Friday, April 20, 2007

Is there a Catholic position on industrial relations? Address by Bishop Kevin Manning.

Is there a Catholic position on industrial relations?
An address by Bishop Kevin Manning
on Monday 16 April 2007 to
Bursars of Conference of Leaders of Religious Institutes (NSW) at the Good Samaritan Congregational Centre, Glebe.
Part one:
Populorum Progressio
I begin by drawing on one of the Encyclicals of Pope Paul VI, Populorum Progressio, a truly radical document: radical when it was first published in 1967, and radical now, forty years later.
I use radical in its true sense of going back to the roots rather than in adopting a position on a political scale of right to left. Populorum Progressio did indeed call us to examine the world from our Christian roots.

The Scriptures call us to focus on our life together, as did the first Christian communities which shared their resources and looked after the needy. The first organizational activity in the Early Church was for the provision of widows who were missing out in the distribution from the common purse.

And you who are keepers of the purse have to be careful! How would you like to be called murderers of the poor? That's what the Bishops of early medieval France called those who took for their own use goods or money destined for the support of the poor.

In view of the Christian Church's long tradition of concern for those who are less well off as well as for the common good, it was nothing short of amazing to read the Prime Minister's remark in the House of Representatives in August 2006, and I quote him: "I think it very important to make the obvious statement that there is no such thing as a Catholic position on industrial relations".1

Of course there is a Catholic position on industrial relations! That some Catholics may not know it, or do not agree with it, cannot obliterate the fact that we have a position clearly enunciated since Leo XIII in Rerum Novarum.

In Populorum Progressio, we find elements of that position unequivocally stated and surgically applied.

Teaching of Pope Paul VI
What did Paul VI say which was so radical? The two hinges of Populorum Progressio are that: firstly, the interest of the economy is subordinate to the interests of the human community, and secondly, the right of all to share in the resources of the earth, to glean what they need for an existence appropriate to their human condition.

I leave it to you to judge that contrast between that position and Mr Howard's statement at the Premiers' Conference in April 2007 that "jobs and economic prosperity is (sic) more important than ideology and emissions targets"2. I suggest that you attend to the number of times the vocabulary of economic prosperity is used by the supporters of WorkChoices without reference to the human dimension of economic growth.

Authentic human development can never be equated with economic growth alone When the economy takes precedence over the authentic development of the human community certain concepts gain an unwarranted pre-eminence. Pope Paul VI named them clearly:
"these concepts present profit as the chief spur to economic progress, free competition as the guiding norm of economics, and private ownership of the means of production as an absolute right, having no limits nor concomitant social obligations" (PP, 26).

We have all read of companies being permitted by their industry regulators to increase prices even though record profits are being announced, and that at the same time as accessibility of services is being reduced! Paul VI calls the operation of these concepts the product of "unbridled liberalism" (26) and unequivocally states the principle that economics is at the service of humanity (27).

Yes, the Church teaches there is a right to the ownership of private property but that right is not absolute and unconditional, as St Ambrose said: "the earth belongs to everyone, not to the rich" (PP, 22). Pope Paul VI goes on to condemn the practice whereby an individual gains substantial income from the resources of his own country and proceeds to invest that income in a foreign country for his own good, taking no account of his country's interest (PP 25).
Hopelessness
Paul VI wrote: "Today, in many lands, countless men and women are starving.
Countless children suffer from malnutrition * whole regions are condemned to hopelessness". He could be writing the headlines for tomorrow's paper!

This hopelessness is all the more harrowing when we know that, in large part, it is not due to the natural incapacity of the land to produce food, nor, in large measure is this hopelessness a result of climate change. No, sadly, it is the result of the desire for power and greed of some human beings You can think of examples.

There was Idi Amin, president of a country, Uganda, which was so fertile it could have fed half of Africa; there is Mugabe reducing the population to poverty as well as flouting every democratic principle, and North Korea unable to feed its people but intent on being a nuclear power.
And then there are the huge contradictions when nations generously give aid to poor countries stricken by natural disaster, but then are party to trade policies which make it impossible for these countries to compete on an equal footing in the markets of the world.

