20 Jan 2023

US unions suffer further decline in membership rate

Shannon Jones


The US unionization rate declined again in 2022 to 10.1 percent, the lowest rate since records have been kept, according to numbers released by the US Bureau of Labor Statistics. The unionization rate fell from 10.3 percent in 2021 and is down from 20.1 percent in 1983, when the figure was first compiled in the wake of the President Reagan’s smashing of 1981’s PATCO air traffic controllers strike.

The decline took place despite a shortage of workers that has increased workers’ bargaining power and an uptick in unionization attempts by the major unions. It occurs two years into the term of the administration of President Joe Biden, who describes himself as the most “pro-union” president in US history.

The number of union members rose by 273,000 in 2022, but this was eclipsed by the nearly 4 percent growth in overall employment, or 5.3 million more workers. The rate of private sector unionization is just 6 percent or 7.2 million workers out of 120.36 million private sector workers. The public sector unionization rate was 33.1 percent, 7.1 million workers. The unionization rate for young workers aged 16 to 24 was less than half that of workers aged 45 to 54.

Nurses strike outside Mount Sinai Hospital on January 10, 2023, in New York City. [AP Photo/Andres Kudacki]

The numbers for 2022 continued a decline in the percentage of union membership that has proceeded steadily for decades under both Democratic and Republican administrations. It follows an absolute decline in union membership in 2021 of 246,000 members.

The sharp fall came despite an uptick in union organizing efforts. According to the National Labor Relations Board there were 1,363 union elections held in fiscal 2022, the most since 2015. The unions won 1,041 of those elections, mostly in relatively small bargaining units such as coffee chain Starbucks.

Responding to the latest numbers on unionization, AFL-CIO President Liz Shuler decried the decline the result of “illegal opposition from companies that would rather pay union-busting firms millions than give workers a seat at the table.” However, this ignores the fact that the industrial unions were built in the teeth of the ferocious and violent opposition of the employers. Nor does Shuler explain why the unions have failed to advance despite the overt support of the Biden administration.

The continuing fall in union membership takes place in the context of an unbroken series of betrayals carried out by the American trade union bureaucracy, which has held wage increases well below the rate of inflation and even below the overall percentage rate increases for nonunion workers. While there was an increase in the number of strikes in 2022, there were 25 involving 1,000 workers or more, these did not result in real wage gains for workers. A whole series of strikes by health care workers and educators, including 48,000 academic workers at the University of California who are members of the United Auto Workers, were shut down on the basis of wage-cutting agreements that imposed below-inflation pay rises.

This culminated in the collusion of the railroad unions with the Biden administration in December to legislatively impose a pro-employer deal on 120,000 railroad workers, which stripped them of their right to strike and overrode their votes to reject the terms. The contract imposed below-inflation rate pay increases and maintained a hated attendance policy, which keeps the workers on call virtually 24/7.

While masses of workers sense the need to collectively organize and fight back against the impact of raging inflation, overwork and deteriorating health and safety on the job, compounded by the continuing COVID-19 pandemic, more and more are coming to see the union bureaucracy as an obstacle to their fight.

This has been reflected in the large number of contract rejection votes by margins of 90 percent or more and the increasing turn by rail, education, health care, auto and other workers towards the building of rank-and-file committees to transfer power from the union bureaucracy into the hands of workers on the shop floor.

At the same time, the pro-company record of the unions has led to several defeats of high-profile organizing campaigns, notably at the Amazon BHM1 facility in Bessemer, Alabama. There, workers twice decisively rejected the Retail, Wholesale and Department Store Union (RWDSU) despite—or perhaps because of—the support from top Democratic and Republican officeholders, including Biden himself.

Significantly, union density is the highest in those workplaces, usually public sector, where they enjoy some degree of sanction by the state. In fact the highest levels of unionization (34.6 percent) are to found in “protective services,” including police and prison guards. The high unionization rate among police officers says much about the character of the unions, given the role of police as enforcers of strikebreaking injunctions and protectors of scabs.

The continuing collapse of union membership under conditions of the highest levels of inflation in decades and an increase in the number of strikes and militancy, reflected in contract rejections and strike votes, underscores the assessment of the unions made by the World Socialist Web Site and the Socialist Equality Party. Under the impact of capitalist globalization and the unions’ nationalist and pro-capitalist program, these organizations have been transformed from defensive organizations of the working class into appendages of the corporations and the government.

This fact is further confirmed by statistics compiled by independent researcher Chris Bohner from an examination of annual union financial filings.

In 2021, net assets of unions filing financial reports with the US Labor Department grew $3.5 billion from 2020 from $28.1 billion to $31.6 billion. The net assets of unions more than doubled in the period 2010–2021 even though total union membership fell by 700,000 during that same time frame.

