Report of visit to the Bolivarian Republic of

Venezuela

26th March to 2nd April 2009

 

Bill Greenshields - President, National Union of Teachers and

David Drever – President, Educational Institute of Scotland

 

Background

Our unions had become increasingly aware of the recent radical developments in education in Venezuela, and sought more information from the Venezuelan Embassy. Bill Greenshields was invited to meet the Ambassador to the UK, His Excellency Samuel Moncada, who is a previous Venezuelan Minister for Higher Education. We then received an invitation to visit Venezuela to meet with the Ministry of Education and take part in a number of meetings, visits and activities to get a clear picture of recent developments in education. Having accepted this invitation, we made further arrangements that would enable us to meet with the teacher unions during our visit.

 

Caracas

We stayed in Caracas, Venezuela’s capital city, for the whole of our visit. We were provided with a permanent guides and interpreters - Luis Henriquez and Horselia Carmen from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

 

Caracas is a city of long established very major divisions in terms of wealth, opportunity and access to power. In the west of the city live the working class - currently the subject of many education, health and anti-poverty programmes promoted by the government. As you move east through the city, the population becomes more wealthy – until arriving in the east you encounter real wealth and obvious privilege.

 

Its population is often quoted as “between six and eight million people”. The lack of certainty is in large part due to the fact that many of the people live in the barrio – the self built “shanty town” on the lower slopes of the mountains surrounding Caracas. These people were consistently uncounted and largely ignored by successive governments. Only in the last 10 years, since the first election of President Hugo Chavez, has their existence been properly recognised and the needs of the poorest sections of society prioritised socially, economically and politically.

 

It is the determination to meet the needs of the poor working class and the people of the barrio, to give them a voice and to empower them politically that is the clearest expression of the Bolivarian revolution. There is indeed a revolution underway, with fundamental shifts in priorities and power, and legal and constitutional changes to reinforce these.

 

These changes have, according to a representative of the UK embassy, “polarised society”. In discussion at the Embassy, we asked if it were not the case that Venezuelan society has long been “polarised” on class lines, and that these divisions have recently become much clearer as a result of the poorest sections of society having been given new rights and a powerful voice, previously denied them. We agreed that this was in fact the case.

 

All judgements about the current situation and recent developments in education have to be made in the context of this polarised revolutionary situation.

 

The Barrio

We visited Onoto, one part of the sprawling barrio. Onoto is subdivided into smaller areas – the area we visited being home to 980 families. For the most part these families live in self built dwellings made from ubiquitous red clay blocks. As families develop they simply add another storey. Thus some are single storey, others up to five storeys high – all built without planning or building regulations, but with the necessary skills being passed from generation to generation. Many of the buildings are in a state of disrepair, and facilities are extremely limited. There is a very strong sense of community, though the area can be very dangerous for outsiders.

 

The Bolivarian revolution sees this area and others like it as priority areas, and is building on the strong sense of community by establishing locally elected Community Councils (elected every two years) which organise activities and services of all kinds – social, political, administrative, security - and working alongside, though independently of, the more formal “People’s Power” democratic process which recently has become more recognised in the barrios. The Community Council covers a very small area of the barrio to encourage direct and active participation of the people to whom it is accountable.

 

We were greeted by the Secretary of the Community Council, Elias, who lives in Onoto and who is a health service trade union organiser and Communist Party activist. He guided us through the extremely steep streets of Onoto, warning us to walk carefully. He had tripped on the broken surface the previous week and having fallen, he had rolled a hundred yards down the hill. “It’s a cheap form of transport,” he said, “if only we could roll uphill.”

 

There are refurbishment and rebuilding activities throughout the barrio, part of the grass roots “Mission Habitat” funded by grants and loans (on a very low cost basis over 80 year periods) to families, and with the employment of skilled building workers employed by the State to work alongside the people of the community. The supply of electricity and water to all homes is another priority. Not only are houses being rebuilt, but community centres and small scale workshops are constructed to provide work. Such workshops include clothing manufacture and food preparation and distribution. Transport – including trucks, buses and cable car - is also being provided to enable people to get to other work in Caracas itself. Elias claimed that these developments meant that now, for the first time, “Unemployment is minimal.”

 

Throughout the barrio, you see the slogans on walls. Simply “Si!” – an affirmative for the revolution and its constitutional changes – and also “Uh Ah! Chavez no se va!” – “Chavez is not going anywhere” – a slogan developed at the time of the failed coup against Chavez in 2002, when at least a million people from the barrio and working class district of town surrounded the coup leaders in the Miraflores Presidential Palace and successfully demanded the release and reinstatement of Chavez.

