I just got back from a quick visit to the KMU Labor Center in the Philippines in late June (2025). KMU, which is the abbreviation for Kilusang Mayo Uno or May First Movement, is one of five labor centers in that country—the AFL-CIO in the US is a labor center in global labor terminology; some countries only have one, but others have multiples—and I believe KMU is one of the most dynamic and developed labor centers in the world. I have been episodically researching this organization since January 1986 and published a book on its first 14 years (1980-1994) in 1996. I’ve updated important developments over the years (see Scipes, 1999, 2000, 2014a, 2014b, 2015, 2018, and 2021).
The reason I made this trip, my 10th to their country, was that the Chair and Secretary General together personally invited me. There was to be a change in leadership—Elmer Labog, Ka Bong, was stepping down after 20 years as Chair, and was being replaced by Jerome Adonis, the current secretary general—and they wanted me to observe the proceedings.
Over 300 KMU delegates made their way to the cool, mountain town of Baguio; they came from across the country and across geographical regions in the country: I met workers who I had met previously in Mindanao and in Negros, as well as from Luzon, a “homecoming” of sorts. This was the 45th anniversary of the founding of the KMU, which had been founded during the Marcos dictatorship, in 1980.
Its survival was/is inspiring. Founded during a dictatorship, the KMU fought and helped bring Ferdinand Marcos down in February 1986. (I left the country on February 5th, with no one even dreaming he would be gone soon, much less in 20 days!) They survived the re-establishment of elite democracy under Corazon Aquino; my book is the only book that examines her administration from the perspective of a labor organization. This included surviving the establishment of more than 200 identified death squads across the country, including the Tad-Tad who cut heads of their victims, and every trade union leader south of the big northern island of Luzon was listed by name on a death list, and “vigilantes” (death squad members) even worked inside some KMU-organized workplaces, such as the Atlas Mines complex on the island of Cebu. Earlier KMU Chair, Crispen Beltran or Ka Bel, once told me that human rights abuses were worse under supposed “democrat” Aquino than they had been under dictator Marcos, but the US backed her. They have survived a string of subsequent presidents, including the current one, Ferdinand “Bong-Bong” Marcos, the son of the former dictator, who entered the presidency in 2022.
When one considers the state of the US trade union movement today—abysmal, and representing less than 10 percent of all non-agricultural workers in 2024—the KMU’s experience is unbelievable; but I’ve watched it, sometimes closely, sometimes less so, for over 40 years. I’ve experienced it firsthand, seeing many places, both urban and rural, across Luzon and Mindanao, the two largest islands, and in more specific places on the island of Cebu and in specific parts of the province Negros Occidental on Negros Island, including rural “hinterlands.” I have traveled by plane, bus, boat, small truck, jeepney, motorcycle, and even on a “tricycle with wings.” I’ve slept on the floor in workers’ houses, and on the picket lines. I have sat in union meetings, and I’ve spent hours learning from elected leaders as well as rank and file members, both in formal interviews and “casual” conversations and drink-laden celebrations. I’ve visited with and talked with some of the poorest people on the planet, people who can’t eat if they don’t catch fish that day. I’ve participated in formal programs, such as the International Solidarity Affair, and I’ve traveled independently, sometimes with a “guide” and sometimes on my own. I’ve marched with KMU leaders at the head of marches in areas where vigilantes have been dominant and ever-present. I’ve been interviewed by the press and on radio, and I’ve avoided vigilantes when they have appeared to seek some of us. And I’ve participated in KMU rallies and mobilizations across the country. My interaction over the years has been engaged.
What I have found is that while the KMU has been subject to considerable violence, capital reinvestment, legal and military attacks, its organization is strong and its leaders vibrant; so, while it has been bloodied and is no longer as strong as before, it nonetheless remains a significant force for social justice in the country.
I have long argued that there is much for workers in the imperial countries, supposed “developed” countries, to learn from unionists in colonized or formerly colonized countries, such as in the KMU; after all, these are common people doing this, not elites. What has allowed their organization so survive in such a precipitous situation?
