A taste for protest

By Huweida Adli

---

Industrial action has surged dramatically in the country, with 220 strikes in 2006 alone. In 2007, the figures were even higher: 56 labour protests in April; 97 in July; and 94 in September. From government departments to publicly and privately owned companies, workers are staging strikes and arranging sit-ins. Manufacturing workers, service workers and women are all taking action. Even solidarity-style strikes, unseen since 1952, have made a comeback, with human rights groups voicing their support.

Aside from the usual demand of better pay, workers in most Egyptian governorates have called for improved health and housing services. In some protests, workers brought up the issue of corruption and mismanagement, clearly indicating their lack of confidence in their bosses.

The wave of labour protests poses several questions, some bearing on the all too important issue of future change. One question concerns parallel labour unions, often formed under the umbrella of civil society as an alternative channel to conventional unions. Why are workers resorting to such a tactic? Because conventional unions are failing to sense their grievances and react to their needs. If this is so, why exactly are we holding on to the old unions?

Look at countries such as the Netherlands, Austria and Denmark. How do they resolve their labour issues? Forget about Europe. Look into Latin America, even South Africa. The answer to our problems is not hard to find. Protests only happen when dialogue fails at the workplace. And dialogue fails because workers lack the freedom to form unions and organise themselves. In brief, we need effective unions to have fewer protests.

This week's Soapbox speaker is an associate professor of political science at Misr University for Science and Technology.