Bohner also notes that the amount spent by the national AFL-CIO in 2021 on political action, that is campaigning for the Democrats, dwarfed the $10.8 million spent on organizing by a factor of two to one ($23 million in fiscal 2022 and $37 million in fiscal 2021). Meanwhile, unions overall have spent an average of just of $78 million a year on strike benefits since 2010, less than 0.5 percent of their net assets.

The decline in the unions is not confined to the US, but is a global phenomenon. Everywhere, the unions have embraced corporatism, the unrestrained collaboration of unions with management to lower labor costs to help “their” corporate owners better compete on the world market. The logic of this is on crude display in Germany where the IG Metall trade union has proposed that Ford workers take an 18 percent pay cut in order to underbid brother workers in Spain.

Australian Labor government’s plan to address school staffing crisis set to further undermine public education system

Karen Maxwell


The federal Labor government recently issued an “action plan,” outlining 27 policy measures that will supposedly address the teacher shortage crisis wracking the public education system across Australia. In reality, the measures will do nothing to address staffing shortages and will only serve to undermine the teaching profession and the public education system.

A section of the striking New South Wales teachers’ rally in Macquarie Street, Sydney on June 30, 2022. [Photo: WSWS]

Schools across the country are grappling with serious difficulties flowing from the inability to appoint the required number of teachers. Previous government forecasts anticipated a shortage of more than 4,000 teachers across Australia by 2025. However, the situation is already worse than that.

In New South Wales, latest available figures show 3,300 vacant positions, and in Victoria, there are 1,100 teaching positions still vacant for 2023. Some schools are desperately offering sign-on bonuses of $10,000, with this spending offset by cuts to other parts of the school’s budget.

The situation is fueling higher class sizes, cuts to curriculum programs, and extra pressures on the existing teaching workforce.

The Labor government’s plan—endorsed by state education ministers, Labor and Liberal alike, and by the Australian Education Union (AEU)—amounts to less than a band-aid response to the crisis. It involves just $328 million of additional government funding, spread over nine years. This amounts to $36 million a year. For comparison, this is equivalent to 0.07 percent of annual military spending committed by the federal government.

Titled the National Teacher Workforce Action (NTWA) plan and issued last month, the government’s document lays out five “priority areas:” improving teacher supply, strengthening teacher education, keeping the teachers we have, elevating the profession, and better understanding workforce needs. The limited spending measures include $159 million for 4,000 additional university places for teachers, $56 million for bursaries, $68 million to triple the number of mid-career professionals shifting to teaching, and $30 million for a Teacher Reduction Workload Fund.

A central part of the NTWA plan aims to undermine teacher qualifications and erode the professional status of teachers. As part of “improving teacher supply,” student teachers will be given permission to teach before they have completed their teaching degree.

This measure was proposed by the AEU bureaucracy in August last year. Under-trained student-teachers will as a priority be rushed to remote and rural areas, which are suffering from critical teacher shortages and are often among the most impoverished in Australia. This is also the purpose of the bursary program, which will be accompanied by a “commitment to teach” obligation on all those offered a subsidy towards their teaching degree.

Linked with this, the NTWA plan also contains measures to bring teachers’ aides and mid-career professionals into teaching with just a one-year secondary teaching qualification.

Within ruling circles, reducing the duration and complexity of teaching qualifications has been a long-standing goal. There is no concern regarding having less knowledgeable, less skilled teachers—the agenda is to rapidly expand the workforce in order to avoid having to invest money in retaining experienced teachers. The Labor government’s “plan” recalls the cynical political adage of never letting a good crisis go to waste.

A further measure envisaged by the NTWA plan is the recruitment of international teachers by expediting visa application processes. This will likely have limited impact, as the teacher shortage is not confined to Australia, but is an international crisis.

The NTWA plan contains no genuine proposals to address the large numbers of teachers denied the right to permanent employment and employed instead on precarious casual contracts.

Under the hypocritical banner of “elevating the profession,” the NTWA plan proposes that members of the public be encouraged to nominate teachers for an Order of Australia medal. This farcical initiative underscores the gulf between the ordinary teachers and the Labor government and its trade union bureaucrat advisors. Teachers did not enter the teaching profession for public glory but in order to educate and inspire young people, to foster within them a love of learning and confidence in their ability to cognise the world around them.

The government has attempted to present the teaching shortage crisis as a highly complex problem with no clear solution. Education minister Jason Clare last year declared there was no “silver bullet” to the issue.

Teachers and school workers have little confusion on what needs to be done. One survey of educators, conducted by Monash University researchers last year, reported the response of three teachers who were asked what they needed:

“Fewer students in each class and more preparation time.”

“Hiring of additional qualified specialist staff to assist teachers by diagnosing students, helping to create support plans, helping to design manageable adjustments, etc.”

