In my reading of the Manila report the participants went further and emphasised that the methodology of the ISC project was to hear the voices of working people. That the experience of ordinary people is often much more useful in understanding major changes in the world. By sharing these experiences it is hoped that global understanding will be achieved. And through this process of education workers and community activists can hopefully be empowered.

In the case of our colleagues from India in particular I think that the current list of participants does not reflect the agreements reached at the Manila 1998 seminar and I think we should all make greater efforts to reach the objectives of the seminar.

Such reporting can lead to other groups taking up the debate and comparing this with workers’ experiences in their own enterprises. That can be very educational. Also if there is a dispute in your group you can raise the dispute in your questions for other ISCs. In this way your questions can flow out of the discussions and not appear very broad and generalised.

I think that it is also very important to avoid jargon or things that may be clear in your country but not to workers from another. Maybe this is an indication of my own ignorance but I would appeal to Don from Australia to explain a bit what is understood by "the Award", "breakdown of old demarcations", "pyramid sub-contracting" and "competency based training" ?

Are workers working longer hours or shorter hours ? Are there changes to shift patterns, night work and weekend work ?

Are there changes in the number of male or female workers ? Are more immigrant workers being employed or workers from different ethnic groups ? Are workers increasingly young or old ?

Is the company using more or less machinery, new machinery ? Are workers being made more or less skilled ? Are there fewer artisans and more general workers ?

Which sections of the labour process are being outsourced ? Cleaning and security or manufacture and servicing ? Where do these contract workers tend to come from ? Is there a pattern ?

With regard to how these affect trade union organisation maybe you can begin to discuss what greater casualisation and outsourcing and fragmentation mean for current forms of collective bargaining. Colleagues who have pointed out how workers are becoming divided and that non-regular workers are not joining unions may want to debate whether there is something in HOW unions are organised in their country which does not make it attractive to join a union.

In the case of Korea it may be useful for Yoon explain a bit more what some of the IMF structural adjustment programme issues which have affected the workplace are. Especially when referring to "The lay off system and workers’ dispatching system were legislated ".

In response there appears to create fragmentation of workers and tensions developing between workers - between permanent and irregular workers for example. These developments require unions and other NGOs which assist unions to think creatively about the new challenges.

An important role is being played by governments which are enforcing legislation which promotes the greater flexibility of labour (check whether this is true in your country ). And major multinational agencies such as the IMF are sometimes directly responsible for pushing governments to make these changes.