Content uploaded by Kim Scipes
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kim Scipes on Jan 16, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Another type of trade unionism IS possible: The
KMU Labor Center of the Philippines and social
movement unionism
Kim Scipes
Behavioral Sciences Department, Purdue
University Northwest, Westville, Indiana
Correspondence
Kim Scipes, Behavioral Sciences Department,
Purdue University Northwest, 1401 S. US Hwy
421, Westville, IN 46391, USA.
Email: kscipes@pnw.edu
Arguing there are alternatives to the generally moribund
trade unionism currently found in the United States, this arti-
cle presents the Kilusang Mayo Uno Labor Center of the
Philippines, an exemplar of social movement unionism, as
providing one alternative developing among labor organiza-
tions in the Global South. It presents a theoretical discussion
of social movement unionism. It seeks to ascertain if the
KMU is still conducting social movement unionism, or it
has reverted back to economic or political unionism. It
reports a 2015 trip across the three major regions of the
country by this researcher—after six trips between 1986 and
1994—where the situation is detailed and the KMU’sefforts
are examined. It finds that the KMU is still implementing
social movement unionism. It illustrates one alternative to
U.S. trade unionism, and suggests that the workers around
the world might consider learning from a southern labor cen-
ter such as the Kilusang Mayo Uno.
1|INTRODUCTION
Trade unionism in the United States today is in terrible shape. According to the latest available data
(January 19, 2018), unions represent 6.5% of the nonagricultural work force in the private sector, and
34.4% in the public sector, making a total of 10.7% of all nonagricultural workers being currently
represented by unions (Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2018). This is down from 33.4% in 1954.
Worse than sheer numbers, the bigger problem is that the U.S. labor movement has no vision, no plan
to move forward, and no real leadership (see Aronowitz, 2014; Scipes, 2017). This is a dismal situation,
especially if one supports trade unionism, and particularly if one knows U.S. labor history.
1
Many youn-
ger people do not see the relevance of trade unionism today; nor, frankly, do most social scientists.
Yet a narrow, nationalist approach—considering only the U.S. unions—ignores the determination
and innovativeness that workers in some developing countries of the Global South are showing in
their efforts to build strong, powerful, and relevant labor organizations to assert their values and
Received: 16 January 2018 Revised: 6 May 2018 Accepted: 31 May 2018
DOI: 10.1111/lands.12348
Labor and Society. 2018;21:349–367. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/lands © 2018 Immanuel Ness and Wiley Periodicals, Inc. 349
defend their interests. In turn, they are showing North American workers that there is another type of
trade unionism that is possible; that North American workers do not have to be (largely) supine in
face of accelerating globalization (see Scipes, (Ed.), 2016).
2
This is important. As Immanuel Ness documents, using International Labor Organization data,
83.5% of all industrial workers are now found in “transition and developing countries”in 2009:
556.7 million versus 109.8 million in “developed countries and the European Union”(Ness, 2016,
p. 7, Table 1.1). While Ness enthusiastically reports the emergence of unions since the beginning of
the 2000s, in reality, there has been a new type of unionism that has been developing in the Global
South since the late 1970s to early 1980s.
3
To make sense of what is going on, and to understand that these unions are not just another ver-
sion of unionism in the United States, a discussion of labor movement theory can be helpful to illumi-
nate differences.
2|DEVELOPMENTS IN LABOR MOVEMENT THEORY
While there is more than one way to understand labor movements (see Larson & Nissen, 1987), based on
his understanding of new unions emerging in places such as Brazil, the Philippines, and South Africa, a
new understanding of unionism was proposed by long-time labor scholar Peter Waterman in the late
1980s. He called this “social movement unionism.”Waterman's version was surpassed by thinking of
Eddie Webster and Rob Lambert, each of whom had been intimately involved in the development of the
new unions in South Africa. Webster and Lambert's approach was subsequently bypassed by that of Kim
Scipes, an American trade unionist who had been researching the new unions in the Philippines, and who
then entered graduate school to study with Waterman at the Institute of Social Studies in The Netherlands
(this is all explicated in Scipes, 2014b).
The term spread. Independently of this global debate, Gay Seidman used the term “social move-
ment unionism”in her innovative study of the new unions that had emerged in Brazil and
South Africa (Seidman, 1994). Kim Moody, building off of Seidman's work, then applied the term
“social movement unionism”to the new form of trade unionism then emerging in North America
(Moody, 1997).
Use of the term spread widely in North America as well as among some labor scholars in Western
Europe. Unfortunately, it was applied to an incredibly wide range of unions and labor centers, turning
a term that had been specifically developed for a particular type of trade unionism into intellectual
goulash, making it basically unintelligible and threatening to undermine much of the solid research
that had previously been done.
Scipes returned to the debate in 2014, making a special effort to untangle this intellectual mess.
Having a longer term historical and global perspective, he was successfully able to accomplish his
goal. In the process of doing this, however, he then identified three types of trade unionism
globally—economic, political, and social movement unionism—and at least two forms (or subsets) of
both economic and political types of trade unionism (Scipes, 2014b; see Pillay, 2013, for three forms
of political unionism); to date, no one has argued for different forms of social movement unionism.
This expanded conceptualization of trade unionism, it is argued, allows labor scholars and activists to
be more precise in conceptualizing different types of unions as well as enabling people to place
unions theoretically with more accuracy.
More than that, however, is that it allows us to recognize a wide range of trade unionism in the
world today, much of it is very different than that developed in the United States. The greatest diver-
gence is with those labor organizations that embody social movement unionism.
350 SCIPES
3|DEFINITION OF SOCIAL MOVEMENT UNIONISM
According to Kim Scipes, social movement unionism is defined as:
…a model of trade unionism that differs from the traditional forms of both economic
and political unionism. This model sees workers' struggles as merely one of many
efforts to qualitatively change society, and not either the only site for political struggle
and social change or even the primary site. Therefore, it seeks alliances with other
social movements on an equal basis, and tries to join them in practice when possible,
both within the country and internationally.
Social movement unionism is trade unionism democratically controlled by the mem-
bership and not by any external organization, which recognizes that the struggles for
control over workers' daily work life, pay and conditions is intimately connected with
and cannot be separated from the national socio-political-economic situation. This
requires that struggles to improve the situation of workers confront the national
situation—combining struggles against exploitation and oppression in the workplace
with those confronting domination both external from and internal to the larger
society—as well as any dominating relations within the unions themselves. Therefore,
it is autonomous from capital, the state and political parties, setting its own agenda from
its own particular perspective, yet willing to consider modifying its perspective on the
basis of negotiations with the social movements [and political parties] with which it is
allied with and which it has equal relations (Scipes, 1992a, p. 133; Scipes, 1992b,
p. 86, quoted in Scipes, 2014b).
Scipes subsequently provided empirical confirmation of this theoretical concept through his
monograph on the KMU (Scipes, 1996), and then with an article finding that COSATU of
South Africa also fit this understanding (Scipes, 2001).
4|SOCIAL MOVEMENT UNIONISM
During the late 1980s and early 1990s, three labor centers
4
in the Global South were considered
exemplars of what has been identified as “social movement unionism”or SMU: CUT (Central Única
dos Trabalhadores) of Brazil, KMU (Kilusang Mayo Uno) Labor Center
5
of the Philippines, and
COSATU (Congress of South African Trade Unions). They were more than “mere”organizations of
trade unions; they were each key actors in overthrowing dictatorships and restoring democracy in
their respective country.
6
Although there is considerable evidence that COSATU and CUT have sub-
sequently “retreated”from “social movement unionism”into forms of “political”or “economic”trade
unionism during the mid- to late 1990s (Pillay, 2013; Sluyter-Beltrão, 2010), the status of the KMU
was not known; no research had been published on this labor center since the mid-1990s (see Scipes,
1996; West, 1997).