“Fewer classes and more preparation time. I have to use my sick leave to mark!”

Such basic measures will not be implemented to address crushing workloads, one of the key issues confronting burned out teachers, because lowering class sizes and providing teachers with more time for planning, preparation, and assessment requires significant new spending. The Labor government is instead heeding the demands of finance capital and big business for lower debt and deficits by curtailing public spending.

Australia now has one of the world’s most privatised school systems, with 46 percent of secondary students attending private schools. The public school system has been systematically underfunded by successive Labor and Liberal governments, and school staff in working class communities are provided with grossly inadequate resources to deal with the impact of the social crisis expressed within classrooms through childhood trauma, undiagnosed disabilities, and related behavioural issues that make teachers’ work even more challenging and stressful.

A staggering proportion, 50 percent, of students who start initial teacher education (ITE) courses drop out before completing them. Many take one look inside a classroom as part of their course and decide to change profession. Somewhere between 30 percent and 50 percent of graduating teachers are quitting after their first, second or third year.

The full reopening of schools in January–February 2022 by all state governments, in collusion with the AEU bureaucracy, led to prolific student and teacher absences as COVID-19 infections raged through the schools. Classes were merged, teachers were expected to teach additional students on behalf of their sickened colleagues, as well as providing extra tuition for students needing help to catch up with the curriculum. The Monash University survey, involving 5,500 teachers, found that 25 percent of teachers said that they felt unsafe at work. One of the main reasons mentioned was lack of effective measures within schools to protect them from COVID infection.

None of the government’s new measures related to the teaching crisis touch on the risk of further COVID infections, consistent with its false assertion that the pandemic is over.

NATO members pledge “unprecedented” new arms shipments to Ukraine

Andre Damon


The United Kingdom, Poland and the Baltic states pledged Thursday to carry out an “unprecedented” increase in arms shipments to Ukraine with the aim of facilitating a military offensive to recapture territory held by Russia.

The announcement took place ahead of a war summit at the US airbase in Ramstein, Germany, in which 50 US allies, including every member of NATO will participate, and where participants are expected to announce the provision of main battle tanks to Ukraine.

Containers and vehicles await transportation on commercial ships to Europe at the Port of Beaumont, Texas, in support of Exercise DEFENDER-Europe 20 February 18, 2020. (Photo courtesy of U.S. Army)

Thursday’s statement declared, “We recognise that equipping Ukraine to push Russia out of its territory is as important as equipping them to defend what they already have. Together we will continue supporting Ukraine to move from resisting to expelling Russian forces from Ukrainian soil.”

The statement continues, “Therefore, we commit to collectively pursuing delivery of an unprecedented set of donations including main battle tanks, heavy artillery, air defence, ammunition, and infantry fighting vehicles to Ukraine’s defence.”

The statement concludes, “The new level of required combat power is only achieved by combinations of main battle tank squadrons, beneath air and missile defence, operating alongside divisional artillery groups, and further deep precision fires enabling targeting of Russian logistics and command nodes in occupied territory.”

The military operation being described in the statement would be a massive combined-arms offensive reminiscent of the Second World War, financed, armed and effectively led by NATO.

The document notes that Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania pledged to train thousands of Ukrainian troops. Poland promised to send two companies of Leopard 2 main battle tanks, about 25 in all, alongside 42 infantry fighting vehicles.

The United Kingdom promised to send a “squadron of Challenger 2 tanks, as well as “100,000 artillery rounds; hundreds more sophisticated missiles including GMLRS rockets, Starstreak air defence missiles, and medium range air defence missiles; 600 Brimstone anti-tank munitions.” The UK promised to train 20,000 Ukrainian armed forces personnel in 2023.

While it appeared that the details of supplying Leopard 2 battle tanks were still being worked out ahead of the meeting at Ramstein Air Force Base, Lithuania’s Defence Minister Arvydas Anušauskas told Reuters that a number of countries will announce they are sending Leopard tanks to Ukraine. “The total number of armoured vehicles pledged at Ramstein will go into hundreds,” he said.

Ahead of the meeting, the United States announced a $2.5 billion arms shipment to Ukraine, including 59 Bradley Fighting Vehicles, 90 Stryker armored personnel carriers, 53 mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles and 350 high mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicles.

Earlier this week, it was reported that the United States will “likely” announce that it is sending to Ukraine long-range missiles—the ground-launched small-diameter bomb—with a range of over 100 miles.

Speaking at the World Economic Forum in Davos, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg declared, “Weapons are the way to peace.”

Addressing the same gathering, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky declared, “Crimea is our land, our territory. … It is our sea and our mountains. Give us your weapons—we will return what is ours.”

