INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE LACK OF V.S. FINANCE IS BEGINNING TO HURT

Press, Volume CXII, Issue 32869, 18 March 1972, Page 16

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE LACK OF V.S. FINANCE IS BEGINNING TO HURT

(By

NORRISS WILLATT

in the "Financial Times," London)

(Reprinted by arrangement)

The sword of Damocles lias been hanging over the staff of the International Labour Office in Geneva for the past 18 months or so. Now, it seems, it is about to drop. The Director-General, C. Wilfred Jenks, has indicated that 140 employees are about to be released. Over the period, a further 170 whose contracts expired have not been replaced.

Such an eventuality has been a distinct possibility ever since the summer cf 1970, when the United States cut off its contribution to the international agency. This action was the result of criticism in certain more conservative United States circles over the trend of 1.L.0. policy, and especially the charge that it was coming too much under the domination of the Soviet Union and its Communist allies. Plunged into crisis Since the United States contributes normally 25 per cent of the total funds levied on the 121 member nations, its action plunged the agency into crisis. Since it was taken in July, 1970, various expedients have been suggested to meet the deficit. Thus, some 900 of the total staff of about 2000 offered to lend the 1.L.0. 5 per cent of their salary; the budget was severely pruned; and the idea of raising an international loan was mooted.

None of these steps has been of avail, and now the Director-General has announced a wholesale economy drive, cutting the budget for the current year from an originally projected $U535.75m to SUS2Bm. He has ordered economies in aid programmes for developing countries, research projects, publications, and the staging of international conferences. Administrative costs also are being slashed. But the most dramatic decision is the proposal to dismiss the 140 employees, with the threat of similar action hanging over additional staff. Mr Jenks, who is British, says each case of redundancy will be considered on its merits, in consultation with the 1.L.0. staff union, and that the whole programme is to be implemented “with humanity.” However, the sackings will certainly tend to reduce the effectiveness of the office, which, anyway, has suffered from the United States action in withholding funds. For the present, the United States attitude seems adamant. It is the outcome of both practical and psychological motivation. In mid-1970, the Americans declined to pay their assessment for the second half of that year which, on the 25 per cent basis, would have amounted to SUS7.Sm from a total budget of about SUS3Om. Nothing was paid for 1971, and no payment presently is in prospect for 1972, when the United States contribution would have been fixed at almost SUSBm from the original total of $U535.75m.

Unfair levy

The American policy is based on a feeling that the 25 per cent levy is both unrealistic and unfair. It was fixed after the Second World War, and reflected the predominance then of the United States in international political, economic and financial affairs. But no attempt has been made to revise it, as other countries have achieved recovery. Today, still, the contributions ’ of the Soviet Union, West Germany and Japan remain, respectively, 10, 4.9, and 2.6 per cent. However, the United States grievance extends far beyond money. For some good time now, the American delegates to the 1.L.0. have been increas- , ingly unhappy over the way ’ the agency conducts its , affairs. The chief cause of complaint has been the habit of certain Communist countries, including notably Cuba, of using the agency as a forum tor political attacks on the United States, which the latter considers a violation of 1.L.0. statutes. The agency is also accused of operating a double standard; for example, by investigating complaints of anti-trade union policies in Right-wing countries, such as the Greece of the Colonels, while ignoring similar charges involving countries of the Left. It is also alleged that the 1.L.0. devotes too much time and money to the problems of developing countries, neglecting the very real problems which at present preoccupy the governments of the industrialised countries in their dealings with organised labour. Programmes for countries in the course of development now absorb over 50 per cent of the budget.

Choice of delegates

Above all, some groups in the United States, especially those associated with the nowadays highly conservative and anti-Communist American Federation of Labour-Congress of Industrial Organisation, have persuaded themselves that the 1.L.0. has become virtually a tool of the Soviet Union. This suspicion seems to have increased since in the spring of 1970 Wilfred Jenks succeeded the American, David A. Morse, as DirectorGeneral; and, more particularly, as a result of the subsequent nomination of a Russian, Pavel Astapenko, as one of the five Assistant Director-Generals. Exception was also taken to publication in the agency's bulletin of an article commemorating the 100th anniversary of the birth of Lenin. The Americans also have

never liked the way in which the 1.L.0. chooses its delegates. Each of the member states appoints four representatives (two from government, and one each from management and labour) from whom are elected the governing body, consisting of 24 representatives of govern-] ment, and 12 each of the other two groups. In theory, each of the delegates has an independent vote, but in practice, according to American critics, all those from a Communist country tend to vote as a bloc, which gives them an undue preponderance in the decision - making process, compared with other countries, in the case of which delegates from management and labour, for example, may on occasion, take different sides.

The disillusionment arising from all these doubts and criticisms finally com-

municated itself back to the United States Senate, where a veto on the payment of further American contributions until the alleged abuses were corrected, was voted in 1970, and which has not since been reversed. Not only has this produced the current ] wholesale budget slashing, : but it has held up plans to build a new 1.L.0. headquarters in Geneva. The impact of the threatened dismissals has been severe enough to cause 700 other employees to stage a sympathy protest. Yet, unless the United States decides to pay up, this may be only the first of such misfortunes; Mr Jenks has warned that further layoffs may occur. Nevertheless, the most ominous feature of the whole affair is the disaffection of the United State* from one of the major international agencies.