IFWEA GENERAL CONFERENCE

Aslak Leesland from AOF, Norway provides a critical overview of IFWEA’s ISC programme thus far, and considers  its future direction.  

The International Study Circle Programme (ISC) has been a resounding success. The purpose of this article is to analyse the nature of this success and to invite those who take an active interest in IFWEA to discuss the future of the programme.

The nature of ISCs

A formal definition of an ISC runs as follows:

 “...a network of course participants organised through local groups in different countries undertaking a common education programme, divided into a sequence of sessions held over an agreed number of weeks”. (ISCs - A Worker Educators’ Manual for Global Education, IFWEA/WEA 2000).

In order to understand the concept fully, it is necessary to bear in mind that international discussions are mediated through a web-site, and there is an international moderator who co-ordinates the programme.

ISCs undertaken by IFWEA have been characterised by the following features:

·         A structured, transnational dialogue has taken place using the Internet as an instrument.

·         Participants have been made aware of facts and points of views that they were not previously aware of. The quality of this new knowledge depends on the quality of the dialogue and the course material.

·         Participants have developed new perspectives not only on a given topic but also on their own situation.

·         Ordinary workers from a great number of countries have been put in direct contact with one another.

The potential of the ISC model lies in four areas:

·         ISCs create a space where minds meet. In our case, these minds come from the labour movement.

·         The ISC model may be used as  a new channel of dialogue between the grassroots and the leaders in a highly bureaucratised labour movement.

·         ISCs can give workers in different countries and cultures an understanding that there is more that unites them than what divides them.

·         Properly designed, an ISC may galvanize workers into action.

Why has the programme been a success?

Firstly, the programme is relevant to the organisations of the labour movement. International labour organisations are mainly policy-making and lobbying organisations. There is a perceived need for more joint analysis and action across borders which involves the rank-and-file. ISCs are an excellent instrument for achieving this.

Secondly, the participants have been satisfied and they say so. They have felt the excitement of being part of something which is new and stimulating.

Thirdly, the programme has been a success thanks to the well designed and beautifully executed work of the international moderator, the facilitators and the web-master.

Fourthly, the programme has focused on important issues.  

Finally, the model itself is inventive - a fact which has raised the interest and the curiosity of many people.

Should the programme be evaluated by independent researchers?

A number of seminars have been arranged to evaluate the ISCs which have already been implemented.  Participants in these seminars have themselves been actively involved in ISC work. These seminars have been absolutely necessary and have given a wealth of insights and suggestions. Without these seminars, IFWEA would not have been in a position to firmly advocate further ISC initiatives.

In my opinion, however,  the case for propagating the ISC model would be strengthened if an independent study of the strengths and weaknesses of the model could be undertaken  by an institute which specialises in such studies. Unfortunately, IFWEA’s financial situation does not permit even the thought of the organisation paying for such a study out of its own funds, so it would have to be financed elsewhere. The purpose of such a study would be to document benefits to IFWEA affiliates and other organisations in the labour movement. It would have to focus on both the short-term and the long-term effects of ISCs.  The study should try to answer questions like

·         What concrete knowledge was acquired? Could it have been acquired in any other and more cost-effective way?  Was this knowledge translated into competence?

·         To what extent did the ISC instil any new perspectives?

·         How was any new insight and competence translated into action? What concrete activities where incorporated in the programmes of  IFWEA affiliates? If none - why not?

·         Who benefited from the ISCs?  Only the participants? Their organisations? In what way? Why/why not? (whatever the case may be).

Now what?

IFWEA has got something valuable to sell. Then sell it !

We need a coherent marketing drive forcefully aimed at labour organisations with money to pay for new ISCs organised to tackle weaknesses they have not, on their own, the resources to correct.

We also need ISCs that are instrumental in enhancing the stature of poor IFWEA affiliates among their target groups, even if they have no funds to chip in.

Above all, we need ISCs that serve to empower the poor, the marginalised and the brutally exploited masses in what we call  “the South”.

Marketing of the ISC model must be based on information and an active dialogue with partner organisations and funding agencies. By way of information we have got an ISC manual, which can easily be supplemented with speeches and articles which have been produced about ISCs over the years.

When it comes to recruiting participants in future ISCs, IFWEA has an urgent need to enter into an active dialogue with interested affiliates and partner organisations. The clue is to promote the relevance of the ISC model in the context of the organisation in question. The flexibility of the model must be stressed without sacrificing the core tenets of the method. Thematically, the content must of course be adapted to the priorities of the organisations that are to be involved, but a few general themes point themselves out as worth pursuing

Firstly, I am absolutely convinced that IFWEA should promote further ISCs on topics connected to the broad theme of “economic globalisation”. IFWEA should aim at cementing the uneasy alliance between the trade union world and the radical opposition to globalisation that was unfolded to the world in Seattle.

Secondly, even if the first priority of IFWEA shold be the trade union movement, we should not forget that the organisation also has a broader agenda. One backdrop of an ISC could be the up-coming UN conference “Rio+10” in the autumn of 2002. The key themes will be “environment, poverty, and social justice”

I conclude by launching ideas for four new ISCs. Space does not permit any elaboration, but they would all need careful planning, fund-raising and implementation; each in its own way.

·         One aimed at workers in a relatively worker-friendly US-based TNC. The strategic idea behind this choice would be the wish to create a valuable benchmark in a corporate environment that is better known for union busting than for friendly dialogues with unions.

·         Another one disseminating the idea of core labour standards to workers in countries where these standards are scoffed at.

·         A third one organised by Euro-WEA aimed at unions that are new to the process of European Works Councils. This is an institution that many trade unionists shrug their shoulders at, but to others it is their first and maybe only meeting-place with unionists in other countries. The idea would be to build on something which is already institutionalised and offer unions a practical way of drawing maximum benefits from this opportunity to build union solidarity across borders within the same company.

·         Finally, a “Rio+10” ISC.  It would be aimed at strengthening the arguments of NGOs/unions involving themselves in this hugely political process and, secondly, to produce learning materials for ordinary people. Funding would have to come from governmental donor agencies or private foundations, and a natural partner would be Solidar.  

email to IFWEA Journal: alana.dave@mcr1.poptel.org.uk