Responding to the escalation being carried out by the NATO powers, Dmitry Medvedev, deputy chairman of Russia’s Security Council, penned a brief statement on Telegram:

Tomorrow, at NATO’s Ramstein base, the great military leaders will discuss new tactics and strategies, as well as the supply of new heavy weapons and strike systems to Ukraine. And this was right after the forum in Davos, where it was repeated like a mantra: “To achieve peace, Russia must lose.”

And it never occurs to any of them to draw the following elementary conclusion from this: The loss of a nuclear power in a conventional war can provoke the outbreak of a nuclear war. Nuclear powers do not lose major conflicts on which their fate depends.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov endorsed Medvedev’s remarks, telling reporters, “Potentially, this is extremely dangerous. It will mean bringing the conflict to a whole new level which, of course, will not bode well from the point of view of global and pan-European security.”

Russia possesses nearly 6,000 nuclear warheads. Despite efforts by the United States to develop its missile defense forces, it is widely believed that a full-scale nuclear war would kill more than half of the populations of both countries.

The rapid escalation of the war has been accompanied by a staggering mood of recklessness within the US political establishment.

In an editorial published Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal demanded strikes inside of Russian territory, declaring, “Why should a dictator who rolled over a foreign border be free to claim his territory as sacrosanct?”

It concluded, “The rejoinder is that Mr. Putin might unleash a nuclear weapon, but the past months have shown that he will make that decision based on his own calculations in any case.”

Millions march in France against Macron’s pension cuts

Alex Lantier & Anthony Torres


Two million people struck or marched in protests yesterday called by union federations against President Emmanuel Macron’s pension cuts. Polls show around 80 percent of the population oppose the cuts, which would increase the minimum retirement age to 64 with a minimum pay-in period of 43 years. Strikes calls were widely followed by rail and mass transit workers, school staff, and electricity and refinery workers, and 200 protest marches were held in cities across France.

Trade unions reported that 400,000 people marched in Paris, 140,000 in Marseille, 38,000 in Lyon, 60,000 in Bordeaux, 50,000 in Toulouse and Lille, and 55,000 in Nantes, 35,000 in Strasbourg. Moreover, many smaller cities saw large turnouts that surprised police authorities. There were 25,000 in Orléans, 21,000 in Le Mans, 20,000 in Nice, 19,000 in Clermont-Ferrand, 15,000 in Tours, 13,000 in Pau, 10,000 in Chartres, 9,000 in Angoulême and 8,000 in Châteauroux.

Over 140,000 people marched in Marseille against Macron's pension cuts. [Photo: WSWS]

Clashes broke out between police and protesters in Lyon and in Paris, where 3,500 riot police were on duty and, as during “yellow vest” protests against social inequality in 2018-2019, reinforced the police guard on government buildings.

Macron’s cuts are being overwhelmingly rejected. Amid a wave of strikes across Europe and internationally against austerity and inflation, an explosive confrontation is emerging between the working class and the Macron administration. Indeed, French officials went on television last night to boast that they would ram Macron’s cuts through despite overwhelming public opposition.

Public Service Minister Stanislas Guérini told TF1 that Macron would not change the cuts in response to the protest. “There were a lot of people today, we should not minimize that fact,” Guérini said, but he added that the cuts were “the product of social dialog” between the union bureaucracies and the state. “The mobilization does not change our plans,” he concluded.

The “president of the rich” aims to cut €13 billion per year from pensions, as European Union states hand out trillions of euros to banks and corporations in massive bailouts and spends billions to send tanks and other weapons to Ukraine for war with Russia.

Protesters who spoke to the WSWS also cited the recent Oxfam report on inequalities produced by the capitalist system. The report, which revealed that two-thirds of new wealth created since 2020 has gone to the richest 1 percent of society, also noted that France’s top 10 billionaires have increased their wealth by €189 billion since 2020. The fortune of French billionaire Bernard Arnault, currently the world’s wealthiest man, now stands at €213 billion.

One statistic exposes the oligarchic interests Macron serves: the €13 billion he wants to cut from the France’s yearly pension budget is less than the amount of profit Arnault has added to his personal fortune each year since 2020, when his fortune stood at €79 billion.

Priscillia [Photo: WSWS]

Priscillia, a caregiver, told WSWS reporters at the protest in Paris why she rejects Macron’s cuts: “With the difficulty of the work, it’s impossible. We are not office workers, we are not government ministers, we are health care workers. We cannot last until 64, it’s not physically or psychologically possible. I use my body a lot to lift people, even if there is mechanical assistance, we use our physical strength. We already have many colleagues on disability because of that.”

She also stressed her “disgust” at mounting inflation, which is impoverishing workers in France and internationally. “Everything is expensive, and salaries are not going up. We have to watch very carefully what we eat, we have to cut out the small pleasures like restaurants, going out, taking vacations.”