Based on his earlier research, and recognizing that the KMU differs from most other labor
organizations, Scipes (2014a, 2016b) suggests there is much that unions around the world can
learn from the KMU, in addition to the new type of unionism it created (which has been identi-
fied globally as SMU).
7
These things include its unique organizational structure (including verti-
cal and horizontal linkages), which include geographic, industrial, and conglomerate alliances, as
well as a nation-wide gender-based alliance of women workers. It also is exemplary in its
SCIPES 351
dedication to individual member education (i.e., not just limited to shop stewards); building rela-
tions with other sectoral organizations (such as of the urban poor, fisher folks, indigenous peo-
ples, women's organizations, students, peasants, etc.); and its conscious building of global labor
solidarity.
However, what has not been known was whether the KMU was still engaged in developing SMU
or not. To ascertain this, this author returned to visit the KMU during April–May 2015. After travel-
ing around some of the areas in the middle of the northern island of Luzon, he also traveled to the
more southern islands of Mindanao and Negros. What did he find: had the KMU maintained its
dedication to SMU or has it retreated?
This article argues that while the KMU has been battered through industrial relocation and repres-
sion (both legal and extra-legal) over the years, it has maintained its dedication to SMU and it has
been the features mentioned above that have enabled it to survive.
8
5|BACKGROUND
To help readers understand the social context in which the KMU operates, some background is
necessary.
The Philippines is a country of 7,100 islands—about 10 are economically important. It is located
in the Western Pacific Ocean area, with its capital city of Manila sitting about 912 miles east of Viet-
nam, and 746 miles south of Taiwan.
The Philippines was colonized by both Spain and the United States. The islands—all but the
Moro (Muslim) areas in northwestern Mindanao—were colonized by the Spanish beginning in 1565.
The economic system established by the Spanish was one dominated by a small elite with extensive
land holdings, which established export commercial agriculture as its backbone, especially by the
1870s. By this time, independent regional economies “produced a range of commercial crops for
intra-Asian and international markets—tobacco in the Cagayan Valley of northeastern Luzon, rice
and sugar in Central Luzon, abaca (hemp) for sailing cordage in the Bikol Peninsula, sugar in the
Western Visayas, and Chinese foodstuffs in Sulu.”Accordingly, “the archipelago emerged as a series
of separate societies that entered the world economic system at different times, under different terms
of trade, and with different systems of production.”
…in the Philippines, production was more commercialized, or capitalist from the outset
[as compared to Java-KS]. Emerging regional elites consequently played a more entrepre-
neurial role in the growth of the Philippines exports and some local peasantries began to
operate as regional wage labourers. The archipelago thus became the first area in
Southeast Asia to develop indigenous commercial elites employing modern production
methods and a rural wage labour market (McCoy, 1982, p. 8).
However, by 1898, in the first national liberation struggle in Asia, Filipinos had rebelled against
the Spanish and had liberated most of their country. Then, as part of the “Spanish-American War,”
the U.S. Navy destroyed the Spanish fleet in Manila Bay in 1898 and, following, landed U.S. troops
to occupy Manila. As the United States sought to conquer the rest of the country, the Filipinos fought
back and the brutal Philippine–American war ensued; somewhere between 10–20% of the entire
Filipino population, between 500,000 and 1 million people—men, women, and children—were killed
in the Philippine–U.S. War between 1899 and 1903, which the United States ultimately won (see
Francisco, 1973/1987). Eventually, in 1946 (after Japan had invaded and then been expelled during
352 SCIPES
World War II), the United States granted the Philippines its independence, albeit with many strings
attached (see McCoy, 2009; Shalom, 1986).
Since independence, the elite-dominated economy has gone through a number of changes. An
import substitution economic program led to some improvement of the economy, although this was
undermined with what is now known as a neo-liberal economic program beginning in 1962 (see
Scipes, 1999). Opening the economy to foreign corporations so as to enable an export-processing
program was advanced by the Marcos Regime as a way to address the resulting problems, but it left
the Philippines dependent on outside political-economic forces that had no interest in industrializing
and developing the country.
9
During the late 1960s, similarly to others around the world, Filipinos began protesting their elite-
driven economic system, as well as the Marcos government's support for the U.S. war in Vietnam
(see Shabecoff, 1970/1987). One of the responses was founding the Communist Party of the Philip-
pines in 1968, and its' New People's Army in March 1969 (Chapman, 1987, p. 11; see Jones, 1989;
Sison, 1971, Sison & Werning, 1989). As people resisted the government's program, Ferdinand Mar-
cos declared martial law in 1972, placing the country under dictatorship, in an effort to preclude Fili-
pino workers and peasants' efforts to overcome these disastrous policies (see Bonner, 1987).
Another response to the exploitation and oppression of Filipino workers was the creation of the KMU
(Kilusang Mayo Uno) Labor Center on May 1, 1980.
10
The KMU united a number of established unions
and their worker-members from around the country into one militant and nationalist labor center, fighting
exploitation of Filipino workers and opposing the dictatorship. Despite the arrest of 69 of its top leaders
in 1982, and the victimization of many of its members over the years, the KMU and its member unions
played key roles in the 1986 overthrow of Marcos (see Scipes, 1996).
Subsequent to the “People's Power revolution”in February 1986, there have been a number of
governments, each one determined to pay off the dictatorship's economic debts while advancing
plans—some quite grandiose—to develop the country, putting their country even deeper in debt.
Their economic plans all are based on keeping the cost of labor cheap and controlled, whether in the
factories, department stores, or agricultural plantations (see Bello, 2009; Scipes, 1999).
The KMU—in conjunction with women, students, peasants, indigenous people, fisherfolks, and
the urban poor—has led the fight against cheap labor and governmental control. Subject to vicious
repression in the late 1980s—worse than under the dictatorship—the KMU has survived (see Scipes,
1996; West, 1997).
The KMU has also survived political troubles within the larger Left movement. The most important
was the series of political splits within the Communist Party of the Philippines during 1993, which also
affected both below-ground and above-ground organizations of the National Democratic “movement.”
11
Despite what looked initially to threaten the existence of the KMU, the KMU survived the splits:
…all evidence to date indicates that the splitting [within KMU] has been confined to
Metro Manila. Leaders from Bataan, Mindanao and Negros have all confirmed the lack
of splits in their respective areas. Along with this, most alliances with other sectoral
organizations in these areas appear intact (Scipes, 1996, p. 246).
12
The KMU today is organized into nine national federations, each with a minimum of 10 union
affiliates, as well as one regional federation. Some focus on particular industries—such as food and
beverages, hotels, and transportation—while the rest organize any workers they can, into what are
called “general”unions. Its' membership today is approximately 125,000 workers, but its' social
impact is much broader, having earned the respect of Filipino workers and peasants over the past
38 years.
13
SCIPES 353
Still conditions are terrible for large numbers of Filipinos, with massive numbers living in abject
poverty—approximately 6,000 Filipinos leave every day for work in other countries around the
world—although a small “middle class”has emerged across the country. At the same time, and an
ongoing legacy of Spanish colonialism and the resulting Roman Catholic Church, the population has
expanded from 56 million in 1986 to over 100 million in 2015.
6|VISIT TO THE PHILIPPINES, 2015
In April–May 2015, this author returned to the Philippines, with two specific research questions.
First, how has the KMU's international solidarity affair (ISA)—an annual program, unique in the
world, where KMU invites workers and labor leaders from around the world for a 10-day exposure
to the daily lives and concerns of KMU members—changed from 1988, the last time this author had
participated in the ISA (see Scipes, 2000)? And if it has changed, are these changes qualitative? And
second, how has the KMU developed/not developed over the 21 years since this author had last
visited?
As reported earlier (Scipes, 2015), the ISA had remained much the same as in 1988. We had a
formal program welcoming us to the Philippines, although it was much less elaborate than in 1988.