Paul VI commented that the people of these poor countries "will have no grounds for hope or trust if they fear that what is being given them with one hand is being taken away with the other (PP 56).

Sadly, there is another kind of trade: the trade of human beings as sex workers - frequently innocent young women and men who respond to the human yearning for a better life in the West and find themselves caught up in a web of debt bondage from which it is difficult to escape; all the while the abolition of slavery is being commemorated!

But let us not stray too far from home here! We are all complicit in creating, or, at least, in allowing to be created, a society and a climate which makes the economy the barometer of human fulfillment, and the goal above all other goals which is to sought by politicians and others. Why is it that we not only tolerate, but continue to reward, those who drive the economy at the expense of authentic human development?
Part two: Catholic Social Justive Teaching
In this part I will talk about some principles of Catholic Social Justice teaching which have particular application to work and then speak about principles to guide Catholic Church employers.
I can probably assume that in an audience such as this, you are familiar with the basics of Catholic Social Justice teaching so I will confine myself to two very important principles enunciated by Pope Paul VI in Populorum Progressio. Both principles originated from earlier popes but it is a measure of the pivotal position of these principles in Catholic teaching that Paul VI repeats them.
Principle one
The first concerns the human context of work and Paul VI wrote:
"Our predecessor Blessed John XXIII stressed the urgent need of restoring dignity to the worker and making him a real partner in the common task, ' every effort must be made to ensure that the enterprise is indeed a true human community, concerned about the needs, the activities and the standing of each of its members'." (PP 28)

Does this strike you like a workplace operating under WorkChoices legislation? Let us unpack the principle a little.
The most technical understanding of employment is that it is an exchange; an exchange of labour for remuneration, including pay and conditions. But the context in which this exchange occurs is a human context, and that places the exchange in the field of relationships.
The rights which flow from the principle of the dignity of the human person require that there is fairness in the relationship brought about by the exchange of labour for remuneration and conditions of work: that there is a reasonable and fair balance between the rights of employers and the rights of employees.

The point which emerges here is the crucial point of balance which requires that the rights of employers are respected as well as the rights of employees. But the arrangements set up under WorkChoices ensure that there is an imbalance in very many cases.
Principle two
This imbalance arises particularly in the matter of the AWA's. The position is plainly put in Populorum Progressio:
"when two parties are in very unequal positions, their mutual consent alone does not guarantee a fair contract: the rule of free consent remains subservient to the demands of the natural law".
In other words, just because something is agreed does not guarantee that it is fair! Pope Paul VI was applying the principle, derived from Leo XIII, in the context of agreements between nations, but the principle applies equally well in the context of AWAs.

There is nothing intrinsically wrong with an AWA provided that the worker is highly skilled and has a sophisticated capacity for negotiation. In the workplace, some, but by no means all, workers will have skills of sufficient marketability, and the capacity to negotiate an AWA which suits them, but the fact remains that the majority will not. As an instrument of work relations, the AWA does not guarantee balance or fairness
Strangulation of Union Activity
Another imbalance in the structure of workplace arrangements is the restriction on the right of free association brought about by limiting by legislation, the activities of Unions on worksites. Remember that unions are 'a mouthpiece of the struggle for social justice" (Laborem Exercens, 20).
Although not instigated by the Government of the day, the appearance of guard dogs in an Australian workplace is forever etched on my memory, and is an image which lurks behind the over-regulation and strangulation of workers' rights to free organisation imposed by WorkChoices.

The lack of congruence between restriction on Union activity and "a true human community, concerned about the needs, the activities and the standing of each of its members" is blinding!
Church as Employer
The Church is a major employer and must practice what she preaches and recently the Catholic Commission for Employment Relations has adopted Four Principles for Catholic Church Employers. These are 'hot off the press' so you may have only recently received them, or indeed not yet received them.
The Principles themselves are not new. They are straight from Catholic Social Teaching and are:
The Right to a Just Wage
The Right to Fair and Reasonable Working Conditions
The right to Security of Employment
The right to join a union and strike as a last resort.

