General Workers' Union general secretary Tony Zarb tells Herman Grech there is a movement to destroy the GWU in every possible way.

The GWU has described the Freeport's decision to file a garnishee order against the union as disproportionate. Many would say that the industrial action called by the GWU over what is essentially a union issue as disproportionate. How do you respond?

I disagree. The GWU took limited action; nobody left their workplace. We merely instructed the employees to embark on work-to-rule and go-slow directives. The criticism against us is unjust.

This is a case of union recognition. Aren't you jeopardising the national interest?

We're not suggesting that we ignore the national interest. We certainly didn't want to reach this stage. We wanted to resolve the issue in the most democratic way possible, so we wrote to the Director of Employment and Industrial Relations to discuss it. He failed to hold a conciliation meeting and that left us with no alternative but to hold an independent ballot, conducted by an independent lawyers' firm, and the absolute majority of workers wanted the GWU to represent them. After that result, the director chose to verify the membership via interview. We felt this was undemocratic.

In the meantime, the Freeport filed a garnishee order of €1 million and the GWU has threatened to escalate the action. In the current scenario, considering the economic slowdown...

It's not the GWU which brought about this situation, others did. The GWU cannot wait for the economic slowdown to come to an end to decide to take action. Let's not forget that other unions in our country are also taking action at the moment.

But we're talking about the Freeport...

We have an issue with the Freeport and the Malta Maritime Authority.

The haulers are effectively self-employed, and the Freeport merely rents out their services. So the Freeport is not the employer of these workers.

Ask the Director of Employment and Industrial Relations, who took the cue from the Freeport management to verify the workers' union representatives. The director acknowledged that the Freeport was their employer.

You are now threatening to escalate the action. What's in store and when?

We're holding discussions with foreign trade unions to see how they can help us. We believe in workers' solidarity, even help from overseas. There's nothing wrong in drumming up international support.

To step up your action?

Of course. The Freeport issued the garnishee order and suspended workers who were obeying a legitimate directive.

The Freeport is saying the three port workers were suspended for parking their trucks near the gate and not in the established area as per company procedures.

That's what the Freeport is saying. It was part of the industrial action. The Freeport's action is intended to destroy the GWU. There's a movement in our country to destroy the GWU in every possible way. The government is fully aware what's going on.

Don't you think the Freeport's primary interest is to ensure the continuation of its services rather than destroying the GWU - especially at such a critical time?

We equally want to ensure that the interests of our members are safeguarded...

... At the expense of impacting on Freeport business and ultimately, workers' jobs?

We're not saying the Freeport should lose business. God forbid the Freeport loses business as a result of such insignificant action. The action started at 4 p.m. and by the following morning at 9 a.m. the Freeport had presented a court mandate with a garnishee of €1 million. We didn't cause so much damage - by then, just over 20 people in each shift were taking part in our action.

Ultimately, this dispute concerns union recognition - are you prepared to take such action at the expense of national interest? It could impact on business passing through Malta.

Are you suggesting we should sit pretty and do nothing?

Maybe there are other ways to exert pressure.

How?

You have to tell me - you're the trade unionist. Maybe you should have discussed it before taking action.

How can we discuss it when the Director of Employment and Industrial Relations failed to call a reconciliation meeting?

Are you saying you have no faith in him?

The way things have developed forces you to reach that conclusion.

Has there been any attempt to appoint a mediator?

Yes, but there are no results yet. But we can't mention any names.

Are you prepared to budge?

We're prepared to discuss all the problems, not parts of the problems. Three workers are suspended for obeying our directives, there's the €1 million garnishee, and we need to resolve the union recognition issue. In this country there's a craze that the GWU wants to inflict harm whenever it takes any action. Nobody bats an eyelid whenever other unions take action.

But do you agree with me that this is a particularly sensitive period?

Every moment is delicate.

But we're talking about the Freeport, not some small government department.

Our issue is with the Freeport.

Can you guarantee that the union's action is not going to harm the country in any way?

No, I'm saying that others left us with no option but to take this action.

Have you exhausted all other options?

We weren't even given any options. The Director of Employment and Industrial Relations has a duty to call a conciliation meeting.

A TUC official has practically suggested an international boycott of Malta until the problem is resolved. Considering the situation, isn't this madness?

It depends how you interpret him. Any industrial action needs to have the GWU's blessing.

What kind of action are we talking about?

It could be the stoppage of merchandise towards Malta, especially in ports used by (Freeport owners) CMA, CGM...

...which will have a negative impact on the economy.

Everything will have an impact the Maltese economy.

So you're saying that the action can be really stepped up.

While you're saying that our action can harm the economy, isn't the garnishee going to harm us? It's not right to see just one side of the coin.

Back in January 1998, the front page of l-orizzont had highlighted the court decision stating that the Union Ħaddiema Magħqudin's action at the Freeport as abusive and illegal. Now you're quoting their case to justify your cause.

It's different. The UĦM was being sought for damages running into thousands. Our assets have been frozen. Technically, our union can't operate.

The UĦM had a dispute with the Freeport at the time, which you don't...

And at the time, no journalists had criticised the UĦM for threatening to close the Freeport.

But the Freeport is contending that this issue merely surrounds union recognition.

The Freeport asked for the verification of workers' representatives, so they got into it. Why did the Freeport write to the Director of Employment and Industrial Relations to verify?

What kind of impact has the garnishee had on your operations?

To run such an organisation you need funds. We have 50 full-time employees and they need their salaries. How are we going to do that when everything is frozen? This is a direct attack to eliminate the GWU.

