It was the movement which finally toppled the dictator Suharto in 1998 which made Romawaty Sinaga realise that workers and students had to unite to achieve any lasting fundamental change. IN that year, she left her position as an assistant lecturer at the University of Indonesia to build KOBAR, the Workers' Committee for Reform Action, which at the time was the only union prepared to work with the radical student movement.
She was then involved in the May 1999 establishment of the independent and militant Indonesian National Front for Workers' Struggle (FNPBI). She was re-elected the union federation's international officer at its second congress in July.
While still new, the FNPBI is already seen as the most militant of the trade union confederations leading campaigns for a 100% wage rise for all workers, against the subsidy cuts on fuel, electricity, fertiliser and other essentials and against the privatisation and sackings currently being sought by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) in exchange for more loans.
Sinaga was invited to Australia by Action in Solidarity with Indonesia and East Timor (ASIET) to take part in the discussions on "globalisation" and workers' rights which occurred in the lead-up to the S11 actions in Melbourne.
Australian unions, many of which made a financial contribution to Sinaga's tour, showed a high level of interest in the situation facing Indonesian workers, and some are considering the FNPBI's request for Australian unions to sponsor an organisers at $75 a month, as a concrete way of strengthening international solidarity.
The FNPBI is also inviting Australian unionists to participate in the May Day 2001 actions in Indonesia. ASIET national secretary PIP HINMAN spoke with Sinaga for Green Left Weekly while Sinaga was in Sydney.
Which sectors does the FNPBI organise and how many workers does the FNPBI cover?
We are doing that calculation now by re-registering our membership, so it is not possible at this moment to give an exact figure. Roughly, the FNPBI covers 30,000 workers, of which some 10,000 work in the garment and textile industry. We also organise some 5000 maritime workers and about 5000 automotive and metal workers. We also cover workers in the chemical, food, mining, forestry, plantation and electronic industries.
Can you give us an example of the sort of disputes the FNPBI has been involved in recently.
Recently, IndoMobil workers, who assembly Suzuki cars, succeeded in setting up their independent union, getting rid of the former government union (the SPSI) in the process. They had launched a two-week strike to demand a 30% increase in their wages, as they had the lowest wages among the whole automotive sector despite the fact that IndoMobil is a large company. The workers had been asking their former union for assistance, but this didn't happen. The FNPBI became involved and helped them win this reform.
How is your union is different to the other main independent union, the Indonesian Workers Prosperity Union (SBSI)?
The main difference is the way we approach disputes. We always assess the problem from the workers' point of view. Currently, some workers face threats for being union members and of course they are suffering under the economic crisis in which living costs are rising and yet wages are still low. These problems are the starting point for the union to help defend workers' rights.
For example, our demand for a 100% wage rise is based on the minimum cost of living, which is around Rp 400,000 a month ($88). Before the government-decreed wage rise of April 1, workers were earning on average around Rp 238,000 a month ($52). The government increased wages by 25% on average, bringing the average monthly wage up to Rp 286,000 ($63), which still isn't enough to make ends meet. On top of this, the government's policy of cutting subsidies on fuel and electricity will hike up living costs even more.
We will not compromise on the demand for an across-the-board 100% wage rise. It's only a fraction of the pay rises received by senior politicians, whose pay packets increased from around Rp 5,000,000 ($1111) to Rp 10,000,000 a month ($2222) and that's not counting their allowances, which were raised by almost 2000%.
Some argue that our demand for a 100% pay rise will destroy the government's economic recovery plan and that workers should be supporting the government in this objective. But the FNPBI argues that a wage increase would increase workers' purchasing power and in so doing give a kick-start to the economy.
How does the FNPBI intervene in a dispute? For instance, do you send in organisers or do you wait until a local union gets in touch with you?
We do both. Organisers regularly visit workplaces and workers' neighbourhoods and they visit factories where there are disputes. In some instances, where workers have no union and little idea of how to go about changing their conditions, we help them organise actions such as for a pay rise. But before this can happen, we have intensive discussions to hear their ideas and gain their support for any such action.
However, it's a different story when workers ask us for help when they've already begun industrial action. Sometimes workers haven't done the necessary preparation before embarking on their campaign and then find themselves in a difficult situation.
Non-government organisations in the Third World, often with Western government funding, are tending to assume the role unions once traditionally played in the workplace. What is your opinion of this phenomenon?
NGOs have a long history in the movement for democracy in Indonesia. They have sometimes challenged the government, including taking up the working conditions of Indonesian workers.
But the main problem with most NGOs is that they seek to promote consensus between workers and their employers. This promotes the illusion that workers can rely on their boss to do the best for them, and that in return they should do their best for their boss.
In Indonesia, most NGOs do not have an industrial background and they do not involve themselves in workers' rights campaigns. They generally provide education and training to workers which focusses on what they can do once there is a dispute.
But they forget one important issue: the question of workers' rights being defended through their own mass actions. This is one way NGOs reduce workers' resistance to employers and even the meaning of trade union work. Workers' "training" is reduced to education in labour legislation and a reliance on lawyers to advocate on their behalf. Strangely though, NGOs never seem to carry out evaluations on whether their programs succeed or not, that is, whether workers manage to defend their rights or not.
The whole purpose of NGOs is to protect the interests of those forces which back them. In Indonesia, many NGOs are supported by US-AID, whose funding comes from the US state department.
What would you say to some leaders of the union movement in the First World who argue that the best way workers here can help lift labour standards overseas is give more power to bodies such as the World Trade Organisation to arbitrate on fair labour standards in countries?
I don't agree with giving the WTO more power to arbitrate over labour rights in any country, especially the underdeveloped countries.
The most powerful forces inside the WTO (such as the US government) will use the labour rights issue to penalise their competitors in Third World countries, without this benefiting workers in those countries.
For instance, the WTO complained that the Wahid government should not allow special conditions for PT Timor, a local automotive company owned by Suharto's son. The WTO said it would penalise the government, but said nothing about the appalling conditions workers there had to endure, nor anything about the lack of a union to defend those workers' rights.
The WTO will do everything it can to ensure that profits keep flowing to the First World-based transnational corporations. At the same, it cares nothing for workers, anywhere in the world.
When unions in Australia campaign in solidarity with labour rights in Indonesia, they also have to respect the rights of all workers. What is the meaning of solidarity when some workers benefit from the exploitation of the other workers? If the WTO wants to impose more barriers on the importation of goods, will they allow the proceeds of the import tariffs to be given to the workers? I think not.
The FNPBI did not support the call to boycott Indonesia's goods or exclude them from the flow of trade during the height of the Timor crisis last year. We argued that such a move would hit workers the hardest and would have minimal impact on the government.
In most cases, boycotting certain products because the company violates workers' rights generally only puts workers in a more difficult situation. The company can use the boycott not to pay workers overtime or at all. It may even close down the factory, without any compensation to the workers.
In other situations, a boycott can lead to workers being more repressed and being scared to speak out or join a union.
Those concerned about labour rights in Indonesia have to help us pressure our government to formulate laws which protect labour rights. So far, the International Labour Organisation has only been able to pressure the government to ratify the convention standards; they have never been able to ensure that it enforces them in practice.
[For more information on the FNPBI's projects or the May Day 2001 tour, contact