There are a number of points to each of these heading but I will mention one or two which illustrate the principle well.

Right to a Just Wage
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church (2434)h, in determining fair pay, both the needs and contributions of each person must be taken into account. Wages should continue to compensate people for work during unsocial times, weekends, public holiday and late nights.

The Right to Fair and Reasonable Working Conditions Employers should provide working conditions which are fair and reasonable and which allow employees to have a proper work/life balance, for example, employees should not be encouraged to cash out leave entitlement but to take the leave that is due to them.

The right to Security of Employment
It is a traditional teaching of the Catholic Church that workers have rights which are superior to the rights of capital among which is the right to security of employment. Workplace agreement should be supported by policies which enable employees to seek remedy if they are unfairly or unlawfully dismissed and casual employees employed on a regular and systematic basis should be offered permanent employment.

The right to join a union and strike as a last resort Agreements should be supported by policies which encourage union involvement in the workplace at the employees' request. Specifically, employers in Catholic organisations will not refuse to enter into collective agreements when this is the desire of the majority of employees in the workplace.
Conclusion
The world has come a long way since the discourse of the inevitable class conflict between capital and labour prevailed. We have moved towards a better balance of the rights of employers and employees, and that balance is what Catholic social teaching seeks to articulate.
Yes, there is a Catholic position on industrial relations, and it is nothing less that the preservation of the balance between the rights of employers and employees. When this balance is tilted one way, and the disadvantaged are denied redress, the Church must speak.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Pentecost Forum 2007 27 May 2007 12.30pm

VOICES OF HOPE!
New Pentecost Forum 2007
Pentecost Sunday, 27 May, 12.30-6.30pm
Australian Catholic University,
North Sydney (40 Edward St)


Guests: Rev Dr Jojo Fung, Sr Susan Connelly, Mr Tony Kevin and Mr Graeme Mundine Hear Rev Dr Jojo Fung, a Malaysian Jesuit priest who ministers to Malaysia's Orang Asli indigenous people. His perspective will have particular relevance as we celebrate the anniversaries of the 1967 referendum and the ground-breaking 1987 "Bringing Them Home" report which recognised Indigenous Australian human rights. Dr Fung will be joined by Sr Susan Connelly, a Josephite Sister and well-known advocate for East Timor, Mr Tony Kevin, a distinguished former Australian ambassador to Poland and Cambodia and 2003 "International Whistleblower of the Year", and respected Indigenous Christian leader Mr Graeme Mundine. These speakers will offer fresh perspectives on how people of faith can help build a just and compassionate society and world. The Forum will include opportunities for dialogue and self-initiatives in the spirit of our unique "free space" method of grassroots networking and organising which allows people to be heard and individuals or groups to act. For example, peace activist and former Iraq human shield Ms Donna Mulhearn will present a workspace on Christian non-violence.

Program12.00-1.00 -- Registration and cuppa (bring a sandwich and chat with friends)


1.00-2.30 -- Lecture 1 - Mr Graeme Mundine, Rev Dr Jojo Fung and Mr Tony Kevin


2.30-4pm -- Workspace

4-4.30pm -- Networking/refreshment break

4.30-6.30pm -- Public Lecture - Rev Dr Jojo Fung and Sr Susan ConnellyCost: $20/$40 (or whatever you can afford).


Public lecture: entry by donation.

More information or for expression of interest on hosting a workspace, call 0403 181 586 or visit http://www.newpentecost.com/.

Friday, April 6, 2007

No Hope in Guantanamo

http://www.amnesty.org.uk/petitions2.asp

Amnesty International Petition to Close Guantanamo

Joshua Colangelo-Bryan
The Miami Herald April 5, 2007

On Monday, I was at Guantánamo Bay to meet with Jumah Al Dossari, one of the detainees my firm represents. As always, I spent the first few hours of our meeting trying to convince Jumah to fight the desperation and hopelessness that threaten what little spirit he has left.

