Mexican Labor News & Analysis

Alert on Behalf of the Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas (SME)

More than four months since President Felipe Calderón sent the police to occupy the electrical facilities in central Mexico, liquidated the state-owned Light and Power Company, and terminated 44,000 workers, their union and many of those workers continue to fight for their jobs, aided by other unions. This past week in Michoacán, thousands of teachers, members of the National Coordinating Committee (la CNTE) of the Mexican Teachers Union (el SNTE), held demonstrations throughout the state in support of the fired electrical workers.

On October 10 of last year, Felipe Calderón sent police, at first hundreds and eventually thousands, to occupy the electrical facilities in Mexico City and surrounding state in Central Mexico. He simultaneously announced the liquidation of the Light and Power Company and terminated the 44,000 workers, thus effectively destroying the Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME). At the same time he announced the liquidation of the company and later arranged for it to be absorbed by the Federal Electrical Commission, another state-owned electrical company. Workers from that company, members of the pro-government Sole Union of Electrical Workers (SUTERM) together with Mexican Army electricians, replaced the SME members.

The Latest Blow

The latest government blow to the union came on Feb. 27 when the Mexican Labor Board (JFCA) rejected the SME’s claim to represent the Light and Power workers in upcoming negotiations and its action of filing strike notification as required by law. The Board denied those claims arguing that since no contract now exists, there can be no revision, and, since the Light and Power Company no longer exists, the union could not represent workers at the company. The Board also argued that the SME has never had a contract with the successor companies which absorbed the former Light and Power Company.

Speaking in Culiacán before that ruling came down, Martín Esparza, general secretary of the SME, referred to President Calderón as a “fascist” who was filled with “class hatred for the workers” and who had carried out a “coup d’état” against them. Esparza averred that Calderón’s ultimate goal was the privatization of the electrical industry and other state-owned companies. He said that workers would respond to the president’s attack on the unions with a general strike on March 16.

The Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME) continues its fight for the reestablishment of the Light and Power Company, for the survival of the union, and for the jobs of its members. Hundreds of thousands in Mexico have responded in major demonstrations, and the union has also begun to reach out for international solidarity. Please do everything you can to support them!

Call to Action: Please Support SME:

1) by sending letters (see draft below);
2) by organizing delegations or demonstrations at your local Mexican consulate; (see talking points below) and/or;
3) by making a financial contribution (the union’s assets have been frozen). You can help provide material support to the fired workers and their families through a tax-deductible donation to the AFL-CIO Solidarity Center’s Mexican Electrical Workers Relief Fund. https://co.clickandpledge.com/advanced/default.aspx?wid=20780

Since the message you deliver and manner in which you decide to deliver it may depend on your relationship with the consulate in your area (a number of Mexican consulates are very active in defending the rights of Mexican workers in the US), we leave it to you to determine the best course of action in your area and to modify the following letter. The important point is to support the SME’s request by letting the Mexican government know that many of us in other countries are aware and outraged about their blatant violation of labor rights.

If there is no consulate in your area, please at least send a letter and help publicize this alert.

Sample Letter

The following letter was sent by Grassroots Global Justice (GGJ) - please adapt as you see fit:

Felipe Calderón Hinojosa
President of Mexico
Los Pinos
Mexico D.F.

Dear President Calderón:

We are writing to you on behalf of the Grassroots Global Justice Alliance/La Alianza Popular Para La Justicia Global to express our continued outrage about your government’s actions in issuing a decree liquidating Luz y Fuerza del Centro, sending federal police to occupy its facilities, dismissing some 44,000 unionized workers, as well as refusing to recognize the elected leader of the Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas (SME) and freezing the union’s assets.

These actions violate both Mexican law and the commitments assumed by Mexico before the international community, specifically conventions 87 and 98 of the International Labor Organization, as well as the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC).

We are aware of the response by various representatives of your government which seek to justify these actions based on allegations of inefficiency and excessive cost. However, with all due respect, these concerns are beside the point since according to one of our most active member groups, the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America, you were legally bound to address them in negotiations with the SME.

Instead, without any due process, disregarding Article 123 of the Mexican Constitution pursuant to which the SME is recognized as a union and the ILO conventions to which Mexico is a party, your government failed to negotiate with SME and even bypassed the Mexican Congress in summarily liquidating Luz y Fuerza del Centro. Simply because you believe that a collective bargaining agreement is onerous does not give your government any right to disregard it.

Moreover, the actions taken in discharging all of the employees without notice and pressuring and providing economic incentives to accept severance pay, thus relinquishing their legal rights; acting unilaterally without negotiating with SME, interfering with the internal affairs of the SME by refusing to recognize its elected leadership and freezing its assets; and failing to apply the well established principle of successor or substitute employer leave little doubt that this was done with the intention to destroy the SME, one of the few independent and democratic unions in Mexico and eliminate its contract. While we do not claim to be experts in Mexican law, we have no doubt that these actions violate ILO Conventions 87 and 98, as well as the NAALC.

We therefore strongly urge that you immediately take the following steps:
• Revoke the decree liquidating Luz y Fuerza del Centro;
• Reinstate the workers and respect their employment and labor rights;
• Respect the Mexican Electrical Workers’ Union’s collective agreement;
• Unconditionally recognize the SME’s democratically elected union leadership and rapidly conclude good faith negotiations with them for a just resolution to this dispute;
• Unfreeze the union assets.

Our alliance and other organizations around the world will be closely monitoring your government’s actions in the coming period, and look forward to your response.