About Macron’s reckless decision to send tanks to Ukraine for war with Russia, she said: “I worry about what can happen between Russia and France, and I also worry about the French people.”

Priscillia spoke of her anger at the gulf between Arnault, raking in tens of billions of euros each year, and workers struggling to get by: “It is disgusting, it is we the poor who will pay for people like that. Today, if both people in a couple are not working, it’s impossible to make ends meet. As a public sector worker, it is extremely hard to find a place to live. We make too much money to obtain social housing, but we are too poor to afford private housing on the market.”

WSWS reporters in Paris also spoke to Ludovic, who said: “I am a professional firefighter, I have a pension system, and now I’m learning they will make me work two years more before I can retire. It’s a physical job, I’m sure I cannot last until the end. … With work at night and by day, working 24 or 48 hour shifts, the physical demands of this job mean that we have seven years shorter life expectancy than the average in France.”

Ludovic [Photo: WSWS]

Ludovic warned that Macron’s pension cuts aim to make workers work until they die. He said, “In the fire station where I currently work, I have never seen a retirement party. The last two colleagues who left, they went straight to the cemetery before they could retire. I had one colleague who died of a massive stroke a week after starting to retire, a second died of cancer. Our profession is known to be dangerous because of all the toxic smoke we breathe on our missions.

“I started work at age 19, I want to have free time when I retire and not just die,” Ludovic said, stressing his anger at the obscene enrichment of the financial oligarchy: “It’s sick that we are being asked to give things up, either in our daily lives or in our pensions, when these people are given unlimited opportunities to soak up wealth.”

Catherine, a social worker, told WSWS reporters in Marseille she wants to fight the systematic assault the ruling establishment is waging on the social rights of the workers. “Everything earlier generations built is under attack,” she said.

Protesters in Marseille hold a sign saying "Macron's rule = Lies, Corruption, Racketeering, and Oppression" [Photo: WSWS]

She added, “They are destroying all our rights: unemployment insurance, welfare payments, public hospitals are being wrecked, now pensions. This has to stop. The government hands out billions to super-rich corporations and asks for nothing in exchange, we have no idea what they do. … I work with people who struggle, eat in soup kitchens, don’t heat their homes, and must pawn what little they still have. They are sad, worried about their future and those of their children. They are worried about getting sick.”

Catherine also emphasized the growing distrust of broad layers of workers towards the corrupt negotiations between the union bureaucracies and the Macron government: “The unions no longer represent the workers, they have compromised themselves. … Yes, the unions are waking up, but one can no longer simply rely on the unions, that is no longer possible. We are attacked on all sides, we have to all revolt together.”

French union confederations including the Stalinist General Confederation of Labor (CGT), the social-democratic French Democratic Labor Confederation (CFDT) and Workers Force (FO) met last night and announced a new protest for January 23. Well aware of explosive social anger in the working class, the union bureaucrats are desperate to posture as opponents of Macron, even though they negotiated the cuts with him.

Workers cannot give any confidence to the CGT, CFDT or FO bureaucracies, however. They isolated the 2019-2020 rail strike against these pension cuts, which let Macron pass the cuts in March 2020. He only withdrew the cuts, as strikes grew across Europe against EU inaction on COVID-19, out of fear of an uncontrollable social explosion. Now, with the complicity of the union bureaucracies, Macron is returning to try to pass the pension cuts again.

Bitter experience shows that the façade of trade union “unity” will collapse with the escalation of the class struggle between the financial oligarchy and the working class, as union bureaucrats try to prop up the capitalist state machine against the workers.

The best allies of workers in France, struggling against global problems like inflation, war, the COVID-19 pandemic and social austerity, are their class brothers and sisters in other countries. Strikes are erupting internationally. A national strike of nurses, together with calls for strikes in transport and education, is underway in Britain, while Portuguese teachers are on a nationwide strike. As nurses and teachers strikes spread in the United States, demands are growing among US rail workers for a strike against a draconian concessions contract imposed by the Biden administration.

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern resigns

Tom Peters


In a shock announcement on Thursday, New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern told the media she would step down from the position by February 7 and leave parliament in April.

After more than five years leading the Labour Party-led government, Ardern offered little explanation for her sudden departure, other than saying she was burnt out. “I know what this job takes, and I know that I no longer have enough in the tank to do it justice. It is that simple,” she said, adding, “I am looking forward to spending time with my family again.”

New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern at press conference at parliament in Wellington, Oct. 11, 2021. [AP Photo/Robert Kitchin/Pool Photo via AP]

Ardern’s resignation apparently took most Labour politicians by surprise and has thrown the government into turmoil ahead of a national election scheduled for October. Labour MPs will meet on Sunday to try and choose a new leader, but according to the New Zealand Herald there is “no clear consensus on who should succeed Ardern.” Deputy prime minister and finance minister Grant Robertson has ruled himself out as a contender.