Jumah has been at Guantánamo for more than five years. The government has never charged him with a crime and does not accuse him of taking any action against the United States. For several years, Jumah has been held alone in solid-wall cells from which he cannot see other detainees or communicate except by yelling. He has spent 22 to 24 hours a day by himself in these cells. He has been short shackled, threatened with death and, once, severely beaten. Interrogators have told him that he will be at Guantánamo for the next 50 years and that there is no law at Guantánamo.

Sometimes the idea of spending the rest of his life locked up thousands of miles from his family is too much for Jumah. On Oct. 15, 2005, I walked into an interview room to visit him. There was blood on the floor. I looked up and saw Jumah hanging by his neck from the other side of a metal mesh wall that divided his cell from our meeting area. He was bleeding from a gash in his arm.

I couldn’t reach Jumah because the door to the cell was locked. I yelled for guards who came, unlocked the door and cut the noose from Jumah’s neck. I was ordered out of the room but later learned that Jumah had survived. Since that day, Jumah has tried to kill himself three times. Last spring he slashed his throat with a razor, spraying blood on the ceiling of his cell.

During our meeting on Monday, we talked about Jumah’s court case, a bleak — and therefore dangerous — subject. I explained again that the Bush administration insists it may detain anyone it designates an ”enemy combatant” forever without a trial. I explained how Congress blessed that notion in last year’s Military Commissions Act, which bars foreign ”enemy combatants” from going to court to challenge that designation. I explained that lawyers for the detainees had challenged the act as unconstitutional, but that in February a federal appeals had ruled against us on the grounds that people like Jumah have no rights.

Desperately wanting to boost his spirits, I also told Jumah that there was reason to be optimistic. We had asked the Supreme Court to review the appeals court decision and we felt pretty sure that our request would be granted. Were that to happen, Jumah might be a step closer to a court hearing.

At noon, I went to the galley — as the cafeteria at Guantánamo is called — to get lunch for Jumah and myself. While waiting for a burger, I glanced up at a television tuned to CNN. Text ran across the bottom of the screen: “Supreme Court refuses to hear Guantánamo detainee appeals until alternative procedures are exhausted.”

Our request — the one reason I had given Jumah to be optimistic — had been denied. The Supreme Court was saying it might consider the detainees’ cases, but not until the detainees subjected themselves to proceedings created by the Military Commissions Act.

It is a disturbing ruling because the government says the purpose of these proceedings is not to determine if a detainee is actually an ”enemy combatant” but rather to determine if the military followed its own rules in applying the ”enemy combatant” label. For that reason, detainees will have no chance to produce evidence of their innocence that the military didn’t consider or to challenge the use of evidence obtained through torture. Worse yet, these procedures will be held before the same appeals court that recently found the detainees have no rights at all.

I walked slowly back to the room where Jumah sat shackled. I wondered if there was a good way to tell a suicidal man that all three branches of our government appear content to let him rot at Guantánamo. Nothing came to mind.

Maybe I shouldn’t have worried. Jumah’s reaction to bad legal news has become as muted as his emotions generally. He long ago stopped believing that a court will ever hear his case and thinks I’m naive for hoping otherwise. Instead, Jumah believes that he has been condemned to live forever on an island where there is no law. He may well be right.

Joshua Colangelo-Bryan, an attorney, represents several Guantánamo detainees.

Wednesday, April 4, 2007

July 9 - 13 Christian Ecological Perspective in Changing World


Tabgha Centre for Ecology and Spirituality is offering a one week
course from July 9 - 13th, 2007.

The content of the course will explore a Christian Ecological
perspective in a changing world.