 

The “missiones”

The government has established “grass-roots” missions to improve the lives of the poorest sections of the community with emergency measures, to put in place more long term programmes, and to build social and political authority from the bottom up.

 

Health care

Despite Venezuela’s great wealth, poor and rural citizens historically lacked access to basic healthcare services.  Constitutional reforms in 1999 made healthcare a fundamental human right afforded to all.  To fulfill this mandate, thousands of community health clinics have been established throughout Venezuela to provide care and medicine to the country’s neediest citizens.  According to Venezuela's Health Ministry, more than 80 percent of the population now receives some form of government-sponsored healthcare. Another striking achievement has been the decline in postnatal mortality rates, which fell by 50 percent between 1995 and 2005. Venezuela now has one of the lowest infant mortality rates in Latin America, and is set to reach the UN Millennium Development Goals by 2015.

 

One of the health care missions is called “Barrio Adentro” – and our visit to Onoto included a visit to a newly established polyclinic, staffed by Venezuelan health workers, supported and trained by others from Cuba. This was run by these professional staff and by a locally elected “health committee”. There are now 64 such centers in this barrio, providing 24 hour health care, diagnostic services, radiography, ultrasound, emergency operations, child health etc – and an intensive care ward. While waiting to be introduced to staff, I used the translator to ask a woman who was reading a book with her arm round a small girl, waiting in the reception area what she thought of these developments. She replied after a pause, “I can read this book, and my daughter is alive”. Before the revolutionary process, she had been illiterate. Her daughter had needed a minor operation some time before – and would have almost certainly died without the polyclinic. It was a good answer.

 

Food and nutrition

Just across the way from the polyclinic was a supermarket called “Mercal”. This is one of a chain of state run “missione” supermarkets selling good basic foodstuffs – rice, beans, oil, flour, sugar etc – at very highly subsidised rates. These are situated to be convenient for the barrios and for the poorest districts of town, and staffed by enthusiastic workers who lose no opportunity to promote the Bolivarian revolution.

 

Corazon Adentro – the cultural mission

We visited a state community TV station – TV Caricauo – which serves a very tight community as part of a network of community television stations… a big feature of the Chavez government’s attempt to break the dominance of the big business controlled private media… the latter routinely calling for his overthrow, and being very central to the failed coup of 2002.

 

TV Caricauo was hosting a community education class/activity when we arrived. It was focused on developing multiculturalism and mutual respect – with people from different ethnic and cultural groups exploring how they celebrated particular festivals and significant days.

 

The TV station encourages local people to take active part in activities and debates around all sorts of social and political issues, and to make and present their own programmes.

 

We took part in one such programme, being interviewed about the purpose of our visit, what we thought of Venezuelan society, about education in Britain and the issues we are dealing with as trade unionists etc… and what we thought the response of the British government might be if the USA tried to undermine or depose Chavez!

 

Education missions

There are a number of grass roots education initiatives using volunteers and about 35,000 extra emergency trained (2 year programme) teachers since 2005, working with about 12 million people across the whole country.

 

Mission Robinson 1 & 2 (launched July 2003) teaching reading, writing, and arithmetic to Venezuelan adults, and then to bring them up to the standards expected at the completion of primary education. UNESCO has recently declared Venezuela to be “free of illiteracy”. Opponents of the government claim that this had been the case for many years prior to the Chavez government… but they do not take into account the illiteracy of people of the barrios who were not previously counted.

 

Mission Ribas (launched November 2003) – provides remedial secondary level classes to Venezuelan “high school dropouts” and adults, with about 600,000 students enrolled, being taught such things as grammar, geography and a second language.

 

Mission Sucre (launched in late 2003) – provides free and ongoing basic education courses to adult Venezuelans who had not completed their elementary-level education. This is now expanding into Advanced and Higher Education for people without formal entry qualifications, through University “outreach” centres available in the community.

 

Mission Che Guevara

A workplace basic skills and vocational skills programme

 

There are many other missions concerned with (amongst others) electoral rights and participation, the environment and conservation, indigenous rights, socioeconomic transformation and  land reform, forestry and rural development. We did not get an opportunity to observe these at first hand or to discuss them in any detail – but they are considered to be an “integrated package” for the “bottom up” transformation of society. The land reform programme is particularly hotly contested as it involves the “expropriation” of big underused privately owned estates and their distribution to the previously landless rural poor.

 

The formal Education System

We had meetings with representatives of the Ministry of Education, the National Assembly Commission on Education, the Minister for Women, the Ministry of Labour, and with five teacher unions. These provided us with a picture of the development of the formal Venezuelan education system, its current situation, and current and future plans.

