They say it was an unprecedented
event. And it was. For many
years, staff at WHO have been
made to believe that this kind of
thing is «just not done here,» it is not in
the culture of WHO staff to do anything of
this sort. And how many times have we
heard staff members themselves saying
that strikes in the UN were not legal.
Whether they were simply uninformed or
misinformed or whether management
propagated this myth to keep staff in their
place, we will never know because on 30
November 2005 for one hour between 10
and 11 staff were out there and the myth
was put to the test.
So what are the issues that brought staff
out? Staff are deeply concerned about management
or mismanagement within WHO –
of staff, budgets, technical work and the
politics of global health. The resulting
impact on the organization’s ability to fulfil
its role as the international health authority
has begun to show both internally and
externally. If the current administration
cannot address the «disease» of internal
mismanagement, how can it expect staff to
deal with growing global emergencies such
as avian flu and the continuing massive
problems of AIDS, TB and malaria. Long
serving staff with expertise and experience
are losing their jobs while new staff are
taken on – and it is not clear that competence
is the criteria being applied to determine
these separations and recruitments.
What is clear, however, is that new appointments
are increasingly political or filial. The
world simply cannot afford to have a dysfunctional
health authority at this time. The
Director General has repeated many times
that staff are WHO’s key asset; we agree
and respectfully request that this view be
given serious consideration.
What was not expected and what took all
staff by surprise however was a message
from the Director General on 29 November
2005 to all staff at HQ and also to staff in
the regions (Africa, Asia, Western Pacific,
Europe, the Americas and the Middle East)
threatening those that went out with disciplinary
action and possible dismissal.
«…I am a member of the Staff Association. It
should serve all our interests. It represents us,
but it is not a union. I know that the majority
of staff in Headquarters are proud of WHO
and are fully committed to their work. I am
therefore deeply concerned and disappointed
at the recent turn of events. I consider that the
Staff Committee’s recent actions in calling for
a work stoppage demonstrate a betrayal of
trust, and are neither in your interest, nor
that of the hundreds of staff who are working
in hardship posts around the world such as
Darfur, Baghdad, and field stations in Africa
and Asia, nor those whom we serve. In view
of this decision, it is my duty and responsibility
as Director-General to bring the following
to your attention:
– We must ensure the continuation of our
work. It follows that staff members who
express an intention to go on strike may be
informed by their respective ADG that they
cannot do so if their work is of an essential
nature.
– It should be noted that staff members who go
on strike are not entitled to be paid for the
period during which they do not work. Therefore,
it is important that staff members
inform their ADG in writing by the end of
today if they intend to participate in the work
stoppage.
– In addition, other measures may be considered,
including disciplinary measures – which could involve dismissal from WHO.
I have consulted with Regional Directors, and
if required, they are prepared to send staff to
Headquarters, in order to ensure the continuity
of our critical work.»
This type of behaviour is an ancient tactic
used to intimidate and scare workers, the
old conquer and divide ploy, first by threatening
dismissal and then by threatening to
bring in strike breakers or «scags» to
replace them. In the present case, what kind
of sense would it have made to bring in staff
from the various WHO offices of India, the
Phillippines, the Congo, Denmark, Egypt,
the US even for ONE LITTLE HOUR! Was
any thought given to those colleagues in the
Regions that perhaps they feel as frustrated
as their counterparts in Geneva and that
they may totally agree with them?
Though not on the same scale as the Haymarket
event in Chicago or similar demonstrations
in NY in the late 1800s or early
1900s, and currently in other regions of the
world, this hour long work stoppage awoke
something in the WHO. The WHO Staff
Association and the Administration are currently
in discussions to see how to proceed.
But what is very, very clear and essential
before anything can be accomplished is that
the threat be withdrawn. Very difficult to sit
at the negotiating table (well we really do
not have the right to negotiate, do we?) with
people who are violating your human rights
and those of the rest of the staff.