Sincerely,

Grassroots Global Justice Alliance/La Alianza Popular para La Justicia Global

Emails should be sent to:

“Felipe Calderón Hinojosa” ,
“Lic Fernando Gómez Mont” ,
“Lic Francisco Javier Lozano Alarcón” ,
“Lic Francisco Ramírez Acuña” ,
“Lic Carlos Navarrete Ruiz” ,

with copies to:
“Martín Esparza” ,
“Benedicto Martínez FAT UNT”

Chronology of Conflict Between Mexican Government And Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME)

Since October 11 there have been continuous marches and demonstrations, many legal actions, and legislative discussions and proposals. Below we provide some of the most important dates.

September 10, 2009 -- Felipe Calderón's Secretary of Labor, Javier Lozano, declares that there have been irregularities in the Mexican Electrical Workers Union's election process.

September 28, 2009 -- Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME) warns that Felipe Calderón's government has plans to seize the Light and Power Company's electrical facilities. SME calls for support from other unions and movements.

October 5, 2009 -- Mexican Secretary of Labor Javier Lozano refuses to recognize Martín Esparza, general secretary, and other union officers of the Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME), declaring their election invalid. The Union is left without a legally recognized leadership.

October 11, 2009 -- The Calderón government sends the Federal police to seize Light and Power Company facilities, liquidates the company, and fires 44,000 workers, which would effectively eliminate the Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME). President Calderón states that the company is being eliminated because it is inefficient.

October 13th, 2009 – The Asset Transfer and Administration Service (SAE), as LyFC Liquidator, brought a special proceeding before the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board (JFCA), requesting approval of the termination of the individual and collective labor relations due to an alleged “force majeure” or Act of God based on the government’s argument of excessive costs and inefficiency and that it could no longer afford to pay what it had negotiated under the collective bargaining agreement with the union.

October 15, 2009 -- More than 150,000 Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME) members and families, other labor unions and social movements march to protest the government's seizure of plants, the liquidation of company, and rally in the Zócalo, the national plaza.

October 31, 2009 -- Federal Judge Guillermina Coutiño Mata temporarily blocks the dissolution of the Light and Power Company. Labor Secretary Javier Lozano says the judge's decision will not stop the government from continuing to terminate workers and give them their severance pay.

November 6, 2009 – SME files a claim with the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board asking as relief for the reinstatement of all the workers that were terminated without a cause due to the federal police’s taking possession of the premises of Luz y Fuerza del Centro, preventing them from providing their services, and to the ruling published in the federal official gazette on sunday october 11th, 2009 suppressing the decentralized government agency luz y fuerza del centro, as well as payment of the earned but unpaid wages, respect for seniority and retirement rights, and assumption by CFE or the SAE of the obligations of Luz y Fuerza del Centro as a substitute employer as provided in article 41 of the federal labor law, etc.

November 11, 2009 -- Mexican Electrical Workers (SME) calls upon other unions and social movements to participate in a national work stoppage and unions and workers in many parts of the country stop work and engage in protests.

November, 2009 – Mexican Electrical Workers (SME) files complaint with International Lobor Organization (ILO) in Geneva.

December 2, 2009 -- The Federal Board of Conciliation and Arbitration declared void Martín Esparza's election as general secretary of the Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME).

December 3, 2009 – SME files legal claims, asking that workers continue receiving health services, as well as their year end bonus and savings dispersal.

December 4, 2009 -- Mexican Electrical Workers summons Mexican unions and social movements to a "symbolic taking of Mexico City" to protest the government's action in seizing electrical facilities, liquidating the Light and Power Company and firing 44,000 workers. Tens of thousands of workers join in the "taking of Mexico City" with marches and a protest rally at the Monument of the Revolution.

December 11, 2009 -- Federal Judge Guillermina Coutiño Mata denies the Mexican Electrical Workers Union's petition for an injunction to stop the liquidation of the Light and Power Company.

January 11, 2010 – Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board rejects the Union’s request that it review the employer-employee obligations between Luz y Fuerza del Centro and/or the Asset Transfer and Administration Service as its Liquidator and between Fuerza del Centro and Comisión Federal de Electricidad (CFE) as defined by the Bargaining Agreement 2008-2010.

January, 2010 Two members of SME’s leadership visit Washington DC where they meet with the AFL-CIO, SEIU, US Representative Eliot Engle, chair of the House Western Hemisphere Sub-committee. They also filed a complaint under the Labor Side Agreement of NAFTA with the US Department of Labor.

February 8, 2010 – Meeting of some 100 Mexican organizations from 25 states resolves to seek agreements necessary to carry out a general strike.

Feb. 27, 2010 – Mexican Labor Board (JFCA) rejected the SME’s claim to represent the Light and Power workers in upcoming negotiations and its action of filing strike notification as required by law.

Current situation: Legal appeals are pending, demonstrations including a permanent protest encampment continue, blackouts continue to affect business and residential consumers. It is anticipated by the union that there will be a decision from the appellate court soon.

Talking Points for Consular Visits:

Express concern/outrage about the Mexican government’s actions in issuing a decree liquidating Luz y Fuerza del Centro, sending federal police to occupy its facilities, dismissing some 44,000 unionized workers, as well as refusing to recognize the elected leader of the Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas (SME) and freezing the union’s assets.

These actions violate both Mexican law and the commitments assumed by Mexico before the international community, specifically conventions 87 (freedom of association) and 98 (collective bargaining) of the International Labor Organization, as well as the North American Agreement on Labor Cooperation (NAALC), also known as the labor side agreement to NAFTA.

