establishment of partnerships also gives teachers’ unions a chance to convince other groups of the importance of conserving the `public’ nature of education in terms of equity and opportunities for young people.

The principles of an effective partnership If an effective partnership is to be established, there are common rules and principles that the various actors need to abide by. They are as follows:

The principle of independence: Partnership does not mean that the partners have to agree on everything; nor does it mean that one of the parties has to play a subordinate role. For example, in the case of partnerships between trade unions and governments, the parties clearly have different roles, and these are sometimes in opposition to each other. Trade unions have to speak on behalf of their members, even when their demands conflict with the government’s position, and governments have to carry on being responsible for the funding and for education policy generally. Governments cannot be the prisoners of trade unions, or vice-versa. In strong partnerships, key responsibilities are clearly distributed between the various partners.

The principle of legitimacy: Disagreements on specific issues should not bring the partnership to a halt; opportunities for disagreement naturally abound. Trade unions get nervous when governments or employers talk about privatising public services or introducing market mechanisms into education. Like most workers, teachers often think that the world of business is only interested in making profits, and this usually by cutting salaries. However, governments are afraid that the unions will only put forward proposals designed to undermine their authority, and sometimes to the detriment of young people’s interests. A true partnership will overcome these suspicions.

The principle of substance: A partnership requires the discussion of substantial issues. To sit around a table and discuss superficial reforms is a pointless and time-wasting exercise.

Given the numerous failures that authoritarian practices have had in the past, it has become a sine qua non of success that reforms should be planned consensually. However, certain matters merit further consideration. Those set out below should be enough to sustain discussion at the Round Table to be held on this subject at the EI Congress:

Participants in the round table are invited to consider the following questions as part of the debate:
 

• What parameters should be defined for trade union partnerships with industry and the business community, both at trade union level and in educational institutions?
• Do partnerships embracing teaching unions and the public authorities affect the ability of trade unions to represent their members’ interests with employers collectively and individually?
• When establishing partnerships with parents, members of the community, local organizations, etc., will the set of parameters governing the partnership be different from that governing partnerships with industry and the business community?
• How can a trade union protect its members and the public education system when it is in a coalition with groups (e.g. minority communities and city-centre activists) that represent other special interests and may not genuinely feel that public education institutions are satisfactorily preparing their children for life?

Elie Jouen
EI Deputy General Secretary