The rest of the program remained basically the same. We spent the rest of the ISA traveling to a num-
ber of work sites around Manila, visiting workers and their unions. We participated in two joyous
marches across Manila, with about 70,000 participants, and ended up with a militant program in front
of the Presidential palace, Malacañang. We subsequently traveled to the Southern Tagalog region
south of Manila, to meet with a number of unions, affiliated organizations, and with staff from a local
labor education center. While the 2015 program did not entail the level of risk inherent in participat-
ing in the 1988 program—we had visited Davao City in Mindanao, where death squads had been
very present and visible (see Scipes, 1996, pp. 89–109)—the 2015 ISA was substantively comparable
to that of 1988.
The larger and more important question was how had the KMU developed/not developed since
1994, the last time this author visited the organization?
7|METHOD
Over six previous visits—during 1986, 1988, 1989, 1990, 1992, and 1994—this author had traveled
widely and engaged in a wide number of in-depth but unstructured interviews with a number of peo-
ple knowledgeable about the KMU. These included KMU leaders from the local-level to the top-level
national leadership, across the country but particularly within the four regional political economies
that were investigated in depth.
14
It also included a number of KMU members, as well as supporters
of the KMU (including a Bishop in the Catholic Church), as well as opponents of the KMU. These
included over 120 hr of formal, taped interviews which the author later personally transcribed,
supplemented with many hours of informal conversation, as well as reading as much as possible on
the Philippines, its economy, and its labor movement, both about the KMU as well as about compet-
ing labor centers. All of this, in turn, was utilized in discussion with labor and Filipino scholars in the
United States, as well as from the United Kingdom and Australia. This material was used to produce
the first (and to date only) nation-wide study of the KMU (Scipes, 1996).
This method had worked so well that it was decided to basically follow the same process during
the 2015 trip, while recognizing that one 3-week trip could not provide the depth of experience, the
354 SCIPES
range of conversations, nor the reflection time available between the earlier trips. It also did not allow
this author the chance to interview people outside of the KMU, neither supporters nor detractors. It is
clear that without the previous experiences, one 3-week trip would be wildly inadequate for making
any conclusions beyond simple descriptions.
Ideally, it would have been desirable to go back into the same political-economic regional econo-
mies, visit the same unions, and talk with the same informants as during the previous research trips.
For many reasons—deaths of individuals, radically different circumstances (such as KMU-affiliated
unions being destroyed by closure of factories/mines), and simple opportunities presenting
themselves—this could not be done.
However, what was done was that this author participated in the 2015 ISA, and took advantage of
opportunities presented during that process (traveling throughout the National Capital Region and into the
CALABARZON area of the Southern Tagalog region on Luzon).
15
He also traveled extensively on the
island of Mindanao, and visited several sites on the island of Negros. Thus, visits and interviews were
done in the three major “regions”of the Philippines: Luzon, Mindanao, and the Visayas.
The KMU facilitated these visits. The ISA was a structured program, so this researcher went to
events on the formal program. He also found and talked with people he had met almost 30 years ago.
However, the KMU International Department secretary contacted KMU Mindanao in Davao City
and NAFLU (National Federation of Labor Unions) in Bacolod City, Negros Occidental—the local
affiliate of a nation-wide KMU-affiliated federation headquartered in Metro Manila—told them of his
requests to visit, and they each developed a program in their respective areas for this researcher.
While the various KMU-affiliated organizations were “chosen”for visits, at no time were there any
limitations on questions, length of time of interviews, or subjects to be discussed in the interviews.
Additionally, while in local areas, the local organization provided opportunities for casual conversa-
tions around meals and other social events, including an afternoon swimming party with activists in a
stunningly beautiful river on Negros.
Modes of transportation varied, as did accompaniment. Travel between islands was by airplane,
but in local areas, we utilized public busses, private vans, taxis, jeepneys, motorcycles, “tricycles with
FIGURE 1 Five men and a boy on a "tricycle with wings," Trento, Agusan del Sur Province, Mindanao, May 2015
SCIPES 355
wings”(Honda 50 cc. motorcycles with a wooden frame around the driver and passenger for hauling
sacks of rice as well as people), as well as walked (Figure 1). At times, travel was unaccompanied,
but other times, someone locally was enlisted to help ensure my safety/provide entrance to particular
communities, but at no time did my “guides”place any limits on who could be talked with nor ques-
tions that could be asked; they simply were provided to facilitate my research efforts.
8|ORGANIZATIONS VISITED/REPORTS AND INTERVIEWS
In the Metro Manila area, we ISA visitors engaged in a number of activities. At a formal introduction, we
were welcomed to the ISA by then-KMU Secretary General Roger Soluta. We were introduced to labor
leaders from a number of locations across the country—including the Southern Mindanao Region (SMR)
and the Caraga Valley (each of Mindanao), from Ilo-Ilo and Cebu City (each of the Visayas), and from
the Bicol Region of Luzon—each who had been brought to Manila to provide various “situationers”(situ-
ation reports) from their respective areas to ISA visitors. Together, we visited picket lines for striking
building construction and recycling workers, and talked extensively with a number of workers at each site.
We joined a march for the commutation of the death sentence of a female OFW—overseas Filipino
worker—who had been caught with heroin in Indonesia, although it turns out she was an unwitting victim
of a drug trafficker. We participated in a two-part march/demonstration on May Day—International
Workers' Day—with an estimated 70,000 people, ending with a cultural program outside of the presiden-
tial palace, Malacañang. We also took a day trip to Cavite (in Southern Tagalog) to get updated on negoti-
ations between a local union and the local Coca-Cola bottler.
After May Day, we traveled more extensively within the CALABARZON area of the Southern
Tagalog for an extensive introduction to the regional KMU alliance, PAMANTIK (Solidarity of
Workers in Southern Tagalog), and its organizational members. There we talked with leaders from
OLALIA (Organized Labor and Line Organizations in Agriculture, the predominant KMU federation
in the area, although most of their affiliated unions today are in industry), as well as with leaders from
organizations that were affiliated to PAMANTIK, such as the KMK (women workers' organization),
LIGA (contractual workers' organization), and STARTER (the regional transportation organization).
We also got an in-depth accounting of the struggles to build genuine unionism at Segara Metropoli-
tan, where plastic parts for cars are made. This researcher also spent hours with the staff of LEADER
(Labor Education, Advocacy, Development, Responsive Services), an independent but pro-KMU
non-governmental organization that provides “genuine trade union”education in affiliation with
PAMANTIK throughout the region (see Scipes, 2015).
After an intensive day-and-a-half exposure in Southern Tagalog, this researcher returned to KMU
National Headquarters in Quezon City. KMU staff had arranged for a number of KMU organizational
leaders from across Metro Manila to meet with him, and those that attended included representatives
of NAFLU and ANGLO (KMU national federations), PISTON (national transportation alliance),
KMU-National Capital Region, and from EILER (Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education and
Research). We had an in-depth discussion of the period since the early 1990s, so they were able to
bring me up-to-date, touching on debates and controversies within KMU, as well as outside pressures
(opening economy much more to foreign corporations/global forces, deteriorating wages and salaries,
and militarization/repression of labor organizers).
On May 6th, this researcher flew to Davao City on the southern coast of the big southern island
of Mindanao, where he met with leaders of KMU Mindanao, and discussed conditions in the South-
ern Mindanao Region (SMR). The following day, he traveled 5 hours on the bus to the Compastela
Valley in Davao del Norte Province, where he met with leaders from five local unions and learned
356 SCIPES
about their organizing successes and successful struggles against the implementation of piece rates as
the basis of wages.
After learning about all of this and after a good night's sleep, this author returned to Davao City
the following day. That night, May 8th, this researcher met with a group of Lumads (indigenous
people) and other activists in the Salugpongan Hall (named after one group of the Lumads) at the
Haran Center in Davao City. This allowed me to learn about issues/struggles going on in addition to
labor struggles in SMR.