Strongly urge that the Mexican government immediately take the following steps:
• Revoke the decree liquidating Luz y Fuerza del Centro;
• Reinstate the workers and respect their employment and labor rights;
• Respect the Mexican Electrical Workers’ Union’s collective agreement;
• Unconditionally recognize the SME’s democratically elected union leadership and negotiate in good faith with them for a just resolution to this dispute;
• Unfreeze the union assets.

The consul may well respond:

1) excessive cost and inefficiency justified its actions.

Response: These concerns are beside the point. Such issues could, and you were legally bound to address them in negotiations with the Mexican Electrical Workers Union, SME. Simply because you believe that a collective bargaining agreement is onerous does not give your government any right to disregard it.

2) They didn’t interfere with internal matters of the union. On the contrary....

Response: ILO convention 87 provides that when the results of a union election are disputed, the labor authorities should submit the dispute to the courts and can act only after an independent judicial authority has ruled on the dispute. In this case the Labor Secretariat withdrew the toma de nota and nullified the elections first, leaving it to Martin Esparza to appeal to the courts. This is one more instance of the government using toma de nota as a political instrument to decide who they want to recognize as a union leader.

3) The court upheld the legality of the liquidation decree when it ruled in the government’s favor. On December 11 Federal Judge Guillermina Coutiño Mata denied the Mexican Electrical Workers Union's petition for an injunction (amparo) to stop the liquidation of the Light and Power Company. The judge declared that President Felipe Calderón had acted in accordance with the law when he liquidated the company because of what he said was its inefficiency and high cost, because in doing so he was putting the collective economic interests of all Mexicans ahead of the individual interests of the employees.

Response: This reversed an initial determination in favor of the union and is currently on appeal. Whether it violates Mexican law awaits a final determination by the Mexican courts. In any case, the government's actions violate international law as well as Mexican domestic law which clearly requires that the new company operate as a substitute employer.

4) They engaged in high level talks with SME before taking these actions.

Response: Even if true (and the union denies that there were any good faith negotiations), the government's actions violate international law as well as Mexican domestic law which clearly requires that the new company operate as a substitute employer.

5) The government had nothing to do with freezing the Union’s bank account.

Response: Although they claim that is the case, the union believes otherwise and the reality is that their accounts remain frozen.

6) Most of the workers have already accepted severance pay and no longer have any legal rights to reinstatement, to challenge the government’s actions, or anything else.

Response: While many have accepted severance, they did so under intense pressure – having lost their means of supporting themselves and their families from one day to the next due to action by the government and police – and based on financial incentives. A just legal system will not find that relinquishing rights to challenge illegal action by the government under such circumstances is permissible. In any case, some 18,000 workers did not accept severance and they were not provided jobs with the CFE under the doctrine of substitute employer.

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Alert on Behalf of the The Mexican Miners and Metal
Workers Union (SNTMMRM)

This Alert was sent to us by Labor Notes

Class war in Northern Mexico, being fought in the Cananea copper mine, could soon turn much bloodier. After dissolving the militant Electrical Workers union in October, the Mexican government is now going after 13,000 striking miners, who are determined to hold their ground—and their mines.

The government is “going to try to take Cananea over by force, to eliminate the most powerful independent union in Mexico,” according to Jerry Fernandez, international relations director of the United Steelworkers union, which has worked closely with the miners throughout the strike.

If this happens, it may mean a bloodbath in Cananea, one of the largest copper mines in the world. Owner Grupo Mexico has declared that “the collective bargaining contract with the mining union from today on does not exist,” based on a court decision designed to break the strike.

The workers disagree. The courts did not allow the union to present evidence, accepting the company’s claim that the mine is inoperable—even though it has plans to reopen the mine as soon as the union is broken and the strikers are dislodged. In fact, Grupo Mexico’s chief financial officer predicted this week the mine would return to production by July.

Given this decision, the Steelworkers doubt the independence of the Mexican courts from the federal government’s offensive against independent organized labor.

The miners today in Cananea carry the legacy of their forefathers who struck the same mine in 1905. The murder of 27 miners that year fed working class anger that led to the Mexican civil war and the 1910 revolution—the centennial of which is being officially celebrated by the government this year.

In 2006, Grupo Mexico’s mine at Pasta de Conchos saw an explosion that buried 65 miners alive. The union had previously brought its safety concerns to the company. The miners’ bodies still lie under the rubble, and Grupo Mexico has not compensated the families. The union has called the incident “industrial homicide.”

In 2007, a delegation of independent industrial safety experts found extreme health violations causing deadly lung diseases at the Cananea mine, boosting the Mexican Labor Department’s report on 72 serious safety hazards—which the company never addressed. Grupo Mexico’s refusal to budge on workers’ demands for a safe work environment provoked the strike and occupation.

Already three unarmed miners have been shot down by state forces when 700 agents invaded in 2008. Emboldened by the questionable court decision, Grupo Mexico is asking for the army to go in again. “These miners are tough, they believe in their union, and they’re going to support their rights,” says Fernandez. The USW fears bloodshed will ensue.

The Steelworkers and other allies are calling on the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights, a branch of the Organization of American States, to condemn the planned attack and use international pressure to stop a possible massacre.

Please send an email:

Please send appeals to Santiago Canton, executive secretary of the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights, urging him to ask the Mexican government not to use force against the Cananea miners, lest they become the mourned Cananea martyrs. Email Dr. Santiago Canton at cidhoea@oas.org.