 

In brief…

 

The Venezuelan education system developed rapidly in the 1960s and 1970s. This was as a result of a great deal of general social and political unrest, including widespread teacher union activity and strike action over teacher pay, school funding and the demand for free education for all, led by the teacher unions of the CTV.

 

In the 1980s and 1990s the government adopted the neoliberal agenda with the resulting and increasingly widespread underfunding, pay cuts and privatisation programmes – and resulting exclusion of many children from the education service. This was again met by militant action by some. The teacher unions leaderships still made “pay and conditions” demands on behalf of teachers, but the union leaderships were largely unresponsive to the more general demands for political progress

 

Up to 1999 – before the election of President Chavez, only about 60% of children were in school, including both public and private sectors. Of this 60%, most working class children, barrio children etc left school before the end of primary education due to economic pressure, and the need to earn a wage.

 

Now, 95% of children are in school, and completing secondary education.

 

They identify five stages to education, which is free up to 16

 

1.  Birth to six years

State support for mothers and families, parental education, kindergarten from 3 for some (with “small” parental contribution) – though there remains a long waiting list for early years provision

 

2. 6 to 11 years

1st – 6th grade primary education

 

3. 11 to 16 years

7th – 11th grade general secondary education and technical education

 

4. 16+

School and continuing education, training etc

 

5. 18+

University

 

Prior to the election of the Chavez government, 3.7% of GDP was spent on education. Now, over 7% is spent on education

 

There are a total of around 25000 state schools in Venezuela. All state schools are free.  Nearly 9 million students are now incorporated into the formal education system and, together with those in the educational missions, there is more than 50 percent of the population directly taking part in education – plus many others involved in workplace skills/vocational education (Mission Che Guevara). They claim that Venezuela is the only country in the world where almost 60 percent of the population is formally “enrolled” in the education system.

The number of teachers has also significantly increased in the country. In the 1999-2000 school year there was an average of 62 students per teacher, a number that has now been improved to 28 students per teacher. 

 

The rapid improvement in state schools, and the reduction in class size to below that of the private sector (maximum of 38 in state schools, normally around 45 in private schools) has meant that the private sector is in real decline.

 

Now there is a government led initiative for “Bolivarian Education” and “Bolivarian Schools” which aims to fundamentally change the functioning of schools and the curriculum they offer. This is a developmental process. Only a minority of  schools are at present Bolivarian Schools. The process relies on the support and commitment of teachers. The priority is to establish Bolivarian Schools for the poorest children and communities

 

The target is that all state schools should be Bolivarian Schools by the end of 2010, and that the remaining private schools should also follow the Bolivarian curriculum. Those that fail to do so will be taken under state control. The latest figures (2008) show about 6,000 schools are fully integrated into the Bolivarian school system

 

Bolivarian Schools are open 8 hours a day - an increase of three hours. Teachers in these schools are paid 60% more than teachers in more “traditional” schools. The school provides for the all round well being of pupils, including food and nutrition (three meals per day), health care, social workers etc. They are staffed, as are all schools, by fully trained teachers who are graduates with postgraduate training

 

The new Bolivarian education is based on four “pillars”. Learn to create, learn to participate and coexist, learn to value, and learn to reflect.

 

It is based on the ambition to integrate “the school, the family and the community”, and emphasises, environmentalism, multiculturalism, national independence, internationalism, inclusivity and co-operation – “to reflect our changing society”

 

Teachers is Bolivarian schools are expected to adopt “teaching by investigation”, a child-centered dynamic approach, very different from the very formal didactic education process more traditionally prevalent.

 

The Ministry of Education is highly critical of the nature of the curriculum before 1998. They regard it as being "colonial, Eurocentric, ideological education," that taught Venezuelans “to admire the conquistadors, based on capitalist values and promoting consumerism and contempt for others."

 

In launching the Bolivarian curriculum, Chavez said, "We want to create our own collective, creative and diverse ideology.”

 

We were told that these educational developments in schools – and in Universities – are at the centre of the “battle of ideas” in new Venezuela - and of course there is very lively – at times fierce – debate about all these issues and teachers’ roles in them.

 

As Maria de la Paz – the national Assembly’s Chair of the Commission on Education told us, “Economic development should be about meeting the needs for human development – not vice versa. Politics is not about preserving institutions but empowering citizens. Education is our route to both. Venezuelan society now demands this new approach”.

 

Her Deputy said, “Venezuela is refinding itself, and refounding itself. The whole of Venezuela is a huge school”

 

Visit to a Bolivarian primary school

We met the Headteacher. She had been a teacher for 25 years, always working with the poorest children. She told us she had always had to spend her own money on buying not just school equipment, but clothes and food for the children. She said that often malnourished children would bring a mixture of rice and dog food to school for their lunch – while others had nothing. Children would use small nets, weighted with stones to trap pigeons, which they would kill, cook and eat – causing real health problems. Often children would be asleep or faint in school.

