ORDINARILY I would not reply to any Tom, Dick and Harry writing on labour matters or arguing my stand as to the role of unions in Malaysia.

But author Ronald Benjamin who wrote “What is Ramasamy up to on labour?” might not be just a lay person.

Although he penned the above piece, I think he was backed by some powerful persons in the Human Resources Ministry in general and the minister M. Kulasegaran in particular.

By the way, I just found out that on a recent visit to Geneva, he was in the delegation as one of the ministry’s advisers.

I take it then that Benjamin is not just a person interested in labour matters but was entrusted to criticise my piece  on the need for labour empowerment to ensure the wellbeing of Malaysian workers.

Benjamin’s basic argument is simply this: why is Ramasamy complaining when the ministry has adhered to ILO international standards in coming up with labour law amendments?

The Malaysian Trade Unions Congress might be displeased but then the ministry had to make a decision rather than wait for consensus from the MTUC.

The MTUC being hardly representative of workers in the country should understand that the ministry acted within the ambit of the law and within the ILO framework on tripartite negotiations.

And finally, being mischievous, he asked why I did not use internal channels within DAP to discuss the legal amendments and why the party should not think of taking disciplinary action against me for breaching party rules and regulations.

Of course, he went to the irresponsible extent of saying that I was the mouthpiece of MTUC leaders.

Whether Benjamin realises it or not, my basic approach to labour matters is institutional and not focussed on personalities. 

In the last 30 years or so, my methodological perspective was looking at the interrelationship of the state, labour and employers.

Just for his knowledge, I was never the slavish proponent of the government, the employers or labour.

Due to the preponderant role of the state on behest of capital, labour was always on the receiving end.

Unless and until labour is empowered through legislation and other means, labour or its representatives cannot make much headway in efforts to improve the lives of millions of workers.

The position of labour or the unions has been considerably weakened over the years.

Tripartite framework should not stick to old rules and regulations, but must empower unions to play a significant role in determining the interests of labour.

Gone are the days of government or the employers knowing the best.

Labour or its representatives must be given a role in accordance with the principles of freedom and voluntarism.

The statist approach of Benjamin or those in the ministry does not address genuine problems of the subaltern class.

Why can’t my analysis of institutionalism with particular emphasis on the empowerment of labour or MTUC cannot be appreciated in the Ministry.

Tripartite mechanism is there, but it means nothing to the empowerment of labour.

I am urging the government to re-consider the present tripartite framework and whether it is really consonant with international labour standards.

I doubt it.

So, Benjamin or whoever is behind him should realise the truth that the government slogan of shared prosperity could be a pipe dream if labour was not factored into the overall calculation.

By the way, Benjamin should  not foolishly drag DAP into the debate simply because it is not involved in the matter in the first place.

Threats of disciplinary action against me must be relegated to the realm of jokes! – November 2, 2019.

*P. Ramasamy is Penang deputy chief minister II.