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Miners Dig In and Prepare to Confront Military or Police Assault

By Dan La Botz

Miners at the Cananea mine in northern Mexico have dug in and are bracing themselves for an assault by the army or police that will come within the next few weeks. Grupo Mexico, which owns the mine, has been fighting for three years to break the strike by the Mexican Miners and Metal Workers Union (SNTMMRM) and wants the miners removed. The miners say that they will resist any attempt to remove them from the mine. A violent clash seems inevitable and the question is: will there be a bloodbath?

A Mexican appellate court ruled on Feb. 11 that Grupo Mexico could terminate the 1,200 miners at Cananea who have been on strike since July 30, 2007. The court accepted the employer’s argument that the miners had damaged the mine. Grupo Mexico claims that the miners’ union intentionally sabotaged the mine, though the union denies that charge. The miners, to prove that the mine was not damaged, set the mine to work on Feb. 20.

“We are Prepared to Defend Ourselves”

The Felipe Calderón government appears to be waiting for the court’s written decision before taking action. That the government will take action is not in doubt. The Calderón administration has worked hand-in-glove with Grupo Mexico in its attempt to break the Cananea strike. And Calderón recently used the police and military to destroy the Mexican Electrical Workers Union (SME) that represented workers at the Light and Power Company of Central Mexico. (See article and alert above.)

The miners vow that they shall not be moved. “We are prepared to defend ourselves as we know how, to fight any way we can,” said Sergio Beltrán, national union secretary. In 2006 when police attempted to remove members of the Miners and Metal workers union from the Villacero Steel Mill in Lázaro Cárdenas, Mexico, union members fought back and successfully prevented police from evicting them from the mill—though two workers were killed and several others seriously injured.

Solidarity with Mexican Miners

These, however, are different times and different conditions. The court’s order gives Grupo Mexico the opportunity to rid itself of the union and these workers altogether. The last three years have shown the Calderón administration’s implacable opposition to unions that demonstrate their independence from the government and employers.

While they dig in and brace themselves for the attack, the Mexican Miners and Metalworkers union has taken its case to the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights, hoping that it will intervene. Whether or not the Commission will act quickly enough to prevent violence at Cananea is not clear.

The National Union of Workers (UNT), the independent labor federation, and many independent unions—pilots, flight attendants, telephone workers, university employees, retired railroad workers, technical and professional petroleum workers, and various other unions have sent delegations to accompany the mineworkers and to establish a circle of peace around the beleaguered mineworkers. Representatives of the United Steel Workers, representing workers in Canada and the United States, has also sent representatives to the mine, no doubt hoping that their presence may restrain the Mexican government from using violence against the Mexican miners.

Prepare to Fight and Expect the Worst

Given the situation, the Mexican government can be expected to move against the miners with overwhelming military and police force, using tear gas and concussion grenades and other such weapons to force the miners and their supporters from the mine. The government may also deport foreigners for violation of Constitutional Article 31, which forbids foreigners from becoming involved in Mexican politics.

With thousands of soldiers and police preparing to move against thousands of miners and their families, violence and casualties seem likely.

Alert: Please take the time to send an email

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

The Cananea Court Decision: a Fact Sheet

On February 11, the Second Collegiate Tribunal for Labor Matters of the First Circuit (CT) issued a ruling by a 2-1 vote upholding the decision of the Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board (CAB) allowing Grupo Mexico to terminate the individual labor relations of approximately 1,200 striking workers at the Cananea Mine. This decision, which is not subject to appeal, effectively nullifies the right to strike in Mexico by allowing an employer to fire striking workers based on the mere allegation that the strike is causing economic damage to the company. In this sense it is comparable to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 1938 Mackay Radio decision, which allowed permanent striker replacements. (1)

The Mexican government is now threatening to use armed force to dislodge the workers who are occupying the mine. The Mineworkers’ Union, supported by the international labor movement, has asked the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights to intervene.

Background

The National Union of Mine and Metal Workers of the Mexican Republic (SNTMMSRM) struck three Grupo Mexico mines, including Cananea, on July 30, 2007. The principal issue behind the strike was the company’s safety and health violations. (2)

The Federal Conciliation and Arbitration Board (CAB) ruled three times that the strike was illegal (“inexistente”). Each time the Union appealed the decision to the courts, which overruled the CAB and found that the strike was legal. (3)

Having failed in its attempts to have the strike declared illegal, Grupo Mexico tried a different tactic. It asked the CAB to terminate the individual labor relations of the striking workers, on the grounds that the strike and the workers´ alleged actions of sabotage to the mine equipment had rendered the mine inoperable. In support of its argument, the company presented an inspection report by the Secretariat of the Economy (SE), the government agency that oversees the mining industry. The CAB, after a one-day hearing, accepted the company’s arguments and issued an order on 20 March 2009 allowing the company to fire its entire workforce. The Union and the individual workers appealed to the Second District Judge for Labor Matters in the Federal District (Docket No. 642/09), which declined to reverse the CAB ruling on 6 April 2009. The Union then appealed to the Collegiate Tribunal, which upheld the CAB ruling.