 

In the last ten years there had been huge improvements. Her school was open from early morning to late afternoon, and provided three meals a day (from onsite kitchens). The children received regular health checks, inoculations etc, with a permanent nurse on site, and a doctor visiting the school and families on 3 days a week.

 

The school was open to the whole community for education through the missiones.

 

Her school had 887 pupils aged between 3 and 12. There were 80 “teachers and helpers” – and a maximum 38 children to a class. All the teachers were university graduates with postgraduate training, and a year of “internship”

 

All children of the local area attended the school, except those selected (through school nominations and the agreement of parents) for specialist art, technical or Special Needs education). All such students were reviewed regularly, and many returned to her school “when agreed appropriate”. The school had a special “UPE” unit for children with special needs.

 

She was very proud of the performing arts aspect of the school – particularly dance and working with the outreach work of the Venezuelan Youth Orchestra

 

She explained to us that the biggest issue in the school had been the change in teaching style – now child centered and investigative – which some teachers (who had become used to “simply following text books”) had found very difficult and demanding. They approached this problem by increasing those teachers’ CPD time.

 

Teachers were also expected to work with the family and community, which could be very demanding.

 

These developments were leading to much greater teacher creativity, more professional control, and much greater professional reward and sense of achievement – “but it remains an issue”.

 

The school was run by the Headteacher together with representatives of the local Community Council and of the formal Local “People’s Power” Government.

 

We asked her about teacher unions. She immediately responded that the teachers in school were members of the FEV - the Venezuelan Federation of Educators – which she said was “the biggest”.

 

Bolivarian University

“Welcome to the University of the Revolution!” said Luis Damiani, the Rector of the Bolivarian University of Caracas. In the same way that the Bolivarian education process is rapidly developing in schools, so it is in Higher Education.

 

The University is 5 years old, “Born out of the revolutionary process, which rejected the policies of exclusion.” He claimed that statistics for 1998 showed 497,000 people who had wanted HE places who were refused under the old system.

 

Now Mission Sucre and the Bolivarian University were intent on opening up HE to these people, denied access before as a result of their poverty and social deprivation.

 

The University has 197,000 enrolled students – divided into 2000 “University Villages” with 11 Headquarters throughout Venezuela. Most students studied in their own communities, and the aim was that they should not abandon these communities when qualified, but stay “and put their education to work for the people”

 

The University offers HE courses in

Legal studies, social administration, politics and government, computing, environmental studies, architecture, engineering, petrochemicals/gas, public health, medicine. They are just preparing a new course in political economy.

 

Students can study any one or a combination of these areas.

 

The Rector described a process that all the academic staff had to constantly put themselves and their teaching through… “Revision, rectification, reinvigoration” to meet the needs of the people, rather than their own needs as academics.

 

This involved them in both informal and formal processes of examining and “reinvigorating”

1. Strategic design and development

2. Logistical management

3. Day-to-day work

 

Currently he was working with “all staff and students” – academics, administration workers and students – on reviewing the original principles of the University… then considered radical, but now recognised as being still too tied to “post-modernist, neoliberal principles”

 

They were starting from the position of recognising the relation of theory and practice, of academic thought and the reality of life – and recognising that it is reality that is primary that needs to develop new ideas – not vice versa.

 

They were looking at postmodernist, fragmented society and the negative individualism it created – and how this permeated HE worldwide, affecting research, administration and teaching.

 

“The main characteristic of the reality of Venezuelan life is one of social conflict,” he maintained - the conflict “between neoliberal capitalism and Bolivarian socialism.”

 

This conflict was manifested in many ways he said – legal, ideological, political, cultural, physical. “No university could or should put itself above this struggle.”

 

The previous role of Venezuelan universities (private and autonomous) had been to train future professional, economic and political leaders to enable the “wider reproduction of capitalist production”. The role of the Bolivarian University is to develop socialist participation, in order to bring about “action for social transformation”

 

Therefore, there were identified structural changes that are necessary.

1.   More participation and democracy in all aspects of planning, decision making and delivery. The University was putting in place a system of student, teacher and worker representation on all strategic bodies in the university

2.   They were abolishing school and faculties, and introducing a module and topic based study to reflect “the complexity of humanity and society rather than the commodification of education”

3.   All curriculum research should use not a reductionism approach, but a dynamic, dialectical materialist philosophy – examining the contradictions in society, to establish how to progress toward a new society of new relations of production.

