By Matthew Russell Lee
UNITED NATIONS, November 8 -- With UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon lurching from one trip to another, with barely time to take a few questions from the Press much less the staff between trips to China and now South Korea, labor problems have cropped out throughout the UN system. “Industrial action” has been threatened; censorship is being alleged.
Back on October 25, Inner City Press asked Ban's spokesman Martin Nesirky about the UN Staff Union's charge that for the first time in years, Ban was refusing to transmit their report on staff relations to the General Assembly. Nesirky rather than explaining this break with precedent referred Inner City Press to a letter Ban's Deputy.
But since in the UN's budget committee, the Staff Union has reiterated its complaint, that Ban “has effectively censored the views of the staff.”
A major critique in the Staff Union report is about the UN's internal justice system. On that, Inner City Press asked Nesirky on November 4
Inner City Press: there was a presentation by the Appeals Tribunal of the various cases and they made some statements of the internal justice system of the UN. And Judge Mark Painter in his presentation made what people are seeing as a pretty strong critique of lack of resources. They said we need help having paperwork processed. If staffing doesn’t substantially improve, we will not be able to continue to progress in the future. Not to mention the issue of judicial independence. So, I am wondering what does the Secretariat think of this cry for help from its Appeals Tribunal and what is it going to do about it?
Spokesperson: Let me find out. Yeah.
Four days later, nothing. Meanwhile, at the International Labor Organization a “global job action” is brewing, to begin on November 10.
The ILO's Staff Union says the ILO has violated their free association rights, including “censoring the Union's communications” -- ironic, as the UN system moves to have a Special Rapporteur on freedom of association. Watch this site.
From the UN's October 25 transcript:
Inner City Press: this is something that has been sort of brewing, but it seems to have reached a head. If I am not wrong, for almost 20 years now, every year there has been a report to the General Assembly of the Staff Union, called, “Views of the staff of the United Nations Secretariat”, produced by the Staff Union here; and the Secretary-General’s Office is supposed to transmit it to the General Assembly. Apparently, there has been a decision, whether it is by Ms. [Catherine] Pollard, Ms. [Angela] Kane or the Secretariat generally, to this year refuse to transmit it and to seek in its place to transmit a much more positive report of the SMCC, Staff Management Coordinating Committee. So the Staff Union says it’s illegal and wrong and also violates… seems to be controlling what is basically criticism of the Secretariat’s performance. What’s the rationale for not putting it out?
Spokesperson Martin Nesirky: Well, given your sources, Matthew, then I am sure you’ve also got a copy of the response to this from the Deputy Secretary-General, which is fairly explicit, fairly detailed and pushes back on all the points made by the Staff Union, and I don’t have anything to add to that.
Inner City Press: But still, why in the past… it’s been done in the past… I guess I am just wondering, it seems like…
Spokesperson: Matthew, I think you probably heard the last bit I said. I don’t have anything further to add to what the Deputy Secretary-General said in the response, which I am sure that you have also seen.
Inner City Press: They said that the Secretariat is now seeking…
Spokesperson: I am not sure that you quite heard what I said. Try a different question.
Inner City Press: Okay. It’s a different question on this, that the Secretariat now has an intention to ask Member States in General Assembly to change the provision that would require the submission of these reports. Is that something that the Secretariat currently intends to do?
Spokesperson: Again, the Deputy Secretary-General has spelled out quite clearly what the provisions are and what the Secretariat was prepared to do in accordance with the provisions that are there. Okay?
Not really okay. Watch this site.