Problems with the Court Decision

There are numerous defects in the Collegiate Tribunal´s decision that violate the fundamental due process rights which Mexico is obligated to uphold both under its own labor laws and Constitution, as well as under international treaties including the American Convention on Human Rights and ILO Convention 87. The key procedural flaws include:

1. Exclusion of individual workers. The company did not provide legal notice to the workers of its intent to fire them. Under Article 375 of the Federal Labor Law (FLL), the workers have the right to mount an individual defense of their jobs, although they are also represented by the Union. This was particularly important because in this case the company was requesting authorization to terminate the individual employment relations, not its collective relationship with the Union. Following the CAB decision, three individual workers petitioned the CAB for the right to represent themselves. On 14 April 2009 the CAB specifically rejected this request saying that this was a conflict of a collective nature.

2. Collaboration between the company, the Secretariat of the Economy, and the CAB. The company brought its case to the CAB on 20 March 2009 using the special procedures of the FLL.(4) The company argued that it became aware of the alleged inoperability of the mine that same day, when it received the inspection report from the Secretariat of the Economy. The CAB, without having time to review some 4,000 pages of evidence or to analyze whether the mine in fact could be operated, summarily granted the company´s request to fire its workers the same day.

3. Force majeure. The company´s fundamental argument derives from Article 434, Section 1 of the FLL, which allows an employer to terminate its workers in circumstances of “force majeure or unforeseen circumstance not imputable to the employer . . . which produces as a necessary, immediate, and direct consequence the termination of the jobs.”

a. First, it is hard to imagine how a strike is not imputable in some measure to the employer´s actions or how alleged damage or deterioration resulting from the strike can be characterized as beyond the employer´s control.

b. Second, the CAB and the CT provided no legal or factual analysis to support their conclusion that a situation of force majeure existed. The CAB simply accepted the SE conclusion in its March 20 resolution presented to the CAB that the mine was “inoperable on account of the situation of force majeure in which the company has been placed.” Yet the company acknowledged in the CAB hearing that its emergency personnel had had continuous access to the mine throughout the strike to make necessary repairs to avoid structural damage.

c. Third, the CAB refused to accept evidence offered by the Union to support its arguments, while accepting all of the evidence offered by the company over the Union´s objections.

d. Fourth, at the same time that it was arguing that the mine was inoperable, the company and the Labor Secretariat were publicly announcing that as soon as they could fire the workers, they intended to bring in replacement workers and resume operations, without the Union. This strongly suggests that Grupo Mexico never considered the mine to be inoperable, but rather simply wanted to divest itself of the SNTMMSRM and the collective bargaining agreement.

e. Fifth, the CAB and the CT overlooked the fact that the mine is property of the Federal Government, which has granted a concession to Grupo Mexico. If the mine is in fact inoperable and can no longer be operated profitably, then the company should return it to the Government.

Threats of Armed Force Against Workers

Following the Collegiate Tribunal decision, the Government has threatened to use armed force to remove the striking workers from the mine. On 10 February, the CAB issued a request to the local Army commander in Sonora to enter the mine to remove explosive materials that allegedly posed a public safety hazard (of course these materials, which are inert unless mixed with diesel fuel, had been in the mine for 30 months without being considered hazardous).

The Government has already demonstrated its willingness to use force to dislodge the miners. In January 2008, after the strike was declared illegal for the second time, the government sent 700 heavily armed federal and state police into the mine in an attempt to dislodge the strikers.(5) On April 13, the day before the CAB issued its final decision, some 500 Federal Police were dispatched to Cananea.

As noted, the Union has filed a request with the Inter-American Human Rights Commission asking it to issue precautionary measures to protect the workers from the expected military attack. The Mexican Senate, in a resolution approved on 16 February, also called on the President to ensure respect for human rights before enforcing the court decision. (6)

Notes

---------
1) NLRB v. Mackay Radio & Telegraph Co., 304 U.S. 333 (1938).

2) See the report of the Maquiladora Health and Safety Support Network at http://mhssn.igc.org/CananeaOHSReport.pdf
3) The CAB declared the strike illegal on August 7, 2007. The Fifth District Judge for Labor Matters in the Federal District granted a temporary restraining order in favor of the Union on August 8, 2007, a preliminary injunction on August15, 2007, and a permanent injunction on October 8, 2007 (Docket No. PRAL 1313/2007 VI). This injunction was affirmed by the First Collegiate Tribunal of the First Circuit on December 13, 2007 (Docket No. RT-2381/2007). The CAB again declared the strike illegal on January 4, 2008. The Sixth District Judge for Labor Matters in the Federal District granted a temporary restraining order in favor of the Union on January 11, 2008 (Docket No. PRAL 1313/2007 VI). However, the terms of the order allowed the company to continue operating the mine with non-striking workers. The Union appealed this order to the Tenth Collegiate Tribunal of the First Circuit, which issued an order affirming the legality of the strike and overruling the District Judge on the issue of allowing the mine to operate (Docket No. QT-04/2008). The Sixth District Judge then issued a preliminary injunction against the CAB declaration on January 18, 2008 and a permanent injunction on February 13, 2008. The CAB then declared the strike illegal for the third time on December 5, 2008. The Fifth District Judge for Labor Matters in the Federal District granted a temporary restraining order in favor of the Union on December 10, 2008 and a preliminary injunction on December 16, 2008 (Docket No. PRAL 2144/2008 IV). The Sixth Collegiate Tribunal of the First Circuit affirmed on March 19, 2009 (Docket No. RT-20/2009).

4) The government asserts that while a strike suspends a conflict of an economic nature, it does not suspend a conflict of a “legal” nature and that it is therefore permissible to proceed with an action to fire the workers even while a legal strike is in effect.