 

These structural changes would equip all those associated with the University to “know reality, identify conflict and its causes, examine the root problem… and deal with it” – and to struggle to end the division between “those who think, and those who do.”

 

After some discussion, he presented us with his new book dealing with these issues, and said, “One more thing. The thing I was thinking about while waiting for you. Do we understand society from the context of law and customs, or law and customs from the context of society?” Discuss.

 

The trade union federations

The CTV (Confederation of Venezuelan Workers) is the longest established of trade union federations in Venezuela – established in 1936, and is the ICFTU affiliate. It has a long history of working class activity, and resistance to exploitation and oppression. It survived a number of dictatorships, the last ending in 1958.

 

CTV then formed a “strategic alliance” with the employers’ organisation FEDECAMARAS (the Venezuelan Federation of Chambers of Commerce) to attempt to take Venezuela in a more democratic direction. This “strategic alliance” has been more or less important to CTV as the struggle ebbed and flowed in Venezuela. In the 1980s and 1990s the “alliance” led to CTV taking no action against the neoliberal policies of the time, and they accepted all the privatisation measures. Its Executive has very close links with Accion Democratica, an ex party of government, now aligned with very right wing forces. CTV is part of Coordinadora Democratica, the coalition established to oppose Chavez and the programs of his government. Thus, it has a very poor relationship with the Government – and in fact was involved in an attempted coup against the Chavez government in 2002.

 

On April 9th 2002 the employers organisation FEDECAMARAS called for a 3 day general strike against the government and its radical policies. The CTV, including some teacher unions, supported that strike. Following a march on the Presidential Palace (which was defended by a counter demonstration of Chavez supporters) there was a coup organised by sections of the army and the employers’ organisation. Chavez was taken away and imprisoned, the government dissolved by force. FEDECAMARAS leader Pedro Carmona was installed as “President”. CTV is very widely alleged to have taken part in the development and organisation of the coup, and its leaders were certainly in the Presidential Palace playing a full part when the coup plotters celebrated their temporary success. They gave their full support to Carmona, until he was removed from office.

 

After 48 hours the coup leaders in the Presidential Palace were surrounded by over a million workers and people from the barrio, demanding the reinstatement of Chavez and his government. The Presidential Guard, loyal to Chavez, took control back, and reinstated Chavez.

 

For their part these CTV unions, including the teacher unions, deny that there ever was a coup. They repeated this to us when we met them. Chavez had “simply resigned” following their demonstration. Then he “changed his mind” and was reinstated.

 

Unfortunately for the coup leaders there happened to be an Irish film crew in the Presidential Palace during all these events – there initially to make a documentary about the Chavez government and its social policies. What they actually managed to film was the entire process of the coup – now a major award winning documentary, “The Revolution Will Not be Televised”.

 

Following the coup attempt, many of those involved fled abroad. Carlos Ortega, the President of CTV, escaped from jail left Venezuela and now lives in Costa Rica – but maintains his union position.

 

Following the unsuccessful coup attempt, FEDECAMARAS and the CTV union representing a managerial union in the oil industry shut the industry down for 3 months, locking out the hourly paid oil workers, in an attempt to paralyse the economy. There was widespread sabotage and destruction of plant and machinery. After 3 months, the government sacked 18000 oil managers, and brought the workers back to work. This led to complaints to the ILO by the sacked managers. The ILO was very critical of the sackings and of the Chavez government’s attitude to CTV. Chavez said, perhaps unhelpfully, that the ILO could, “…go fry monkeys.”

 

It was in response to all this that a new trade union federation, the UNT (National Workers Union) was established.

 

The UNT is a relatively recently established trade union federation formed by workers opposed to the CTV leadership and broadly supportive of the revolutionary policies of the Chavez government. 

 

In 2000, there was a government organised referendum in which workers were asked if all unions should undergo a “re-legitimation” process. The outcome was a vote in favour of all unions having to hold one-member, one-vote direct elections for their leadership. This was adopted into the National Constitution ( a pocket sized copy of which is carried by very many Venezuelans), and applied by the CNE (National Election Council). This provision ran counter to the rule books of many of the CTV unions who refused to implement it. Thus the Chavez government regards these unions as “unconstitutional”.

 

The British TUC unanimously adopted a resolution in 2005 recognising and supporting the social and political developments in Venezuela under the Chavez government, and recognising UNT, though not making any judgment of the CTV unions. The resolution contained the following.