Why would anyone want to do that?

Because the GWU is a voice for workers, pensioners, and their families.

What do you make out of economists who have warned that you are endangering jobs with your action?

These are the same people who have always written against us. We're not surprised that they jump on the bandwagon to fan the flames.

In this day and age, where workers are being shed left right and centre, what role do unions play?

Unions have to be there to help. Unions can't sit still when they're being threatened the way we are. This is an attack on the GWU and the democracy of trade unionism in Malta.

Your critics accuse you of obstinacy, a political agenda, and an inclination to militancy, which have led to dire consequences for the workers over the years. Are they far from the truth?

I deny all these claims. We do everything in the interest of workers. We're fully aware of what we're doing. We could have stepped up our action but we didn't because we sincerely want to solve problems around a table. Are we obstinate because we defend our existence, our position?

Political agenda?

We don't have one. I can even tell you there were attempts by Labour Party officials to draw the two sides together.

Who are they?

I can't say.

Could it be that certain members have abandoned the GWU because the union has lost or mishandled certain battles, such as the Phoenicia case, the Sea Malta case or the drydocks?

You're the first person I'm hearing saying that the drydocks case wasn't handled well.

You had urged workers not to take the early retirement schemes.

No, we had told them to be cautious about their decisions.

And practically everybody took up the schemes.

The workers decided so. In the Sea Malta case, the media, which never treated the GWU well, built up a story against the union - we were not in the wrong. If anybody was wrong, it was Austin Gatt.

How was he involved?

He was aware of all the manoeuvres.

You're implying that the government is also involved in the Freeport issue.

I don't exclude it. Morally, that's what I think.

So you think the government is in cahoots with the Freeport management to inflict harm to the GWU?

Morally, that's what I think.

I guess you have some proof.

No, but morally that's what I think. I'm entitled to my opinion.

After the closure of a number of companies, does the GWU still wield the same strength it once had?

The GWU always adapts itself to the circumstances.

How would you describe today's circumstances?

Several companies have suffered a blow, which has had an impact on our membership. We hold discussions with the government, especially with Finance Minister Tonio Fenech, when we're aware of companies that are about to face difficult times. One of the GWU's recent proposals is to provide training for workers on a four-day week on the fifth day of the week. No columnist has come out praising this initiative.

Five years on from EU membership, do you think it was a good move?

We still have a lot to learn. We need to get more involved in EU systems. We need more time to really get whatever is available.

But what impact has it had on workers in general?

It depends. Drydocks workers would tell you they were negatively impacted. Others will tell you they were positively affected.

Do you think the government dealt with the shipyards' situation well?

The government was aware that it was going to be forced by the EU to take certain decisions and it was too hasty with the yards' privatisation.

Are you suggesting that the government should have extended its subsidies' deadline?

The government should have planned beforehand and gone through the restructuring process at a slower pace.

What do the workers who have taken the early retirement schemes tell you now?

Some of them have not found a fixed job, others are sorry they took the schemes. Others opened a business.

Do you think the workers were taken for a ride?

Yes, because during the election the government had guaranteed workers' jobs.

But if you had to take a snapshot of the workers' situation, do you think it was a good decision to join the EU?

We still have a lot to do.

We've already been in the EU for five years.

But we need more time. Even the Prime Minister says we need more time to get into the framework of the EU. We've actually been working in the EU for years thanks to our affiliations in the ETUC. Although the GWU had its position on the EU, it made it clear it will adapt to the decision taken in the referendum.

Do you fear the unemployment situation will get worse?

We are in the midst of a recession. We need to take measures to cushion the impact. Months ago we sent a document to the government with a series of proposals on how to best face the recession.

George Abela, who was actively involved within the GWU for several years, was recently appointed President. How would you describe your relationship with him?

He is the President of our country, that's all I can say.

You're not answering.

That's our relationship - we need to respect the Presidency.

Do you think he's got the right qualities to be a good President?

I think our MPs thought deeply and felt he has the right qualities before voting for him.

If you were in Parliament, would you have voted for him?

I'm not an MP.

Is Dr Abela persona non grata within the GWU?

No - we had even met with him when he was conducting his PL leadership campaign.

So if he had to invite you for a meeting, you wouldn't have a problem.

We need to respect the Presidency...

...not the individual.

The Presidency is the person.

There is a person behind the Presidency, who you might disapprove of. There were MPs who failed to turn up for the vote.

That's their business. As GWU general secretary, I was invited to the ceremony and I attended.

So if you had disagreements with Dr Abela in the past, is it all water under the bridge?

You cannot forget everything just like that. One still recalls the way certain things took place at particular moments in time.

Like what?

It would be better for everybody if we don't air our dirty linen in public.

So you're saying you can never forget certain problems you've experienced (with Dr Abela).

Yes, there were problems. And before we forget about these problems, we need to find ways and means of how to forget them.

And you haven't forgotten these problems?

No.

Are you prepared to meet with the President?

So far, we have no official invitation.

PL deputy leader Toni Abela suggested during a seminar last week that the President should intervene in the Freeport issue. Do you agree with him?

It was Toni Abela's statement. We didn't speak before he made that statement.

Do you agree with his suggestion?

We think there should be a mediator who genuinely believes he can make a difference.

If a mediator fails, do you agree that Dr Abela should get involved?

We're prepared to reach an agreement with whoever genuinely believes he can make a difference.

Even George Abela?

Whoever it may be.

Watch excerpts of this interview on www.timesofmalta.com.