5) See David Bacon, Right to Strike Imperiled in Cananea, The Nation, 25 January 2008, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080211/bacon
6) http://www.senado.gob.mx/gace61.php?ver=gaceta&sm=1001&id=2145

Alert: Please take the time to send an email

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Report on Steelworker Attendance at the Minero’s National Forum for Respect of the Right to Strike in Cananea

On February 19 and 20, 2010, the Mineros held a National Forum for respect for the Right to Strike in Cananea, Sonora, Mexico.

The Mineros have been on strike against Grupo Mexico in Cananea for more than two and one-half years, and in the last few weeks the Supreme Court of Mexico has ruled that the strike is “inexistent” or, in U.S. terms, not protected. This leaves Grupo Mexico free to fire all the employees and break the bargaining relationship with the union, and hire new employees and sign a contract with the company union that they have established at some of their other properties. The only hope for the Mineros now is to build enough political pressure to keep the government from using force to break the strike. The Forum was a part of this effort.

The Forum began on Friday at the Union Hall in Cananea. A crowd of 1,500 to 2,000 heard messages of support from members of the Electricians and Telephone workers, as well as other no-governmental organizations. Manny Armenta, D12 Sub Director, spoke for the Steelworkers.

On Saturday the Forum moved outside to the plant gate. The entire Congressional delegation from Cananea (all from the PRI, or party of the institutional revolution) spoke in support of the Mineros and promised to work in the Congress to force a withdrawal of Grupo Mexico’s concession to operate the mine.

Jim Robinson spoke on behalf of the Steelworkers. During the rally the Mineros operated the mine equipment, giving the lie to the basis for the court ruling, which was based on the argument that thestrikers had left the plant unable to operate through lack of maintenance and vandalism.

The Historic Importance of Cananea and the Parallels to Today

THEN

Cananea and its mine played a very important role in the history of Mexico a history that has important parallels to the struggle of the Mineros today.

In 1906 the mine was operated by an American company and run by a Colonel Green. The Mexican miners were paid less than their American counterparts, and worked long days.

In 1906 the Mexican miners (who were assisted in organizing by Arizona members of the Western Federation of Miners, a predecessor union to the Mine Mill and Smelter Workers, which merged with the Steelworkers in the mid-1960’s) went on strike for an eight-hour day and equal pay with the American miners. In response, the Arizona Rangers and local Sonoran troops, with the support of
Porfirio Diaz government, moved to end the strike. In the ensuing battle 19 miners were killed.

While the strike was broken, the strike helped galvanize sentiment in the country against the Diaz government. For this reason, Cananea is known as the Cradle of the Revolution. Much like Lexington and Concord and the Boston Tea party in the U.S., Mexican School children learn about the strike in Cananea in grade school as they learn about the Mexican Revolution.

In 1906 a Mexican President approved the use of Mexican troops against Mexican workers in Cananea to break a strike against an American company for equal pay with American miners and 19 Mexican strikers were killed.

In 1910 the Mexican Revolution broke out against the same President of Mexico.

NOW

In 2010 (the 100th anniversary of the Revolution) will another President of Mexico again approve the use of Mexican troops against Mexican strikers?

The strategy of the Mineros is to put as much political pressure on the Mexican government as possible. The Forum was, in part, designed to accomplish this. Aside from the presence of representatives of the IMF, the Mexican Electricians the Mexican Telephone Workers, other Mexican non-governmental organizations, and the Steelworkers, the Sonoran Congressional delegation attended. The Sonoran legislature has voted to call for the revocation of Grupo Mexico’s mining concession in Cananea, as has the Federal Senate. The Sonoran Congressmen have vowed to push for that result in the House of Delegates.

Alert: Please take the time to send an email

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Documents of the Movement in Translation

The Morelos Pact – February 15, 2010

Translation by Dan La Botz

Mexican labor unions, social movements and political organizations met in Morelos on February 15, 2020 and adopted a series of resolutions on the current situation in Mexico. We have found various, somewhat different versions of the Pact on the internet. We translate one of those versions here. We provide the source and the list of participating organizations at the foot of the article in Spanish. – Ed.

The Organizations of the Pact Resolve the Following:

1.- We give total support for the student movement struggle at the Autonomous University of the State of Mexico (UAEM) against the imposition of a new university statute—which has its origins in the logic of neoliberalism and privatization that is dominant in the university administration and in government politic. The proposed statute would weaken autonomy, substantially modify university rights, eliminate the university departments and transform them into educational centers, with severe consequences for higher education, as well as eliminate the decision-making ability of the students, workers, and academics. Therefore, we support the meetings and mobilizations which are being carried out by the students and we reject any intimidation or threat which they might suffer in this struggle to defend their rights.

2.- We repudiate absolutely the authoritarian actions of the Federal government in declaring that the Cananea mine workers’ employment has been terminated. The workers have carried out a prolonged strike in defense of their rights, and therefore we oppose the latent threat of the movement of soldiers and federal police to the mine to re-open it, given that the miners have demonstrated the justice of their demands. Though the National Action Party (PAN) government may not understand the historic reasons that gave rise to the Mexican Revolution of 1910, preceded by the repression of the Cananea miners in 1906, the working class of this country must not tolerate an affront of this kind, which is why we join the call for a National Assembly of Resistance to promote a general strike throughout the country in the month of March to support the Mexican Electrical Workers Union and the miners in defense of the demands which were approved at the Social Congress in Querétaro on February 5 and 6.

3. We oppose the implementation of the tax on income (ISR) which the government began to collect on retirees’ pensions, because they gravely damage the possibilities of life for those who physically can no longer labor as they did throughout their productive lives.