Ardern claimed she was “not leaving because I believe we can’t win the election, but because I believe we can and will, and we need a fresh set of shoulders for that challenge.” This is not credible. In recent months Labour has polled around 33 percent—a dramatic decline since the 2020 election when it won more than half the votes.

The opposition National Party is only polling around 38 percent, reflecting widespread hostility towards both the major capitalist parties. This is an international phenomenon: everywhere, including in the United States, Europe and Australia, voters see little difference between any of the established parties. Traditional parliamentary and two-party systems are increasingly discredited and are breaking apart under the impact of the economic crisis, soaring social inequality and class polarisation, the out-of-control pandemic and the headlong rush towards another world war.

The NZ Labour Party, under Ardern’s leadership was barely able to form a government in 2017 in a coalition with the Greens and the far-right New Zealand First. In 2020, Labour won just over 50 percent of the votes, partly due to the shambolic state of the National Party, beset by factional warfare and conflicts over foreign policy.

Wealthy areas of the country switched their support to Labour largely because of the Ardern government’s multi-billion dollar handouts to big business and the rich during the first year of the pandemic—which are now being paid for by the working class through rampant inflation and austerity measures.

To the extent that Labour was supported by the working class in 2020, it was because the government had implemented a series of lockdowns and other public health measures which kept the country almost entirely free from COVID-19. The elimination strategy was implemented out of fear of a movement developing among healthcare workers, in particular, pushing for a nationwide lockdown, outside of the pro-government trade unions.

Labour’s and Ardern’s support began falling sharply in early 2022, coinciding with a major deterioration in workers’ living standards and the government’s disastrous adoption of the homicidal policy of mass COVID-19 infection. In late 2021, the government acceded to the demands of big business to abandon its “zero COVID” policy. As a result, the death toll from COVID has surged from just 30 in October 2021 to more than 3,000. Hospitals are overwhelmed and tens of thousands of people are likely to be suffering from Long COVID.

Meanwhile, inflation is driving broad sections of the working class into poverty. In her speech yesterday Ardern said her government had “turned around child poverty statistics” and “improved the pay and conditions of workers, and shifted our settings towards a high wage, high skilled economy.” This is a lie. That same day, statistics were released showing food prices went up 11.3 percent in the past year, the biggest jump since 1990 and far outstripping wages, which increased only 3.7 percent in the year to September.

New Zealand is experiencing a severe housing crisis, with more than 102,000 homeless people in a population of 5 million—the highest rate of homelessness in the OECD. The waiting list for public housing has increased fivefold since Labour formed a coalition government in 2017 and made false promises to fix the crisis by building 100,000 “affordable” homes. Only 1,500 homes were built in five years under the Kiwibuild scheme.

Since 2018, the Ardern government has repeatedly confronted nationwide strikes by nurses, doctors and other healthcare workers, as well as teachers and firefighters, demanding decent pay and safe working conditions. These actions have been systematically shut down and sold out by the union bureaucracies, which have also worked closely with the government and big business to dismantle public health restrictions and reopen schools and workplaces.

Ardern is bailing out at precisely the point where the ruling elite is demanding a major escalation in the attacks on the working class to make it pay for the global economic crisis. Reserve Bank governor Adrian Orr has admitted that it is lifting interest rates in order to engineer a recession, to increase unemployment and drive down wages.

The implicit message contained in Ardern’s vague speech was that she does not feel up to the task of implementing this brutal agenda and confronting the resistance that will emerge in the working class. In a telling statement comparing the present period to a war, she told the media: “It’s one thing to lead your country in peace times, it’s another to lead them through [a] crisis; there’s a greater weight of responsibility.”

It also cannot be ruled out that Ardern’s resignation was prompted by pressure from New Zealand’s allies in Washington and Canberra, which are seeking a stronger commitment from Wellington to the far-advanced preparations for world war against Russia and China.

As a minor imperialist power, New Zealand is an integral part of the US-led Five Eyes intelligence network and has actively participated in the criminal US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The Ardern government has sent about 200 troops to the UK and central Europe to assist with training and supplying Ukraine’s military for the US-NATO war against Russia.

Former Prime Minister John Key resigned in 2016 and his National Party government was relentlessly attacked by pro-US academics and journalists because of its promotion of stronger economic ties with China, New Zealand’s most important trading partner. Following the inconclusive 2017 election, the US ambassador publicly indicated Washington’s preference for a Labour-Greens-NZ First coalition government, which the Trump administration believed would take a stronger stance in support of the US against China.

