Seven Points on Workers’ Organizing in the Non-Governmental Sector

Svjetlana Nedimović

1. Does the workforce in the non-governmental sector need union organizing and associating?

Yes.

2. Is it not that NGO workers are activists?

Equating the work in non-governmental organizations with activism has proven to be a hoax – both for NGOs and for social activism.

Domestic and foreign promoters of democracy, who guided us through the 1990s transition, developed civil society, which, more or less, boiled down to NGOs. NGOs often became state surrogates, covering social care, education, information, legal representation, and more. Some NGOs remained simple associations of people with shared interests, goals, and even hobbies, while others took on issues typically addressed by political organizations. Although legitimate in (for) the given framework, in which politics normally takes place only in parties and institutions, that does not necessarily make them activists. And it does not have to.

Activists in political organizations are groups that, in order to achieve a common goal, may or may not accept certain tasks, e.g., volunteering in pre-election or other campaigns. They do not tailor strategies, nor create visions and, most importantly, they do not work day after day, year after year, for eight hours a day. If they do work, they have to eat, live somewhere, have health insurance, and have the right to sick leave, vacations, etc. They cannot live on passion and ideals alone (though, in Bosnia, this sometimes seems necessary for someone to be recognized as a “real” activist).

Not everyone in the NGO sector, especially those in expert, consultancy, or managerial roles, understands that ideals don’t pay bills. Regular, precarious workers who are generously fed tales of noble goals deserve fair compensation, pensions, vacations, sick leave, and more. These workers need unions. And while the union struggle begins here, it does not end here—see point 5.

(BONUS: Equating NGOs with social action has also harmed the latter. NGOs that are dependent on grants and often need cooperation with authorities must appear cooperative and law-abiding in their strategies and tactics. They also need to navigate the agendas of foreign donors, who may not always be philanthropic, as shown in the ongoing battles over domestic resources. However, social action does not have to fit within these frameworks. Moreover, it is most effective when it does not!

3. Aren’t NGO workers employees?

The question would be in the domain of the dollar or the buck dilemma – if it weren’t for the twist. Or two.

3a) One is a lexical twist that masks the fact that employees are all those who sell their work, trading irreplaceable time of their lives, during which their body and spirit are exploited as resources for monetary compensation. This way, division is introduced among workers (who workers really are), but it also dulls the edge of the struggle (who really needs to rebel against the boss).

3b) The second twist is more associative – to employ implies ‘giving a job’. Well, it turns out that you are idle and need some entertainment or that someone awards you for spending the already mentioned time, body, and spirit to create social value, of which, in the given system, you only see a fraction. And that part is most often, especially without a union, the one that barely keeps you alive – keeps you solvent, but never free.

4. And who is the employer in the NGO?

About ‘giving a job’ and why having a job does not mean being awarded, see point 3b.

If you don’t think about employers but rather about the owners of the value (code: visibility, PR, etc.) created by your work, things look significantly different. Namely, donors come to the scene – to whom you offer to do some work for them. You have to present it as a project, that specific project, that you have dreamed about all your life, is either an illusion or a consciously tailored packaging. Donors have their own goals and do not give you funds because they want you to do your project, but to do their project for them. They achieve their goals, and you get a livelihood. Does this resemble any other transaction? See point 3a.

Then there’s the association’s assembly. You are a member? But not all workers are, and even if they are, it is not always by choice.

And if they are?

The Assembly is a collective body and makes decisions collectively. The Assembly works for the interests and goals of the organization. Employees join the union as individuals whose interests as employers may conflict with the interests and goals of the organization they work for.

Complicated? Of course, it is when civil society organizations are introduced into a business niche (long-live democratization), but that is not the subject of this text.

5. What about association presidents who are de facto directors? Aren’t they workers too?

If the association has not declared self-governance that includes founders and workers, if it has a steering board (rarely convened) and an assembly (even less often formally convened), and all decisions are made by the president who answers to donors (mostly), the steering board (little) and the assembly of members (barely) – presidents are not really your friends in the union struggle. Neither are the founders, if you are not among them, nor the steering board.

It is of great importance for union organizing that you disregard this story. You are entangled, and it takes you away from the essence of the union struggle. (Nota bene, administrative structures declare themselves at once by aligning themselves with this or that side in the struggle – more often that one).

How does it take you away from the essence? Well, the struggle for workers’ rights within the existing legal framework is only a part of the union struggle. The essence of the union struggle, the struggle that is social, economic and political, is that the legal, but not limited to, framework – expands. How long? Indefinitely.

How, why? See under point 3a. If you hate to scroll back, here’s a little tip: You are selling an irreplaceable amount of time in your life. So, be a bit more demanding consumable.

6. Why is there no union organizing in the non-governmental sector in our country?

Because we haven’t fought for it or won it.

7. Is it legal?

After all of this, does legality even matter? If it’s legal, good; it makes the job easier. If not—well, that’s what unions are for.

Instead of hindsight, here’s an advance note: A union that would only be a union of workers in the non-governmental sector is doomed to fail. The bonus does not include an explanation of this claim. This is left as an exercise in reasoning based on the above points. You should realize there is no democracy without strong, broad unions, as I recently heard from the leader of just such an independent union.