 

“Congress agrees to support wider trade union initiatives to highlight the issue of Venezuela within the British labour movement, including the organisation of a trade union delegation to meet and build links with Venezuelan trade unionists. Furthermore, Congress will build and work with trade union endorsed organisations in the UK working to provide solidarity to Venezuela. Congress is concerned about the lack of media coverage of events in Venezuela and urges the General Council to establish relations with the Venezuelan National Union of Workers (UNT) to ensure that news of trade union issues, at least, is more widely reported.”

 

The Education trade unions

There are 8 teacher unions. We were able to meet with 5 of them.

 

Fetra-E, Fetrasined, Collegio de Licencias and Fetra Magesterio are all associated with the CTV).

They met us together.

 

Fetra-E

The meeting was opened by Jesus Ramirez, the President of Fetra-E, which claims 80,000 members He is also a national leader of CTV.

 

He told us that the government excluded most CTV teacher unions from negotiations, favouring SINAFUM, which he referred to as a “government union”.  Negotiations over teachers contracts should now be happening, but his union and others are excluded because they do not just follow the government line - they try to talk to the government but are ignored. The government regards them as unconstitutional because their rule books do not conform to the constitutional requirement to hold direct membership elections for national leaders – but this, he maintained, is an excuse. He claimed that the real reason is political because the CTV unions do not support government policies. “No-one really wants Chavez here.”

 

The CTV teacher unions had, last October, handed a document to the Vice Minister of Education containing demands regarding teacher contracts and pay in the light of “below inflation” pay awards. It was ignored, and the CTV unions had organised a demonstration and more recently a strike.

 

He said that the government was undermining teacher professionalism by employing people as teachers without proper qualifications – just two year’s training.

 

Fetra Magesterio

Nelson Gonzalez claimed 47000 members.

He told us that he was an anti-imperialist and a progressive person, but the government developed policy without consulting his union, and flouted principles of inclusivity. Curriculum change was taking place without proper consultation. His union was excluded from discussions on the contract. The government did not respect union autonomy and used the state body, the National Election Council, to try to impose rules and procedures on them.

 

Fetrasined

Falime Hernandez, President, could not give us his membership figures.

He alleged that Chavez had an ambition to destroy all unions and replace them with his own creations. At first he had tried to win elections in the established unions but failed, and so was organising “parallel unions” through the UNT. He uses the power of the State and Ministries to make it look as though CTV unions are illegal, by constantly inventing new rules, but, he alleged, SINAFUM “never held elections, and never produced financial accounts” and so should be illegal. SINAFUM, he said, supported the Government in cutting teachers’ pay

 

Collegio de Licencias

Irma Rojas could not give us membership figures

She asserted forcefully that Chavez was following a highly politicised agenda with the unions. He wanted “to turn Venezuela into a communist dictatorship like Cuba” To do this he wanted to force a fundamental change in the curriculum “to make Venezuelan schools like Cuban schools – just propaganda”

 

Her union was now approaching many other professional unions and bodies in the different regions of Venezuela – for example health professionals – “to form a unique bloc to stop him organising his parallel unions”

 

There was an economic crisis, yet Chavez increases spending on his supporters. “Everyone should suffer equally in the economic crisis,” she said.

 

Venezuelans are told by Chavez not to be wasteful, but, “We see the waste of our national resources on all these extra government workers, just buying him votes.”

 

Following these statements, Jesus Ramirez made some further points in relation to things that had been said, and direct questions

 

Q. If Chavez excludes all unions who did not support him, why had he not excluded two CTV unions - FEV (Federation of Venezuelan Educators) and FVN (Venezuelan Teachers Federation), unfortunately not represented at this meeting?

A. Their existing rule books happen to conform to CNE requirements for democratic processes, and so Chavez cannot exclude them from the collective contract negotiations, but still makes life difficult for them, and invents new rules all the time.

 

Q. How did the strike and demonstration go?

A. The response was 100%.

 

Q. 100%? How many schools were closed or affected? We’ve been told that the response to the strike call was minimal – less than 1%

A. This is not true.

 

Q. So are you planning further strikes and demonstrations? Could we meet some strikers?

A. There were many other actions that members took and would take to show support other than striking.

 

Q. What about SINAFUM? Are they a real union?

A. They are set up by Chavez. They have members – but that is because all new teachers have to join it if they want a job as a teacher.

 

Q. If “No-one wants Chavez”, how does he keep winning elections and referenda?

A. He misuses the authority of the State and Ministries to promote himself and his party, and uses all sorts of programs and government workers to get people to give him support. Now he wants to change the curriculum in schools to support his politics.

 

Q. Is this what was meant by the assertion that Chavez spends money on his own supporters, and wastes money on extra government workers?

A. A lot of government money is being given directly to his supporters, providing electrical goods like fridges to the barrio just before elections–and new buildings etc – and all sorts of projects just so that they would support him in elections.