4.- We invite [the reader of this document] to participate in the Forum in Defense of Public Education which will take place on February 18 at 4:00 p.m. in the Municipal Auditorium of Tetela del Volcán, to discuss the unconstitutionality of the Alliance for Quality Education (ACE) and the alternative required in the face of the capitalist crisis.

5.- We denounce that the fact that nine years since the firing of hundreds of men and women who worked at Rivetex and Confitalia, they have still not received their full severance pay, which means that the women who worked at these jobs cannot get new jobs at other factories, and meanwhile there have been some deaths without their having received the product of their labor as established by the Constitution.
6.- We ask for support and for solidarity of all the organizations in order to strengthen the struggle of the Mexican Electrical Workers, the miners, and the former women workers at Rivetex and Confitalia, and so we will be taking these demands to forums and assemblies on the following dates. [A list of various meetings has been deleted here.]

Pact for Food and Energy Sovereignty, for the Rights of Workers and Constitutional Rights, by the members of the National Assembly of Social Resistance, meeting in Morelos [on Feb. 15].
Published by Conéctate, infórmate, actúa.

[From another source we have taken this list of participants, providing their Spanish names:

Sindicato Mexicano de Electricistas, STUNAM, GER, Alianza de Jubilados del IMSS, Jubilados del Sindicato Independiente de Trabajadores de Nissan, Confederaciòn de Jubilados Pensionados y Adultos Mayores, Comisiòn Independiente de Derechos Humanos de Morelos, Consejo de Pueblos de Morelos, Organizaciòn Nacional del Poder Popular de Axochiapan, Frente Popular Revolucionario, Partido Comunista de Mèxico (ml), Partido Revolucionario de los Trabajadores, Movimiento de Brigadas M-33, se llevò a cabo la sesiòn del Pacto Morelos en Defensa de la Soberanìa Alimentaria y Energètica, los Derechos de los Trabajadores y las Garantìas Constitucionales en el Campamento de la resistencia electricista en el zócalo de Cuernavaca, donde recibimos amplios informes de comisiones y representantes de organizaciones que tambièn formamos parte de la Asamblea Nacional de Resistencia y del Movimiento Campesino Antineoliberal (MORA) del Diàlogo Nacional.]

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Pemex Leaders Win Registro for New Union, Face Continued Repression

Technical and professional employees of Pemex finally won the right to unionize upon their third attempt. The new union, “Unión Nacional de Técnicos y Profesionistas Petroleros” (UNTyPP), received its registration on December 16, and its leadership was officially recognized for the period beginning March 18, 2008 through march 17, 2012. The first two attempts at unionization (ONTCIP and UNTCIP) were denied registration by the government and the leaders fired.

This time, they succeeded in obtaining a registration after a court battle but a few weeks ago, members were informed that in order to retain their jobs they were required to sign two documents – one calling for the cancellation of the registration and the other a resignation from the union.

The union has issued a call, asking that Petróleos Mexicanos respect the rights of workers under both Mexican and international law, reinstate workers who have been fired for organizing the UNTyPP, including the entire National Executive Committee, and establish a dialog with the UNTyPP leaders in order to create a working relationship between the union and management for the benefit of the business and society.

Technical and professional employees seeking to organize a democratic union at Pemex face an uphill battle because both PEMEX and the STPRM oppose them. A real union threatens not only labor relations but the corrupt practices that have historically characterized the whole operation. This case is part of the IMF´s complaint to the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association on protection contracts (No. 2694).

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Widows’ Lawsuit Seeks Damages over Disaster That Killed 65 Mexican Miners

Information provided by the United Steelworkers (USW)

PITTSBURGH (Feb. 19, 2010) - Families of deceased coal miners killed four years ago in an explosion at the Pasta de Conchos coal mine in Coahuila, Mexico, today filed suit in U.S. federal court in Arizona seeking damages from Grupo Mexico Inc. and related companies.

The lawsuit was filed by the United Steelworkers union in U.S. District Court in Phoenix on behalf of three widows whose husbands were among 65 coal miners killed in the Mexican disaster.

The miners were trapped underground on Feb. 19, 2006 when a powerful methane explosion rocked the mine in the early morning hours of an overnight shift.

Only two bodies were recovered in the immediate aftermath of the disaster before Grupo Mexico called off the search, infuriating family members unable to bury their dead.

The lawsuit alleges Grupo Mexico and the other corporate defendants failed and refused to take the necessary steps to prevent the disaster even though they were informed of unsafe conditions by the Mexican government and the miners themselves.

The defendants also include Americas Mining Corp., wholly-owned by Grupo Mexico and based in Phoenix; and Southern Copper Corp., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Americas Mining, also based in Phoenix.

Citing the blatant and reckless disregard for the lives of the Pasta de Conchos miners, the lawsuit alleges the defendants are liable under both federal and state law for damages.

The plaintiffs do not have a proper forum to bring the case in Mexico and fear possible retaliation, even murder, from armed groups in Mexico, the lawsuit alleges.

The plaintiffs do not have access to a functioning legal system in Mexico to raise their complaints. To the extent the legal system functions, the lawsuit alleges it is “held captive” by powerful economic interests such as Grupo Mexico.

Since the disaster, numerous attempts by plaintiffs and Los Mineros, the union representing the Mexican miners, the miners themselves and the Catholic Church to try to force the Mexican government to redress the problems which led to the mine disaster have failed.