We got on the bus the following day, headed toward the Caraga Valley, initially going to an area
near Trento in Agusan del Sur Province. Here, we learned about the struggles of two local unions,
and NAFLU's efforts to organize workers in palm oil plantations in Caraga. After spending the night,
meeting with KMK leaders and talking with union leaders in the morning, we headed for Rosario,
further north, but also in Caraga. In a community far back in the rural hinterlands, we met with
workers and leaders of Filipino Palm Oil Workers Union/NAFLU. FPOWU represents about 200 -
regular workers in both the fields and the processing plant. These workers detailed struggles on palm
oil plantations, as well as NAFLU's plans to organize the area.
From Rosario, we traveled by van to Butuan City, where we spent the night. The next afternoon,
this researcher flew to Cebu City, and then connected on a flight to Bacolod City in Negros Occidental
Province. Negros Occidental is the heart of the country's sugar industry.
Numerous stories awaited in Negros. First, we visited an Urban Poor community in Bacolod City,
which is right on the shore—people so impoverished that if they cannot go out and fish every day,
they do not eat. On to Murcia, and then to Talasay, where there are sugar haciendas—areas of great
wealth production and extensive violence, but of impoverishment and often starvation among the
sugar workers (see Scipes, 1996, pp. 128–158). An area where things were terrible in the mid-1980s
to early 1990s, but which have only gotten worse, if imaginable. People struggle over land, only to
see their efforts destroyed—and then they go back and try again.
The National Federation of Sugar Workers-Food & General Trades (NFSW-FGT) had been the only
KMU affiliate in Negros Occidental Province for many years. They built strength such that they were able
to convince sugar owners to give sugar workers farm lots on which they could grow on their own crops
and survive. The NFSW-FGT has now focused in activities on supporting the farm lots program, and
NAFLU has come in to do actual sugar worker organizing. It remains a long row to hoe.
AreturntoManilaonMay14thwithanextremelyinterestingmeetingwithastaffmemberofEILER
(Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education and Research). He told me that labor—including, but not lim-
ited to KMU—had taken a real beating in the late 1980s to early 1990s. Three factors combined: A 1989
wage regionalization law, which disemboweled the national minimum wage; now each region was able
to set their own minimum wage. Joined, with that companies shifted out of Manila and the National Capi-
tal Region, dispersing to Central Luzon (north of Manila) or to Southern Tagalog (south of Manila), each
seeking lower wage costs. Joined, with this were government subsidies to make such a move out of the
National Capital Region. This dissipated a lot of labor's power. Joined, with this was the widespread
establishment of Export Processing Zones throughout the country—and in some cases, with only single
companies involved—with stricter laws and more control over labor forces; for example, there are
11 EPZs in Cebu, with no unions in any of them. And finally, begun in the early 1990s, is widespread
contractualization, giving workers limited employment, which can only be established at management's
whim, and which has hurt labor organizing nationwide. The EILER staffer also reported that the splits that
developed within KMU in 1993 were ultimately minor threats to the labor center's survival and develop-
ment; that the developments just described had a much greater impact on the KMU.
SCIPES 357
Nonetheless, the KMU continues to organize and fight for workers and their allies. This repre-
sentative told me that KMU was strongest in the Southern Tagalog and SMR regions, but are also
doing organizing in Caraga, Negros Occidental, and the National Capital Region. Interestingly
enough, this researcher's travels and interviews had included KMU organizations, members, and
allies in each of these areas.
9|FINDINGS
To accurately portray what was learned from these efforts, they must be broken into three categories:
economic, labor, and allies' situations.
9.1 |Economic situation
Economic conditions for working people and their allies have definitely lagged behind any growth seen
by the country. Economic growth for the country grew 3 years in a row, 3.7% in 2011 to 6.8% in 2012,
and 7.2% in 2013, although it slowed down through the first three quarters of 2014. But IBON—an inde-
pendent, non-governmental organization (NGO)—estimated the family daily living wage (the minimum
daily wage to live at a sustainable, but simple level) to be P 1,033.17 in December 2012, P 1,059.53 in
December 2013, and P 1,076.84 in December 2014.
16
However, in the National Capital Region (in which
Manila is located) and which has the highest minimum wage in the entire country—minimum wage was
P 456, P 466, and P 466 over the same time periods. The result was a widening gap between the daily
minimum wage and the daily cost of living: P 577.15, P 593.53, and P 610.84, respectively. The daily
minimum wage was only 44.14% of the estimated family living way in December 2012, 43.98% in
December 2013, and 43.27% in December 2014 (IBON, 2015, pp. 3, 15).
It must be remembered, however, that the government established a process for developing differen-
tial wage rates in each of the country's 17 administrative regions during 1989; in 2014, the daily minimum
wage varied from P 466 in the National Capital Region down to P 250 in the Autonomous Region of
Muslim Mindanao. When compared to the respective wage rates in 2006, “Except for NCR where real
wages increased by a scanty P 5.73, real wages in all other regions went down as much as P 47.81 or
21 percent of its value in 2006”(Center for Trade Union and Human Rights, 2015, p. 5).
9.2 |Trade union situation
Everywhere that was reported on, or where this researcher visited, the message was the same: the
unions, and especially KMU unions,
17
were under attack. Some times that would be directly, such as
being threatened and/or physically assaulted by the military, police, paramilitary organizations, or by
goons—often ex-military who are now working for landlords, especially in Negros. Other times, it
would be by companies closing down without advance notice, as required by law, avoiding severance
payments, or simply refusing to negotiate or engage in collective bargaining. Still other times, it
would be by forcing the unions to take cases into courts, and then dragging things out for as long as
possible at each stage, and appealing again and again; with as many delays as possible between
each step.
And almost always, it was paying people too little to live at a decent standard of living: “the aver-
age daily basic pay in the country as of April 2014 is just P 365.89”(IBON, 2015, p. 15), approxi-
mately US $8.13. The Center for Trade Union and Human Rights (2015), p. 3 notes, “Based on April
2014 official data on average wages per industry and sub-sectors, seven out of 10 jobs for wage and
358 SCIPES
salary owners have wages below the national average wage of P 365.89.”And yet, IBON estimates,
based on official data sets, that “some 66 million Filipinos or 68 percent of the population live off of
P 125 or much less per day”(IBON, 2015, p. 28).
A very big issue all over the country is the contracting out of work (contractualization), where
work is for a limited time only, albeit subject to re-employment if management consents. Contractual
workers nationally are overwhelming regular workers—and this is not in construction and fly-by-
night operations, but also among big, established firms: in San Miguel, the country's largest brewery
and food-related company, there are 1,100 regular employees out of 26,000 total employees; in Shoe
Mart (the largest retailer), 1,300 regular employees out of 20,000; in Philippine Long Distance Tele-
phone, 4,100 regulars out of 10,000 employees. Contractualization affects unions, as only regular
employees can legally unionize; this is a very big impediment to organizing workplaces, as was
intended.
Another serious issue—especially on banana plantations on Mindanao—is employers unilaterally
shifting the basis for wages from a daily wage to a piece rate system. The daily rate for 12–14 hr of
work is P 600; piece rate for 14 hr comes to about P 235. It is another attack that must be met.
Yet KMU unions work in a social context, so it is important to know what is going on with their
allies.
9.3 |Allies' situation
Tied to the specific attacks on labor is militarization of the region, an especially big problem in
Southern Mindanao, where the Army is facing an ongoing Muslim insurrection as well as the
Communist-led New People's Army. Approximately, 55% of the Armed Forces of the Philippines
(AFP) are stationed in Mindanao—60 battalions, of which 33 are deployed in SMR. They are also
being used to harass KMU unions.