There have been recriminations, particularly from the Australian media and foreign policy establishment, that New Zealand has refused to fall into line and continues to try and balance between the US and China. The Australian’s foreign editor Greg Sheridan writes today that under Ardern “New Zealand was a tiny, frightened mouse when it came to Beijing.” He complains that “her government did nothing to revive New Zealand’s substantially non-existent defence forces.”

In general, however, the international media greeted Ardern’s resignation with an outpouring of praise, tinged with anxiety. The Washington Post called her “an inspiration to women around the world.” The New York Times described her as “a global emblem of anti-Trump liberalism.”

Former US secretary of state and war criminal Hilary Clinton hailed Ardern “for guiding her country with strength, compassion, and grace through multiple historic crises, doubtless saving countless lives.” She did not mention New Zealand’s disastrous adoption of the same “let it rip” COVID policy that has killed more than 1.2 million people in the US.

In the Sydney Morning Herald, Australian Labor Party Prime Minister Anthony Albanese calls Ardern “a true leader” who “reminded us all that kindness and strength are not mutually exclusive.”

He praised Ardern, in particular, for her response to the March 15, 2019 terrorist attack in Christchurch, in which fascist gunman Brenton Tarrant massacred 51 people at two mosques. “I will always carry in my mind that image of Jacinda in a headscarf, offering the embrace of a nation to a community stricken by grief and fear,” Albanese said.

In fact, the response of both the Australian and New Zealand governments to the Christchurch atrocity was to whitewash the role of the police and intelligence agencies, which did not prevent the attack despite multiple warnings about Tarrant. Since then, Ardern has exploited the events of March 15 to justify the expansion of the intelligence agencies, and has led an international campaign to censor the internet in the name of combating “extremism.”

Over the past five years, Ardern has been relentlessly glorified in the world’s media, for being a woman, then for having a baby while serving as prime minister, and later for her response to the 2019 terror attack and the pandemic.

Commenting on this phenomenon following the election in October 2020, the WSWS noted that New Zealand was falsely portrayed “as an exception, a beacon of hope and a haven from the chaos sweeping the planet. The aim is to persuade working people that the colossal problems they face can be resolved within the present system if only ‘kind’ and ‘compassionate’ leaders like Ardern are elected.”

As we predicted, these illusions could not be sustained in the face of the ruthless pro-business restructuring carried out by the Ardern government. The entire charade has been fundamentally undermined by the worsening social crisis, the out-of-control pandemic and the growing militarisation of New Zealand society under her government.

In New Zealand, the Labour Party’s middle class liberal and pseudo-left supporters have been thrown into despair. The “left-wing” Daily Blog editor Martyn Bradbury called Ardern “one of the best leaders Labour has had” and declared: “This is a terrible blow to the Political Left. We will be in shock for some time.”

Like many media pundits, he blamed Ardern’s decision to quit on “toxic attacks on Jacinda personally that the Right have whipped up”—without mentioning that Labour emboldened the extreme right, firstly through its alliance with the racist and anti-immigrant NZ First, and then its adoption of all the far-right demands for letting COVID rip.

Dougal McNeill, a leading member of the International Socialist Organisation, which supported Labour in the last several elections, similarly wrote on Twitter: “The (misogynist, vile) hatred for Ardern was against all that was her best, a world away from the radical left’s criticisms of her limits. That’s why today, thinking about going hard early on COVID & showing solidarity after the Christchurch massacre, I feel, yes, sadness.”

These statements echo former Labour Party Prime Minister Helen Clark, who told the media “Jacinda has faced a level of hatred and vitriol which in my experience is unprecedented in our country.” The right-wing Māori Party, which is positioning itself as an ally of Labour, similarly issued a statement declaring that Ardern was “driven from office [by] constant personalisation and vilification.”

The aim of all such commentary is to divert attention from the fact that Ardern led the most right-wing, pro-business government in recent memory, which is carrying out historic attacks on the working class. Whatever the immediate outcome of the leadership crisis in the Labour Party, this agenda will only intensify.

19 Jan 2023

Government of Flanders Mastermind Scholarships 2023/2024

Application Deadline: 28th April 2023 GMT+1

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: All

To be taken at (country): Various universities in Belgium

  • KU Leuven / University of Leuven
  • University of Antwerp
  • Ghent University
  • Hasselt University
  • Vrije Universiteit Brussel

University colleges (Arts and Nautical Sciences)

  • Antwerp Maritime Academy
  • Artesis Plantijn University College Antwerp
  • Erasmus University College Brussels
  • Karel de Grote University College
  • LUCA School of Arts
  • PXL University College
  • University College Ghent

Eligible Field of Study: The program holds for all study areas.

About Government of Flanders Mastermind Scholarships: The programme aims to promote the internationalization of the Flemish Higher Education, as stated in the Action Plan for Student Mobility, Brains on the Move (September 2013).

Students cannot apply directly. Applications need to be submitted by the Flemish host institution.