Similarly, attempts by the same groups to force the government to compel Grupo Mexico and its related firms to recover the bodies of the deceased miners from the ruins of the mine also failed.

Grupo Mexico and the Mexican government have waged a four-year campaign of repression and abuse of power against Los Mineros – Mexico’s strongest independent union.

In another situation involving Los Mineros, the USW and other labor unions around the world fear Mexico’s government may use deadly force against striking Mexican miner workers at Grupo Mexico’s Cananea copper mine in the state of Sonora.

Without allowing the union to present evidence, a Mexican court recently ruled that 1,200 workers at Cananea are to be dismissed, a strike they initiated in July 2007 terminated and the union’s collective bargaining agreement with Grupo Mexico be extinguished.

Organized labor and other groups in several countries are asking their governments to refrain from military and police action against the Cananea miners, who are members of Los Mineros.

“The United Steelworkers fears that there could be blood shed if this occurs,’’ USW National Director for Canada Ken Neumann said in a letter delivered to Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper this week on Feb. 17.

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Labor Organizations Present Complaint to ILO Protesting Lack of Freedom of Association on Border

Information provided by the Coalition For Justice In The Maquiladoras

The Telephone Workers’ Union of Mexico, The Coalition for Justice in the Maquiladoras (CJM,) the Democratic Lawyers Association (ANAD), and the labor organizations, unions, and other allied organizations who are CJM members on February 22nd presented a complaint to the Freedom of Association Committee of the International Labor Organization (ILO) meeting in Mexico City.

The complaint focuses on violations of Mexican maquiladora workers’ right to freedom of association and collective bargaining. CJM, maquiladora workers, and CJM member organizations compiled the evidence in the complaint from cases in the maquiladora industry located on the northern border of Mexico. The cases date from 1994, the year the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) went into effect.

The complaint demonstrates a persistent and systematic pattern of violations to the rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining as established in the Mexican Constitution, the Federal Labor Law, and International Conventions 87 and 98 of the International Labor Organization (ILO) as exemplified in the following cases: Sony, Han Young (Hyundai), Custom Trim (GM, Ford & Chrysler), DURO (GAP), LAJAT (Levi’s), y KSS (GM, Ford & Chrysler).

The purpose of presenting the complaint is to denounce and redress violations of workers’ rights by multinational corporations and the Mexican government,, which protects management-friendly “ghost” unions and supports bargaining practices that fail to hold companies accountable. The complaint will provide an opportunity for maquiladora workers to secure enforcement of their rights to freedom of association and collective bargaining, rights that have been eroded within the context of neoliberal economic and political policies.

***

Neoliberal policies over the past several decades have promoted economic integration at the regional levels by implementing free trade agreements like the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), signed by the US, Mexico, and Canada, as the alternative to national and sustainable development for developing countries.

The neoliberal economic model imposed a new labor culture of “flexibility” in labor relationships that has undermined workers’ rights. Like many other developing countries, Mexico was eager to join the global economy and pay the price of complicity with the interests of multinational corporations: a cheap labor force and ghost unions that offer foreign investors protection contracts.

Located on the northern border of Mexico, in close proximity to US consumer markets, the maquiladoras typically sign collective bargaining contracts with ghost unions even before the multinational corporation has begun operations there. The ghost unions agree to protect the company, and exist only on paper because they are not elected by the workers. As result, the workers are not informed that they have a union or collective bargaining rights. Once the workers (most of whom are women) organize themselves to improve their salaries and worker conditions, they face harassment, repression, and arrest by corporations, ghost unions, and the government. Workers who speak out to defend their rights are labeled as trouble makers and may be blacklisted by the company. Blacklisting is a violation of workers’ right to work, to freely associate, and to collectively bargain to improve their work conditions, as established in the Mexican Constitution, the Mexican Labor Law, and Conventions 87 and 98 of the ILO signed by Mexican government.

Although the Freedom of Association Committee of the International Labor Organization (ILO) is taking place in Mexico at this time, and the Mexican government has refused to ratify ILO Convention 98.

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Labor Shorts: Labor Law “Reform” on the Horizon

An extensive document has been circulated to PAN legislators and is expected to be formally presented to Congress later this month. We expect to provide an analysis in our next issue.

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Resources

Mexico Labor Update

Check out Mexico Labor Update on Facebook. It provides current news on key labor struggles and issues in Mexico with a focus on the democratic trade union movement.

Video of SMEReport at San Francisco Labor Council (SFLC) Meeting

Mexican Electrical Workers (SME) Report on Union Busting And Privatization of Their Union at San Francisco Labor Council (SFLC)

Two New Studies on Mexican Migration from the Migration Information Source:

1) Mexico: A Crucial Crossroads
The recent recession has affected Mexicans in the United States, new flows northward, and remittances to Mexico. Francisco Alba of El Colegio de México examines the latest trends as well as Mexican government policies toward the diaspora, Mexico's role as a transit country, and immigrants and refugees and asylees in Mexico.

2) Mexican Immigrants in the United States
Mexican immigrants have claimed the top spot among all immigrant groups in the United States since the 1980 census. In 2008, the country's 11.4 million Mexican immigrants accounted for 30.1 percent of all US immigrants and 10 percent of all Mexicans. MPI's Aaron Terrazas examines their socioeconomic characteristics, where they live, and the size of the Mexican-born unauthorized population.

Back to February , 2010 Table of Contents

Back to Table of Contents of Mexican Labor News & Analysis articles.

Archived MLNA issues.