Workers' rights are continually under siege. One union leader has been charged with murder,
accused of killing a supervisor. AFP elements have been used to try to “seduce”workers at Musahabu
Farms, organized into an independent union, but which later joined KMU after they were accused of
being NPA (New People's Army) sympathizers.
18
After workers at a Davao radio station joined KMU,
they were constantly vilified.
Yet repression, especially but not only in Mindanao, is not limited to workers' organizations. It
also extends to their allies, keeping the overall social situation precarious to those seeking social
change.
On May 8th, this researcher met with a group of Lumads (indigenous people) and other activists
in the Salugpongan Hall at the United Church of Christ's Haran Mission House in Davao City. This
allowed him to learn about issues/struggles going on in addition to labor struggles in SMR.
A representative of BAYAN (a nation-wide alliance of nationalist organizations) started by giving
an overview of the militarization of Mindanao, and especially of the Southern Mindanao region. She
pointed out that the militarization was not limited to the indigenous, but affected all organized sectors
of the region. There have been attacks on Muslim areas, leading migrants to relocate across
Mindanao to escape war. She stated there had been extra-judicial killings and trumped up charges
against activists. There has been strong resistance of people fighting against mining, plantations, and
logging, which the military has sought to stop.
There are many human rights violations taking place across Mindanao, with serious military attacks
on the school system: not only have there been attacks on students, threats, and harassment of students
and teachers, but this has also included burning schools to the ground. The “Save the Schools”
network—part of the National Campaign for Children's Rights to Education—reports that there have
SCIPES 359
been 51 schools that have been attacked in four provinces. All indigenous schools are harassed and
accused of giving combat training. When people protest these activities, the BAYAN representative
concluded, “Military denies cases. Just deny, like in Iraq.”
A woman from Gabriela (nation-wide nationalist women's organization) reported on issues
directly affecting women: seven out of ten women are not considered part of the labor sector. They
are dependent upon males. Contractualization among women is big, and many women lack access to
basic social services. Every day, an average of over 6,000 workers leave the Philippines to work on
foreign shores and 55% of them are women. Women are victims of sexual abuse, especially around
military encampments. More reports on the military attacks on schools; this representative says they
have “many pictures”of the military actually invading schools. The military hamlets communities,
claiming they do this to protect the communities from the NPA. Yet the hamleting—military
control—is so pervasive when it is done, “that you cannot even buy a sack of rice.”Peasants in
nearby areas can only till their land a couple of hours a day.
A representative of the Youth Sector also spoke. Military camps are established nearby schools.
At the University of the Philippines-Mindanao, in Davao City, he claimed that the military is always
collecting information on students: “They recruit snitches to report on students.”The education
system is very commercialized, and two students who could not pay the fees recently committed
suicide. Some students taken by the military have been “disappeared,”while female students have
had broomsticks shoved into their vaginas. There is extensive surveillance, and people under surveil-
lance are tagged by the local media as “criminals.”
The Urban Poor face demolitions and land grabbing. Land grabbers have title to the land, but
leave it unused. When poor people “squat”on it, the landowners fight to take it back. The larger
problem is that the government will not provide housing and related services to the poor; so the
Urban Poor have no services, no work, no food, and no money for relocation. Yet the government is
forcing people off public land and giving it to the railway system to use it for port development.
In the rural area around Capulong, the military has been operating there since July 2014. On March
26, 2015, two people were killed by members of a para-military organization. The para-militaries had
been disbanded in 2012, but in 2014, they were reorganized by the 88th Infantry Battalion. The military
brands any NGO, including those from the European Union, as supporters of the NPA.
In April 2015, Davao City Mayor Duterte said that soldiers would not encamp in indigenous
areas; however, in June, the military started encamping again.
19
The Lumads stated that the military
“is not sincere,”they do not abide by the law or honor their agreements: they continue to violate the
rights of the indigenous peoples. The military is said to be engaging in “divide and conquer”tactics,
and is arming some indigenous groups to combat the NPA.
These Lumads, known as the Salugpongan, are at the forefront of those resisting the military;
other Lumad tribes under the National Council of Indigenous Peoples facilitate mining companies.
The Salugpongan want the military pulled out of their communities, they want the para-militaries
disarmed, and they do not want to sell their ancestral land.
10 |ANALYSIS
The largest problem of the Philippines is that its various governments have accepted neoliberal eco-
nomic policies since the early 1960s and these have been disasters for most Filipinos (Bello, 2009;
Scipes, 1999). Walden Bello argues specifically that the decisions to pay off the national debt to
maintain international investor “confidence”after Corazon Aquino succeeded Dictator Ferdinand
Marcos to the presidency in February 1986 deprived the Philippines of much needed economic
360 SCIPES
resources that could have been used to develop the country's infrastructure and could have channeled
investment into programs that would have benefitted Filipinos while developing domestic demand.
Subsequently, under President Fidel Ramos, the Philippines liberalized its trading policies and drasti-
cally reduced tariffs much below competing Southeast Asian neighboring countries, allowing its
industry and agriculture to be overwhelmed by foreign corporations' exports into the country while
allowing foreign direct investment (FDI) to grow dramatically. And, as IBON (2013) notes, “Increas-
ing FDI has actually been accompanied by increasing unemployment, increasing labor export, falling
real wages, shrinking domestic manufacturing, and more volatile and exclusionary growth.”
The KMU and its fellow National Democratic allies—along with those of other political
persuasions—have long been fighting to change these policies—and they were key factors in helping
to overthrow Marcos in 1986. They also fought the economic policies of the incoming Aquino
regime, and have continued to challenge the economic policies and political orientation of successor
regimes (Scipes, 1996, 1999, 2015).
The key to changing the political-economic social order established in the country is having an
understanding of the necessity to do so, and seeing the building of trade union power at the points of
production/distribution/exchange as a crucial component for this. But the KMU's vision has always
been larger than this. It recognizes that to change conditions on the shopfloors, on plantations, and in
the department stores of the country—along with conditions being faced by peasants, women,
students, indigenous, and so forth, is in coalition with actors in these different sectors—and that not
only must political power be developed to change the country's social order, but that they have to
challenge the global political-economic networks in which the country is enmeshed; in other words,
they reject the U.S. imperialist project that has long entangled their country.
This clarity among its leaders has informed KMU's development. They have acted from the begin-
ning with the understanding that they could only be successful if they trusted their members. To do this,
they realized they had to educate their membership so that through their experiences, the members
would adopt this broader, more expansive approach to trade unionism. But that also meant that they
had to develop organizationally so as to be able to withstand any attacks on the organization, no matter
how violent. Key to that is going to their members, educating them, seeking their consent, and then
supporting their members' efforts to improve their own lives and the lives of all Filipinos.
This can be seen through the development of what the KMU calls “alliances,”in conjunction with
and in support of KMU's national federations; the result is an interlocking web or organizations.
These alliances are “‘horizontal’coalitions of workers from different workplaces and unions, and are
organized on the basis of geography, industry or company ownership. The goal of each alliance is to
unite workers for economic gain; provide self-defense from military harassment; win political
demands outside of the workplace; and give [Genuine Trade Unionism] education to all membership”
(Scipes, 2016b, p. 144).
Each type of alliance organizes differently. Geographical alliances combine unions on
the basis of locality and are the most powerful: these alliances can be can be formed on
national, island, regional, province, city, or even district levels within particular cities.
Industrial alliances unite unions in the same industry, such as health care, transportation
or mining. Conglomerate alliances join unions in multisite workplaces owned by the
same company. The industrial and conglomerate alliances focus more on workplace
issues, while geographical alliances tend to focus on larger political issues—but trans-
portation alliances have always been very involved on the political level as well. Addi-
tionally, while most alliances are affiliated with the KMU, each alliance often includes
unions from outside the KMU (Scipes, 2016b, p. 145).