 

Q. What about the private media? Don’t they put out a lot of anti-Chavez information?

A. We used to have a free media, but Chavez is trying to control it. He shuts them down if they oppose him, and pays for TV stations that support him. There are only a few now that can oppose him.

 

Q. So with the abuse of the Ministries, the use of the State for propaganda, the exclusion of opposition views, the buying of votes, the use of extra government workers to support him, and the change in the education curriculum etc… are you saying that he cannot be removed democratically? Is that why you supported the coup in 2002? Would you support another one?

A. (Before Jesus could get in the translator replied!) There was no coup. It is a fabrication. Chavez realised after our demonstration that he was not wanted, and resigned. (Then she translated her answer for Jesus, who continued…) He was given transport to leave the Miraflores Presidential Palace. We had a party to celebrate his resignation. I was there, so I know what happened. We had to find a new President. We supported Carmona, but only for 48 hours then we withdrew our support because he was doing bad things. Then Chavez changed his mind, and he was brought back. There never was a coup.

 

Q. You only supported Carmona for 48 hours. Wasn’t it about then that a million people surrounded the Presidential Palace demanding Chavez’ release and reinstatement?

A. That’s another exaggeration. It’s not true.

 

Q. So what is your strategy for the future?

A. We will carry on fighting for our rights, to be included in negotiations, to represent teachers and fight for a new collective contract and teachers’ pay.

 

FENATEV (part of CTV)

This organisation was unable to attend the meeting organised by CTV

 

FEV (Federation of Venezuelan Educators) and FVN (Venezuelan Teachers Federation) (also part of CTV)

These unions are recognised by the Chavez government as their internal democracy conforms with constitutional requirements. They were not represented at the meeting organised for us by the other CTV unions.

 

SINAFUM, part of the UNT, met us separately

Orlando Perez, President of SINAFUM, claims 56,000 members

He began by asking about the situation for teachers and the education service in Britain.

Then he made the following points

 

Prior to 1999 Venezuelan teachers and education had been subject to neoliberalism. Teachers’ pay in Venezuela was then the lowest in the Region. The education system did not meet the needs of the ordinary people – and neither did the health system, housing provision etc.

 

Many people were excluded from the education system. Only the “middle and upper class” completed their education. Out of every hundred children starting primary school, only around 20 would complete it. Only about 10% of those completing secondary education would continue in education – and between 25% and 50% of those starting Higher Education would drop out. This exclusion was caused primarily by poverty and deprivation of the families. In other words, in formal terms there was apparent equality of opportunity to education, but the reality was that there was no real access for the majority of the population.

 

Before 1999 about 2.5 – 3% of GDP was spent on education. There had been no new schools built for 20 years.

 

In 1999 the Chavez government’s new constitution established, in Article 102, education as a human right. An investigatory report explored the actual exclusion from the system and its failings, and set objectives for improvement.

 

Spending was raised to 7+% of GDP. Teachers pay increased by 54% between 1999 and 2007, with inflation over the same period running at 34.5%

 

There are now about 380,000 in service teachers, and another 120,000 retired teachers.

 

As well as increases in real pay, and improvements in working conditions the union and government together have established the “Institute for the Protection of Teachers”. This supplies teachers with all kinds of support, including health care, low interest loans, holidays and recuperation in purpose built hotels, car purchase schemes, computers and IT equipment and training, personal and professional support and development.

 

The National Insurance scheme is funded by the employer at 6%, and by the state at 12%

 

SINAFUM is growing rapidly as a result of the nature of the other (CTV) unions. It now has 56,000 members – an increase of 21,000 in the last year.

 

It has regular elections of the whole membership for the leadership. At the time of the last election there were 35,000 members. 17,000 took part in the election for President, which he won with 12,000 votes. He offered to show us the paperwork of this that had been accepted by the National Elections Council. 

 

Some of the CTV teacher unions refuse to hold membership wide elections, even though this is constitutionally required (Article 93) as a result of a referendum of all teachers in 2000. Those unions are therefore not recognised by the Government for collective bargaining or negotiations.

 

It is these same unions that supported the 2002 coup against the elected President and government.

 

For many years, these unions had been in an alliance with the political party Accion Democratica which had become a neoliberal party, and as a result had not opposed any of the neoliberal policies of the time. They “joined the business community and ran their unions like that.” Following the 1999 elections they had systematically opposed the government and its educational program. Progressive teachers had tried to “democratise” these unions and the CTV, but this had proved impossible.

 

In 2000/2001 Professor Aristobulo Isturiz stood as a progressive candidate for President of CTV. The results have never been declared.