Students should not combine this scholarship with another scholarship from the Flemish government or an Erasmus Mundus Scholarship.

Offered Since: 2015

Type: Masters

Eligibility for Government of Flanders Mastermind Scholarships: The Flemish host institution applies on behalf of the student.

General eligibility requirements

  • The applicant applies to take up a Master degree programme at a higher education institution in Flanders (hereafter ‘Flemish host institution’).
  • The applicant should have a high standard of academic performance and/or potential. He/she meets all academic entrance criteria, including relevant language requirements, for entering the Master programme in question offered by the Flemish host institution.
  • All nationalities can apply. The previous degree obtained should be from a higher education institution located outside Flanders.
  • Students who are already enrolled in a Flemish higher education institution cannot apply.

Selection: A Flemish selection committee awards the scholarships, in cooperation with the Flemish Department of Education and Training.

Number of Awardees: 20 per university

Value of Government of Flanders Mastermind Scholarships: The incoming student is awarded a scholarship of maximum €8000,- per academic year.

Duration of Scholarship: The duration of mobility is minimum 1 academic year and maximum the full duration of the master programme. If the student obtains less than 45 ECTS in the first year, then he/she loses the scholarship in the second year.

How to Apply for Government of Flanders Mastermind Scholarships: 

  • You can find more information in the guidelines for application in the Scholarship Webpage link.
  • You need to contact the Flemish higher education institution to inquire about their internal selection procedures and deadline for submitting the application.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details

FAO-Hungarian Government Scholarship 2023/2024

Application Deadline: 28th February 2023

Offered annually? Yes

Eligible Countries: Residents (who must be nationals) of the following countries are eligible to apply for the Scholarship Programme:

Afghanistan, Albania, AlgeriaAngola, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Bangladesh, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Burkina Faso, Cambodia, ChadEgyptEthiopiaGambia, Georgia, Ghana, Jordan, Kazakhstan, Kenya, Kosovo1, Kyrgyzstan, Laos, Lebanon, North Macedonia, MadagascarMali, Myanmar, Republic of Moldova, Mongolia, Montenegro, NamibiaNigeria, North Korea, State of Palestine, the Philippines, Republic of Cabo Verde, Serbia, SomaliaSouth SudanSudan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, Uganda, Ukraine, Uzbekistan, Vietnam, Yemen.

To be taken at (University): The following universities in Europe are participating:

  • Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Buda Campus, Budapest

FAO-Hungarian Government Scholarship Fields of Study: The following Master of Science degree courses are being offered in English for the 2023-24 Academic YearFood safety and quality engineering (Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences)

Type: Masters

Eligibility: Candidates will be selected on the basis of the following criteria:

  • Citizenship and residency of one of the eligible countries
  • Excellent school achievements
  • English language proficiency (for courses taught in English)
  • Motivation
  • Good health
  • Age (candidates under 30 are preferred)

Selection Procedure: The FAO-Hungarian Government Scholarship selection process as described below applies to scholarships beginning in September 2023.

Student selection will take place in two phases:

  • Phase 1: FAO will pre-screen candidates and submit applications to the Ministry of Agriculture of Hungary that will send them to the corresponding University as chosen by the 2 applicants. Students must submit only COMPLETED dossiers. Incomplete dossiers will not be considered. Files without names will not be processed.
  • Phase 2: Selected candidates may be asked to take a written or oral English examination as part of the admission procedure. The participating Universities will run a further selection process and inform each of the successful candidates. Student selection will be made by the Universities only, without any involvement on the part of FAO. Selected students will also be notified by the Ministry.

Number of Awardees: Courses will be offered provided the minimum number of students is reached.

Value of FAO-Hungarian Government Scholarship: The scholarship covers student costs only; family members are not supported within the frame of this programme.

The scholarship will cover:

  • application and tuition fees throughout the study period with basic books and notes;
  • dormitory accommodation;
  • subsistence costs;
  • health insurance.

How to Apply for FAO-Hungarian Government Scholarship: Interested applicants should prepare a dossier to be sent by E-MAIL (to REU-Scholarship@fao.org) consisting of:

  • Application form duly completed
  • A recent curriculum vitae
  • A copy of high school/college diploma and transcript/report of study or copy of the diploma attachment
  • A copy of certificate of proficiency in English
  • Copies of relevant pages of passport showing expiration date and passport number
  • A letter of recommendation
  • Statement of motivation
  • Health Certificate issued by Medical Doctor
  • Certificate of Good Conduct issued by local police authority.

All submitted documents must be in ENGLISH. Documents submitted in any other language will not be accepted. It is the applicant’s responsibility to ensure that documents are duly translated and certified by a competent office; and that each document is saved with a name that identifies what it is.

Visit Scholarship Webpage for details