SCIPES 361
This is obvious when looking at the organization of PAMANTIK in Southern Tagalog.
20
South-
ern Tagalog is an industrial belt. Factories are producing semiconductors/electronics, and there is a
range of other industries including food, cement, and cars in Santa Rosa, Laguna, where there are
Honda and Toyota assembly plants. Garments used to be in this region, but they are dying, if not
dead: most have transferred to Cambodia and Bangladesh. “Earlier, this area was heavily garments,
but they are now gone.”
People said PAMANTIK was KMU of CALABARZON. They drew out an “org chart”of
PAMANTIK. This includes the Federation OLALIA (Organized Labor and Line Organizations in
Agriculture), which includes federated local unions, mostly in industrial plants. OLALIA has over
3,000 members in 13 local affiliates; they had over 30 when Marcos was overthrown. OLALIA files
cases in administrative offices and the courts for all victims of labor rights violations, including ille-
gal dismissals and retrenchments; helps with CBA negotiations in all locals; handles grievances; and
advises workers on how to organize unions. It coordinates organizing activities around local and
national issues in the region. OLALIA is under attack by government agencies; the government says
it is a front for Communist Party of the Philippines. In 2003, leaders were charged by Armed Forces
of the Philippines in a criminal case, which continues today. There have been assassinations, includ-
ing the head of the Nestle Workers' Union. Military intelligence monitors unions, and there is military
harassment, yet many local unions in Southern Tagalog are organizing to join OLALIA.
There are other organizations in PAMANTIK. These include independent unions, which are
KMU in all but name. There are sectoral organizations, including STARTER (the regional alliance of
the nationwide transportation alliance, PISTON), KMK, community organizations, farm workers,
and youth organizations. There are also labor alliances, including LIGA (contractual workers), SOL
(illegally dismissed workers), CAR-AID (auto workers), a garment and textile alliance, and a drug
and food alliance. PAMANTIK meets monthly to further develop trade unionism in the region.
Some of this work can be seen by looking at one of the alliances, KMK (women workers' organiza-
tion). KMK officers work in factories. The Southern Tagalog chapter is in process of reviving, to focus
more attention on women workers. Last March, it had its first assembly after several years—many
women from many factories attended, 60 or 70 representatives. KMK is open to women workers from
independent and KMU unions, and to women who are not in unions.
21
Organizing is tedious and, at times, dangerous work. Nonetheless, since 2013, six new unions
have been created. One of their primary projects is to regularize workers—80% of workers are con-
tractual in Southern Tagalog and the Philippines—so they can become part of the unions. PAMAN-
TIK is trying to organize contractual workers inside each company, so as to form an association or
organization.
Key to this is educating workers. LEADER is an important educational source, because it teaches
workers their basic rights. Over the past 2 years, they are making important advances as more
workers are coming in. They make contact and provide education, and then go into the workers'
communities to provide education to even more members: they recognize, they cannot just sit in their
office and wait for workers to come to them; they must go into the community and seek opportunities
to meet workers and educate them and coworkers.
Yet LEADER goes beyond just introducing trade unionism to workers: they teach a “basic
course”on Financial Crisis and Social System. This course discusses issues like how capitalism
started, how the U.S. financial crisis has affected the Philippines' economy, and its direct impact on
workers. They also teach workers how to bargain with corporations, to get more of what they want.
The campaign to form genuine trade unions across country is important. However, LEADER believes
that establishing genuine unions is not enough to change the worker/capitalist relationship; they argue
362 SCIPES
that workers need to develop and fight for an alternative, beyond capitalism; they call this the “social-
ist perspective.”
LEADER tries to get workers to mobilize and stay active in their unions by seeking to form an edu-
cation committee in each local union, with a regular agenda, education festivals, and individual efforts
to promote union discussions. The education committee monitors the courses workers have taken. This
has been found to be very effective—not just around labor issues, but national issues as well; most
activists come from unions with consistent educational programs. What they have discovered is that the
workers most active have taken a lot of training: more education, more activity.
Some of this education manifested itself on May 1, 2015. According to the president of OLALIA,
there were thousands of workers at multisectoral rally. “Human rights violations have been terrible
under ‘Nonoy’” (the nickname of then-President Benigno S. Aquino), he said.
To get an idea of how this all works, consider the case of Coca-Cola in Santa Rosa, Laguna Province
during 2013. Three plants have yellow unions, which collaborate with management; and they did not
include drivers, pickers, or fork-lift operators. Organizers were able to create an organization/association
of contractual workers to push the company to negotiate with them, by the association other than the
union. The association organized and struck for 2–3 days, immobilizing distribution. The company was
losing “millions”(of pesos) according to workers. The resulting Provision of Memorandum of Under-
standing regularized these outside workers across Coca-Cola plants throughout the Philippines. The hope
is that these workers absorbed by existing unions will transform the existing yellow unions into genuine
unions.
The discussion of PAMANTIK has been used to illuminate a key KMU alliance's operations. Doing
so has allowed discussion of how it is organized, the role of member education, and how it has brought
together both unions and other labor organizations together. This supplements the information
previously discussed from Southern Mindanao Region's operations, and it is in line with observations
provided throughout this article.
The components identified by Scipes (2014a, 2016b) as being key to the 38 years of successful
trade unionism by the KMU—an organizational combination of both “vertical”federations and “hori-
zontal”alliances that include all unions and related organizations; an advanced educational program
that is designed for each member, and not just formal leaders or stewards; and extensive and respect-
ful relations with other sectoral organizations—have all been identified in this article as contributing
to the continued existence and power of the KMU. (For an examination of how it works to create
global labor solidarity—the fourth component discussed in Scipes, 2014a—see Scipes, 2000.) Cre-
ated in 1980 under a dictatorship, threatened by the imprisonment of 69 top leaders in 1982,
challenged by the assassination of its Chair, Rolando Olalia in 1986, and operating in a difficult
social environment since then—and operating in a country where there are many more people than
jobs—the KMU has long played, and continues today, an important role in the Philippines.
And while other unions in Asia have not developed to the extent done by the KMU, its success
and survival over 38 years in an incredibly hostile social situation demonstrates that versions of trade
unionism qualitatively different from that seen in the United States (and Canada) can and have
emerged elsewhere. Researchers around the world need to be aware of the much broader range of
unionism existing than that suggested by the AFL-CIO, and seek to discover it.
11 |CONCLUSION
This article is an effort to ascertain whether the elements vital to the success and development of the
KMU Labor Center of the Philippines—as identified by Scipes (1996, 2014a, 2016b)—still exist and
SCIPES 363
can be learned from today. It has reported Scipes’2015 trip to the Philippines, and his research find-
ings from travels in the three major regions of the Philippines: Luzon, Mindanao, and in the Visayas.
It discussed his findings from this trip, and analyzed them, giving special attention to PAMANTIK, a
KMU geographical alliance in the CALABARZON area of the Southern Tagalog region. It has
shown that KMU has continued to practice SMU. It also noted that while KMU has been battered
through industrial relocation and repression over the years, it remains a strong and vibrant labor cen-
ter, from which much can be learned. It remains one of the most dynamic and developed labor centers
in the world.
The KMU continues to show workers around the world that even in extremely difficult situations,
there are alternatives to the generally moribund trade unionism practiced by the unions in the United
States. Maybe it is time for American unionists, and workers in general, to learn from a southern
labor center such as the Kilusang Mayo Uno.
ENDNOTES
1
Perhaps the most trenchant critique of the contemporary U.S. labor movement is Aronowitz (2014); see also McAlevey
(2016); Scipes (2017); as well as Fletcher and Gapasin (2008). For an excellent history of labor in the United States, see Mur-
olo and Chitty (2001).
2
Obviously, there are different versions of trade unionism in Canada, Western Europe, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand—
the other so-called “developed”countries—from which American workers could also learn. While further discussion herein is
beyond the scope of this article, the most innovative efforts among the worst conditions are by some of the unions in the Global
South, and it is felt this is from where most could be learned.
