“If we don’t talk employment quality, we will just increase urban poverty” – Daria Cibrario, Public Services International, Habitat III

Public Services International is the Co-Chair of the Trade Unions Partner Constituent Group of the General Assembly of Partners, which brings together 15 such interest groups to speak with one voice on behalf of civil society in the Habitat III process. Cities Today US Reporter, Mythili Sampathkumar, spoke to Daria Cibrario, the ‎Policy Officer, Local and Regional Government, MNEs for Public Services International. 

Who do you represent and what is your role in the New Urban Agenda?  

We are here to represent all the global trade union federations and in a way we are here to represent city workers that include local, regional, and central administration workers, those that operate the utilities of cities such as sewage, water, electricity, healthcare, social services, building, construction, manufacturing, and more. Overall that is about 125 million workers around the world. 

Why did you join the General Assembly of Partners (GAP)? How will it help the trade unions constituency?

GAP helps because it unites all the major groups so that we can exchange views, learn about each other, and find points of convergence in our advocacy. We wouldn’t be able to do that as well without this structure and we are grateful for the opportunity. For instance, some of the issues we advocate for have been picked up by other GAP members and vice versa. In a way, we get stronger together. 

Has the draft text addressed all the points trade unions would like included?  

Let me say what’s positive about the Zero Draft…our demand for having clear language on the inclusion of labour standard clauses in public procurement contracts has been taken on board. It is very important and we really encourage member states to keep that. There’s also a good mention of empowerment of local government and decentralisation in terms of resources of power–that again, is something we are very much in favour of.

What are the issues that are missing that your constituency would like to see addressed? 

For trade unions, there are quite a few issues because of the wide variety of members we have.  [Overall], we don’t see a clear connection between the business aspect and analysis of the Zero Draft and the social inclusion, socio-economic equity issues. 

The International Labor Organisation (ILO)…[definition of] ‘decent work’…needs to be at the heart of the agenda. If we just talk about generating employment, but we don’t talk about the quality and the rights that come with it, we will just increase urban poverty. 

The jobs need to be decent–secure in terms of health and safety, but also economic security, permanent wherever possible, and [include] freedom of association. 

It seems to have been forgotten that when we talk about mechanisms to generate social inclusion the key instruments are collective bargaining and social dialogue.

Tax justice for countries and cities [is another issue]. There are a lot of reports out there that actually show billions of unpaid taxes are somewhere in tax havens while central and local governments are struggling to finance essential services. Sometimes they need to tax even more the working class and the poor. That is not viable for us.

Why are collective bargaining and freedom of association such crucial issues for the New Urban Agenda?

One of the key things we advocate for is ILO Convention 151 is that it stipulates the fundamental labour rights of public sector workers to associate in trade unions and negotiate their working conditions. Public sector workers are often seen as an exception as they are part of the state. 

By creating this dialogue and collective bargaining, workers can also have a say in how to propose innovative ways to deliver quality public services at the local level and express what are their capacity building needs, they can better share their ideas and value for those. It just does not happen otherwise. This kind of framework would also facilitate the professionalisation of local government workers, avoiding the consequence of the political cycles…and ensuring continuity in offering public services.

We hear a lot about public-private partnerships in these discussions. Given your constituency’s diversity, what is your stance? 

Of great concern to us is the mobilisation of private investment as the preferred option to fill the investment gap. We think the public options must be…promoted at the same level…if not more, especially for the essential services that involve human rights–access to water, access to electricity, healthcare, and education. These kinds of services must not answer to commercial logic.

Of course, we need to establish a framework that prevents corruption and is conducive to transparency…but let’s remember that lack of transparency and accountability are not just in the public sector.  There is no evidence that the private sector is better than the public sector at delivering essential services…we actually have evidence to the contrary: the re-municipalisation of water in Paris which has made significant savings in one year, public healthcare in Costa Rica, and public electricity management in Uruguay.