For more information please contact

Veronica Littleton OSU or Kay McGrath RGS
Tabgha Centre, 52 Montrose Rd, Cabarlah, Qld. 4352

Telephone 0746969700

Email: tabgha@bigpond.com

WATAC Conference July 20-21, 2007- Joan Chittister

Joan Chittister OSB coming to WATAC Conference on July 20-21, 2007

Women Making the Vision Happen -

Saturday and Sunday 21st & 22 nd July 2007

Keynote Speakers:

Joan Chittister OSB
Ann Gilroy SJS

Canterbury Park Function Centre
King St. Canterbury

Registration and information
Phone: 02 9520 9409
email: watac@watac.net

Conference cost: $275

Donna Mulhearn - pingap6

Donna Mulhearn
Donna Mulhearn is one of the pinegap 6 who are facing trial on 29 May 2007 in
Alice Springs for making an "unauthorised citizen" inspection of the Pine Gap site.
Please go to Donna's website for more information and discussion.

Donna Mulhearn is a high profile and successful journalist and state government public relations officer. In early 2003 Donna went to Baghdad to risk her life as a "human shield" against the American bombs. She was shot at and taken prisoner for 24 hours by an Iraq insurgent group.


Pine Gap, Australia Pine Gap, near Alice Springs, employs nearly 1,000 people, mainly from the Central Intelligence Agency and the National Reconnaissance Office. Originally code-named MERINO, it is the ground station for a satellite network that intercepts telephone, radio, data links, and other communications around the world. The facility currently includes a dozen radomes, a 5,600 square meter computer room, and 20-odd service and support buildings. Two of its ground antenna are part of the U.S. Defense Satellite Communications System.

Source http://www.fas.org/irp/facility/pine_gap.htm

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

Member of Executive Committee Marie Hernandez died 30 March 2007


I had the privilege of meeting with Marie Hernandez on my journey ro Brussels in November 2005 . I am saddened by this news. I did sense in our brief meeting the breadth of her experience and passion for human rights. Maggie Galley

Maria Julia Hernández died on 30 March 2007
Director of the Office of Tutela Legal
of the Archdiocese of San Salvador
Member of the Executive Committee of Pax Christi International
Maria Julia Hernandez, Presente!

Commemorative Liturgy María Julia Hernández
Friday 27 April 2007 – 8 pm
Chapel Theological and Pastoral Center in Antwerp


The International President, the Executive Committee members and the staff of the International Secretariat are deeply touched by the loss of María Julia Hernández, member of the ExCom from El Salvador, and an extraordinary human rights defender. The funeral was held on 2 April 2007 in the Cathedral of San Salvador, where she was buried in the Crypt next to Msgr. Oscar Romero and Msgr. Rivera y Damas.

The Executive Committee will hold a special liturgy, headed by H.B. Michel Sabbah, International President, on Friday 27 April 2007 at 8 pm in the Chapel of the TPC in Antwerp.

Two witnesses about the life and work of Maria Julia will be given by Bishop Kevin Dowling, member of the ExCom, and by José Angel Henríquez, member of the International Secretariat, from El Salvador.

All members of the ExCom and friends of Pax Christi, especially those arriving for the meetings that weekend and all those able to attend, are invited to join the liturgy.

We pray that God will bless her with eternal life. May she rest in peace.


Brussels, 20 April 2007March 30, 2007
By Eileen M. Purcell

Maria Julia Hernandez – sister, human rights advocate, advisor, friend -- loved her people, her church, and the body of human rights law that affirmed human dignity and the fundamental right to freedom, life and security of all people.

She stood alongside other giants in Salvadoran history – Archbishop Romero, the Jesuits of the Catholic University of Central America, and, above all, the thousands of martyred Salvadorans -- demanding an end to the violence of war, poverty and impunity.

Her unwavering faith in the social gospel and a liberating God of love and justice anchored her as she faced generals, presidents, ambassadors, death squads and international courts of law, politics and public opinion.

Tutela Legal
Enlisted by Archbishop Oscar Romero in the late 1970s to document human rights violations sweeping El Salvador, Maria Julia continued the painstaking and dangerous work after his assassination in 1980. In 1982, Archbishop Rivera-Damas appointed her Executive Director of the San Salvador Archdiocesan Tutela Legal.