3
For some of the most important writings on this new unionism, see Scipes, 2014b, FN no. 25.
4
Organizationally, the heart of a labor movement are trade unions and agglomerations of trade unions that are joined by a labor
center which, in turn, works to further unify and strengthen the member unions. The number of labor centers vary by country:
some, such as Australia, Germany, Great Britain, and the United States, each have one labor center; other countries such as
Brazil, France, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Philippines, South Africa, South Korea and Sweden, each have at least two labor cen-
ters, if not more. In the U.S. context, but using international labor terminology, the AFL-CIO is a ‘labor center’(Scipes, 2016a,
p. 45, FN no. 51).
5
Kilusang Mayo Uno translates to May First Movement. The KMU consciously relates to events in Chicago in May 1886.
On May 1, 2018, KMU Chairperson Elmer “Bong”Labog participated in May Day events in Chicago; to my knowledge, this
was the first time a KMU Chairperson has been allowed to enter the United States. He presented a plaque from the KMU to the
Illinois Labor History Society, which will be mounted on the monument (along with those from workers in Colombia,
Germany, Iraq, and a few other countries): other than plaques on the Haymarket monument itself, there is no public signage of
the monument, and most people in the Chicago area know nothing of this monument nor the events it commemorates.
6
“While the emergence and development of labor movements are important in and of themselves for the expansion of
popular democracy in the workplace and limiting exploitation and oppression of workers, I know of five situations
where labor movements played a key role, if not the leading role, in overthrowing dictatorships and expanding democ-
racy across the respective society over the past thirty years: Philippines, 1986 (see Scipes, 1996); Brazil, 1987 (see
Sluyter-Beltrão, 2010); South Korea, 1987 (see Koo, 2001); Poland, 1989 (see Bloom, 2014); and South Africa, 1990
(see Baskin, 1991). Regardless of subsequent developments, the role of these labor movements in the fight for democ-
racy has been exemplary and should be recognized by scholars”(Scipes, 2016a, p. 23, FN no. 1). As explained in
Scipes, 2014b, FN no. 4, he does not consider the labor movements in Poland or South Korea to be examples of social
movement unionism.
For a discussion of “popular democracy,”see Scipes, 2016a, p. 24, FN no. 2.
7
The KMU has long referred to its type of trade unionism as Genuine Trade Unionism. By this, it means that it organizes
workers and fights for their interests against the bosses and the Filipino elites, even at risk of their own lives. This is explicated
most completely in Scipes, 1996.
8
This trip was followed by a briefer trip in August 2016, which was generally confined to the Metro Manila area, where he
engaged in extensive discussion with KMU national leaders, with the leader of an independent human rights organization,
364 SCIPES
leaders of a bank workers' union, and a long-time nationalist cultural leader. He also made a very brief trip back to meet with
leaders of PAMANTIK in the Southern Tagalog region (again, just south of Metro Manila). Results from this trip—which
further support the findings of the 2015 analysis—will be reported in a later article.
9
The Marcos era—1966–1986—set the ground for subsequent economic “development.”Some excellent accounts regarding
the Philippine economy under Marcos include Bello, Kinley, and Elinson (1982); Boyce (1993); and Broad (1988).
10
For an excellent study of the struggle by the peasants, see Putzel (1992).
11
The National Democratic “movement”basically accepts the political analysis developed in Philippine State and Revolution,
said to have been written by Jose Maria Sison (aka Amado Guerrero), arguably the primary founder of the Communist Party of
the Philippines (CPP). It blames the situation of the Philippines on imperialism, feudalism and bureaucrat capitalism (Sison,
1971). As argued over the years, while there are members of the Communist Party within KMU unions—just like there are
communists in almost every labor organization I've ever heard of—there is no credible evidence that I have seen that the CPP
controls the KMU; I argue that the KMU “confronts its reality on the basis of its own dynamics and not on the basis of any
other organization's”(Scipes, 1996:285, FN #15).
12
In Scipes (1996:219–233), I give an extensive and careful analysis of the splits within the KMU, placing them within the
larger crisis of the Philippine left. To do this, I interviewed leaders of all three of the different factions. To my knowledge, no
one else has provided such a detailed examination of what happened within KMU. Further, I examine the impact of the splits
on the KMU within the women's alliance (KMK), as well as impacts on the regional organizations of Bataan, Mindanao and
Negros, and then give KMU's analysis of the post-split national labor situation (Scipes, 1996:233–245).
13
This number was provided by Roger Soluta, Executive Vice President of the KMU, in Quezon City on August 13, 2016 dur-
ing a personal interview with this author.
14
The regional political economies were based on extractive mining (copper) in Cebu, plantation sugar in Negros Occidental,
capitalist agriculture (bananas and lumber) in southern Mindanao, and a multinational export processing zone in Bataan.
For an overview of the Filipino labor movement—including KMU, but other labor centers as well—see Dejillas, 1994.
15
The CALABARZON area includes the provinces of Cavite, Batangas, Laguna, Rizal and Quezon, which are south and east
of Manila, about the mid-center of Luzon.
16
The exchange rate during my trip was approximately P 45:1 US Dollar or, to put it in a way that is much easier to understand
$1 would buy 45 pesos. To convert these peso (P) amounts to US Dollars, divide by 45.
17
One of the big differences between KMU unions and those affiliated with other labor centers—as has been explicated consis-
tently by workers met by the author over the years—is that KMU unions actively work to meet the interests of the workers as
defined by the worker/members, instead of management, etc., and thus they fight more aggressively to win their demands.
Managements do not like that, and seek to avoid KMU unions if at all possible.
18
The NPA is a Communist Party of the Philippines (CPP)-led guerrilla army that was established in 1969, and has been wag-
ing a war against the government since that time. Very strong toward the end of the Marcos Dictatorship, it has lost consider-
able strength since then. However, while it is not strong enough to overthrow the government, the government has not been
able to eradicate the NPA, although it keeps trying. One tactic used by the Army is to brand anyone who challenges the status
quo as being a “NPA sympathizer,”thus setting them at risk for being killed or being “criminalized,”and thus, subject to arrest,
sometimes torture, and imprisonment.
19
In May 2016, Rodrigo Duterte would be elected President of the Philippines.
20
For an excellent discussion of the origins of worker organizing in CALABARZON and early efforts, see McKay (2006). For
some reason, McKay did not identify the “national labor center”to which PAMANTIK was affiliated, the KMU.
21
For an earlier discussion of KMK, see Scipes (1996); for an interview with the then-Secretary General of the KMK, Cleofe
Zapanta, see Scipes (1990). For more on women's struggles, see West (1997).
ORCID
Kim Scipes http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9712-3995
REFERENCES
Aronowitz, S. (2014). The death and life of American labor: Toward a new workers' movement. London: Verso.
Baskin, J. (1991). Striking back: A history of COSATU. London: Verso.
Bello, W. (2009). The anti-development state: The political economy of permanent crisis in the Philippines. Manila, Philippines:
Anvil.
SCIPES 365
Bello, W., Kinley, D., & Elinson, E. (1982). Development debacle: The World Bank in the Philippines. San Francisco, CA: Institute
for Food and Development Policy and Philippine Solidarity Network.
Bloom, J. M. (2014). Seeing through the eyes of the POLISH revolution: Solidarity and the struggle against communism in Poland.
Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.
Bonner, R. (1987). Waltzing with a dictator: The Marcoses and the making of American policy. New York, NY: Random House.
Boyce, J. K. (1993). The Philippines: The political economy of growth and impoverishment in the Marcos era. Honolulu: University of
Hawaii Press.
Broad, R. (1988). Unequal alliance: The World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the Philippines. Berkeley, CA: University
of California Press.