 

As a result of this lack of democracy and membership involvement, progressive workers first established the Bolivarian Federation of Workers, which became a new Trade Union Federation, the UNT. SINAFUM is the teachers’ section of UNT. It supports the Bolivarian revolutionary process, but is “totally independent of government.”  Perez offered us an opportunity to meet with some of his members, but we could not fit this into our program.

 

“Teachers need an independent union, and the Bolivarian revolution needs workers to be organised and taking a lead in the process,” he told us.

 

SINAFUM is organised in the schools, and at local, regional and national levels. Subscriptions are kept to the absolute minimum – 0.5 Bolivar a month.

 

SINAFUM is currently in negotiations with the government for a new collective contract, together with two other teacher unions from the CTV  that conform with the constitution’s requirements in terms of democracy. These negotiations are focusing on working hours, pay, and the “social wage”

 

At present, teachers in state schools work a 36 hour week. Teachers in schools integrated into the Bolivarian education process work 54 hours per week, and are paid 60% more as a result. SINAFUM is proposing a maximum 48 hour working week, with appropriate pay. 30 hours of teaching, 6 hours of research, 6 hours of CPD, 6 hours of work in community education.

 

Given the increase in teachers pay since the 1999 election, the global economic crisis, the urgency of developing the school system and the missiones, and the need to combat poverty, SINAFUM has reduced its wage claim to the rate of inflation. In return, they expect to see the development of the Institute for the Protection of Teachers and its support for teachers, an increase in the national minimum wage, the capping of “top salaries”, even more investment in the missiones, and the acceleration of the Bolivarian education developments, with the establishment of a single type of Bolivarian National School by the end of 2010.

 

Following this introduction we discussed a number of issues.

 

Q. There are 380,000 teachers in Venezuela. You have 56,000 members – so many more are in other unions? We’ve been told that in order to become a teacher, you have to join SINAFUM. Is this true?

A. We recruit all teachers in schools and on the education missions. There is no compulsion to join, no requirement – but many new teachers recognise the nature of the unions and want to join us. So we have grown by 21,000 in a year.

 

Q. We are told that SINAFUM is not democratic, and does not produce accounts.

A. I was recently elected after a hard fought election with about 50% of members voting. And our accounts are presented properly, on time

 

Q. Recently the CTV unions called for strike action and demonstrations over teachers’ pay and because they have been “derecognised” by the government. What did you think of that?

A. This was part of a continuing attempt to destabalise the government. There was very little support for it. Only 168 educational institutions went on strike out a total of more than 25,000 in the country. Their own members do not support these unions.

 

Q. How do you see things developing?

A. We have offered a national referendum for all teachers to vote on which unions should be in the negotiations and collective bargaining. We think that all unions should conform to the year 2000 referendum of teachers that said that there should be democratic all-member elections for the leadership of the union. We have a lot to do to represent teachers well, and to develop our education system and our society.

 

Q. Our British TUC (which includes both EIS and NUT) voted unanimously in 2005 to build links with UNT. There is also the international organisation of education unions, Education International. What is your attitude to international links?

A. We are internationalists. We would very much like to have such links with your organisations, and we need to know more about Education International, its membership, activities and processes. We look forward to working with you.

 

      CONCLUSIONS

1.   The situation in Venezuela is indeed one of a revolutionary process. As a result there is constant movement and development.

2.   Education is recognised a key to that process by all involved in it. Therefore there is an acute struggle of ideas, which manifests itself in different organisations and social movements

3.   There are many radical, progressive attempts to reform and rebuild the education service in Venezuela that deserve our support and solidarity

4.   The fundamental ideas behind the Bolivarian educational developments have a great deal in common with our own education policies of “a good local school for every child and community”, inclusion, lifelong education, the defence and promotion of an integrated system of state education, education as the liberator, equality of opportunity, fighting poverty and disadvantage etc.

5.   The CTV unions that are recognised by the government were not invited to our meeting by their colleagues, and no explanation was offered for this. Some of the other CTV unions appear to have understandable complaints that they are excluded from negotiations and collective bargaining, and that the state is attempting to bring about changes to their internal processes.

6.   However, it is certainly true that if the NUT refused to comply with the law on elections, and indeed had been associated closely with an attempt at an armed coup against the British government, and thereafter with continuing efforts to destabalise that government, we might also expect some action to be taken against us.

7.   The NUT would strongly support any British government which opposed neoliberalism and prioritised education for all. This would not be an indication of lack of independence from that Government

8.   SINAFUM is a newly established fast growing independent trade union which gives support to a revolutionary government with education policy at its heart. It has democratic processes and a very real growing membership

 


Back to homepage

Back to contents