Housed in the Chancery Offices of the Salvadoran Archdiocese, Tutela Legal became the safe harbor where victims of political and military repression could turn to relate their stories without fear of retribution. Maria Julia and her staff created the space, the expertise and the trust for survivors of massacres, relatives of “the disappeared,” and families of political prisoners to recount their experience and seek legal recourse at a time when the Salvadoran government and Armed Forces along with the United States government denied human rights violations were occurring.

Maria Julia and her staff meticulously documented, dated, and corroborated first hand testimony of war crimes, while at the same time offering compassion and support to the families who turned to her in their grief. She shared her findings in courts of law, before the United States Congress, at the European Union and in the court of public opinion. She met with congressional, religious and community delegations from around the world and painted the picture of systematic state-sponsored terror with the dossier of personal stories of tragedy. She lifted up the tenets of international law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Geneva Conventions and called for accountability and an end to impunity.

__________
Eileen Purcell is the former Executive Director of the SHARE Foundation and worked with Maria Julia from 1983 to the present. She currently works with the Service Employees International Union (SEIU).

Dr. Maria Julia Hernandez Chavarria, 68, passed away on Friday 30 March 2007. After having cardiac problems, she had a successful surgery at the end of February but relapsed on 8 March. She did not recover. The last three weeks, she remained in the hospital with artificial respiration, in critical conditions.

Maria Julia was born in Tegucilgapa (the Honduras’ Capital - her nationality was Salvadoran), on 30 January 1939. She got a PhD in Human Rights and International Law. Since 1977, Maria Julia had been working at the Archdiocese of San Salvador taking care of the pastoral work in the field of human rights. She became the promoter of human rights and the protector of the dignity of all Salvadorian people, especially the victims of the civil war in El Salvador. Maria Julia was a good friend of the late Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero who was assassinated on 24 March 1980. For several years she had been active in the development of a network of various human rights offices of the Bishops’ Conferences in dioceses across Latin America.

In May 1982, she became the Founding Director of Tutela Legal (Legal Protection), the Human Rights Office of the Archdiocese of San Salvador. The office documents and opens up judicial proceedings to claim justice in regard to massacres not yet resolved that to this day foster impunity in the country. Maria Julia devoted her life to truth and justice and acted very strongly against impunity. Tutela Legal became a member organisation of Pax Christi International.

Ms. María Julia Hernández had been elected member of the Executive Committee at the Pax Christi International Council in Amman/Jerusalem, July 1999. That visit and peace pilgrimage to the Holy Land impressed her deeply. In 1995, on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of Pax Christi International in Assisi, Italy, Maria Julia was the keynote speaker. She was involved in fact-finding missions of Pax Christi International to Mexico (Chiapas), Guatemala, and El Salvador. Maria Julia was a member of the Steering Committee preparing the First Latin America Consultation of Pax Christi International to take place in Lima, Peru, in August 2007.

The International President, the Executive Committee members and the staff of the International Secretariat are deeply touched by the loss of such an extraordinary human rights defender. We present our condolences to her family and collaborators. Her death and resurrection, close to the liturgical Celebration of Easter, feed our hope and our commitment.

A prayer vigil was held on Friday evening, 30 March. The funeral will be held on Monday 2 April 2007, at 3 pm, in the Crypt of the Cathedral of San Salvador.

The Executive Committee will hold a special liturgy, headed by H.B. Michel Sabbah, International President and Latin Patriarch of Jerusalem, at the ExCom meeting on Friday 27 April 2007. We pray that God will bless her with eternal life. May she rest in peace.



Address of Tutela Legal:

Av. Dr. Emilio Alvarez y Av. Dr. Max Bloch, Colonia Medica. Ap. Postal 2253. San Salvador, El Salvador.
Phone: (503) 22345323 – 22345324.
E-mail: tutela@tutelalegal.org


Read more at:
http://archive.laprensa.com.sv/20070330/lodeldia/20070330/9459.asp


Brussels, 31 March 2007