Bureau of Labor Statistics. 2018. Union members survey. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm
Center for Trade Union and Human Rights. (2015). Report on trade union and human rights situation, 2014. Quezon City, Philippines:
Center for Trade Union and Human Rights.
Chapman, W. (1987). Inside the Philippine revolution: The new people's army and its struggle for power. New York, NY: W.W.
Norton.
Dejillas, L. J. (1994). Trade union behavior in the Philippines 1946–1990. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila University
Press.
Fletcher, B., Jr., & Gapasin, F. (2008). Solidarity divided: The crisis in organized labor and a new path towards social justice.
Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Francisco, L. (1987/1973). The Philippine-American War. In D. B. Schirmer & S. R. Shalom (Eds.), The Philippines reader: A history
of colonialism, neocolonialism, dictatorship and resistance (pp. 8–19). Boston, MA: South End Press.
IBON (2013). Foreign divestment and underdevelopment. In IBON facts and figures, 2012 (Vol. 35, p. 4). Quezon City, Philippines:
IBON.
IBON. (2015). Economic and political briefing, yearend 2014. Quezon City, Philippines: IBON.
Jones, G. R. (1989). Red revolution: Inside the Philippine guerrilla movement. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Koo, H. (2001). Korean workers: The culture and politics of class formation. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Larson, S., & Nissen, B. (1987). Theories of the labor movement. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.
McAlevey, J. F. (2016). No shortcuts: Organizing for power in the new gilded age. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
McCoy, A. W. (1982). Introduction: The social history of an archipelago. In A. W. McCoy & E. C. de Jesus (Eds.), Philippine social
history: Global trade and local transformations (pp. 1–18). Quezon City, Metro Manila: Ateneo de Manila University Press.
McKay, S. (2006). The squeaky Wheel's dilemma: New forms of labor organizing in the Philippines. Labor Studies Journal,30(4),
41–63.
Moody, K. (1997). Workers in a lean world: Unions in the international economy. New York, NY: Verso.
Murolo, P., & Chitty, A. B. (2001). From the folks who brought you the weekend: A short, illustrated history of labor in the United
States. New York, NY: The New Press.
Ness, I. (2016). Southern insurgency: The coming of the global working class. London: Zed.
Pillay, D. (2013). Between social and political unionism: COSATU and democratic politics in South Africa. Rethinking Development
and Inequality,2,10–27.
Putzel, J. (1992). A captive land: The politics of agrarian reform in the Philippines. Quezon City, Philippines: Ateneo de Manila
University Press.
Schirmer, D. B., & Shalom, S. R. (Eds.). (1987). The Philippines reader: A history of colonialism, neocolonialism, dictatorship and
resistance. Boston, MA: South End Press.
Scipes, K. (1990). Interview with Cleofe Zapanta, secretary general of the KMK [women workers' organization] of the Philippines. Z
Magazine, May, 105–107.
Scipes, K. (1992a). Social movement unionism and the Kilusang Mayo Uno. Kasarinlan,7(2), 121–162 Retrieved from http://journals.
upd.edu.ph/index.php/kasarinlan/article/view/1393/pdf_38
Scipes, K. (1992b). Understanding the new labor movements in the ‘third world’: The emergence of social movement unionism.
Critical Sociology,19(2), 81–101 Retrieved from http://labournet.de/diskussion/gewerkschaft/smu/The_New_Unions_Crit_
Soc.htm
Scipes, K. (1996). KMU: Building genuine trade unionism in the Philippines, 1980–1994. Quezon City, Metro Manila: New Day
Publishers.
Scipes, K. (1999). Global economic crisis, neoliberal solutions, and the Philippines. Monthly Review, December,51(7), 1–14 Retrieved
from http://monthlyreview.org/1999/12/01/global-economic-crisis-neoliberal-solutions-and-the-philippines
Scipes, K. (2000). Communicating labor internationalism: The KMU's ‘International Solidarity Affair’.29 p. Retrieved from www.
antenna.nl/~waterman/scipes.html
Scipes, K. (2001). Social movement unionism: Can we apply the theoretical conceptualization to the new unions of South Africa—and
beyond? Germany http://labournet.de/diskussion/gewerkschaft/smuandsa.html
Scipes, K. (2009). An alternative perspective for the global south—Neoliberal economic policies in the United States: The impact of
globalization on a ‘Northern’country. Indian Journal of Politics and International Relations, January–June,2(1), 12–47. Retrieved
from https://faculty.pnw.edu/kim-scipes/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2017/04/Neoliberal-Economic-Policies-for-US-2009.pdf
366 SCIPES
Scipes, K. (2014a). Building global labor solidarity today: Learning from the KMU of the Philippines. Class, Race and Corporate
Power,2(2) Article 2. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower/vol2/iss2/2 [Subsequently repub-
lished in Kim Scipes, ed., 2016: 139–152]
Scipes, K. (2014b). Social movement unionism or social justice unionism? Disentangling theoretical confusion within the global labor move-
ment. Class, Race and Corporate Power,3(1) Article 9. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower/vol2/
iss3/9
Scipes, K. (2015). Celebrating May Day, KMU Style. Countercurrents.org, Retrieved from www.countercurrents.org/
scipes081015.htm
Scipes, K. (ed.). (2016). Building global labor solidarity in a time of accelerating globalization. Chicago, IL: Haymarket Books.
Scipes, K. (2016a). Multiple fragments—Strength or weakness? Theorizing global labor solidarity. In K. Scipes (ed.), Building Global
Labor Solidarity in a Time of Accelerating Globalization, (pp. 23–48). Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/
publication/315617986_Multiple_Fragments–Strengths_or_Weaknesses_Theorizing_Global_Labor_Solidarity
Scipes, K. (2016b). Building global labor solidarity today: Learning from the KMU of the Philippines. In K. Scipes (ed.), Building
Global Labor Solidarity in a Time of Accelerating Globalization, (pp. 139–152).
Scipes, K. (2017). The epic failure of labor leadership in the United States, 1980-2017 and continuing. Class, Race and Corporate
Power,5(2) Article 5. Retrieved from http://digitalcommons.fiu.edu/classracecorporatepower/vol5/iss2/5
Seidman, G. (1994). Manufacturing militance: Workers' movements in Brazil and South Africa, 1970–1985. Berkeley, CA: University
of California Press.
Shabecoff, P. (1987/1970). The growing protest movement. In D. B. Schirmer & S. R. Shalom (Eds.), The Philippines reader: A his-
tory of colonialism, neocolonialism, dictatorship and resistance (pp. 157–161). Boston, MA: South End Press.
Shalom, S. R. (1986). The United States and the Philippines: A study of neocolonialism. Quezon City, Philippines: New Day
Publishers.
Sison, J. M. (1971). Philippine state and revolution. Manila, Philippines: Pulang Tala Publications.
Sison, J. M., & Werning, R. (1989). The Philippine revolution: The Leader's view. New York, NY: Crane Russak.
Sluyter-Beltrão, J. (2010). Rise and fall of Brazil's new unionism: The politics of the central Única dos Trabalhadores. Bern,
Switzerland: Peter Lang.
West, L. (1997). Militant labor in the Philippines. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
AUTHOR BIOGRAPHY
KIM SCIPES is a Professor of Sociology at Purdue University Northwest in Westville, Indiana, USA,
whose research focuses on global labor. His latest book is an edited collection, Building Global Labor
Solidarity in a Time of Accelerating Globalization (Chicago: Haymarket Books, 2016). His writ-
ings–many on line–can be accessed at http://faculty.pnw.edu/kim-scipes/publications/#2.
How to cite this article: Scipes K. Another type of trade unionism IS possible: The KMU
Labor Center of the Philippines and social movement unionism. Labor and Society. 2018;21:
349–367. https://doi.org/10.1111/lands.12348
SCIPES 367