Perhaps most important is the will to fight, and to fight for workers both inside and out of the trade unions. Seeing unions as weapons for working and poor people is important; independent unions that have been able to be established and maintained, with this larger vision, are sources of social power. When they are joined in organization—whether that organization is created by the workers from below, or where they have been created by organizers sent by a “higher” organization such as an established union or federation—their strength is greatly enhanced; each federation in the Philippines must have at least 10 unions to qualify. Federations then unite into labor centers, which they feel are most politically compatible, with power enhanced in the various regions and across the country. It is this concept that a labor movement should fight for all workers and their families instead of just union members, both in the workplace and in respective communities, that unites the KMU-affiliated unions, and as they specifically recognize that many of the problems of the Philippines are caused by US imperialism. (They consciously identify their unionism as “anti-imperialist” unionism.)
[Since right-wing labor leaders of the Congress of Industrial Organizations (CIO) in the US expelled 11 left-led unions in 1949/50, removing somewhere between 750,000-1 million members from the organization, I argue we have not had a labor movement in the United States; we have only had a trade union movement. The difference? A labor movement looks out for the interest of all workers, where a trade union movement confines its work to advancing only the interests of trade union members, and usually only the most dominant of them.]Key to organizing is to provide “genuine trade union” education to their members. This is a union program initially developed by EILER, the Ecumenical Institute for Labor Education and Research, that is utilized throughout KMU. This shares the militant traditions of the radical unions in the Philippines across the 20th and 21st centuries, along with analysis of the particular national situation and expectations of behaviors by leaders, especially in the labor movement. This education is shared with each member and not limited to leadership. It also utilizes a process of labor education that is based on workers’ knowledge and is interactive and is based on the work of Paolo Freire in Brazil, so that allows workers to incorporate their aspirations and dreams for a future society into the education process.
Joined with this is a conscious project of leadership development. Union leaders actively seek out members who want to learn, who want to contribute more, who are willing to organize other workers, and after an educational process, try to elevate each into higher levels of responsibility. This specifically includes bringing women into formal leadership; they have always been there informally.
In addition to enhancing union development, KMU workers developed a new form of organization to help protect themselves: alliances. Alliances were first developed by mostly young women workers in the Bataan Export Processing Zone (BEPZ). When 55 labor organizers were arrested, 26,000 workers launched a general strike across BEPZ, the first of any in the world, in June 1982, and won the release of the organizers. Workers in local factories recognized that by striking together to defend some, they were more powerful. Out of that experience was born the first geographical alliance: workers in multiple unions of different labor centers in the same geographical area together organized to protect each other. This gave a “cross-hatched” organization form: unions were organized “vertically” by federations affiliated to the different labor centers, and then the alliances organized “horizontally” across similar geographic areas, uniting workers from all labor centers that were present; together, they create organizations difficult to repress.
These alliances expanded into other forms. Workers learned to develop industrial alliances, where unions of different federations united with unions in the same industry, such as mining, hospital workers, etc. Then unions united across sites that were owned by the same capitalist firm. Right now, it seems that the province-wide geographical alliances are some of the most powerful forms, at least uniting all KMU-affiliated unions and sometimes even those of competing labor centers.
One of the best ways to build solidarity is through promoting culture; getting workers involved through participation. The Philippines has a rich culture of resistance, first against the Spanish—Magellan was killed by Chief Lapu Lapu on a Philippine island during the first circumnavigation of the Earth—then the Americans, then the Japanese, then the Americans, and then against their own leaders since 1946, when they got their political independence. Thus, one often sees banners, huge paintings and flags, and wonderful dance routines, and the singing of songs of struggle. But this differs in different parts of the country; the sounds from the Cordillera (mountainous northern Luzon) differ from the sounds of southern Mindanao and, yet, they were present in the songs, in the material in clothing, in the subjects of struggle that were shared throughout the Congress.
Yet holding this all together was the democratic spirit of the Congress. For example, Ka Bong, who had been the Chair of KMU for 20 years, insisted on instituting new policies where no one could hold the same elected office for more than three successive congresses, generally three years apart, making sure that passed before the voting for the new chair: that way, appreciative workers could not re-elect him to another term! (I cannot imagine all the pressures he faced as the head of the KMU over 20 years!) The Congress elected Jerome Adonis to replace Ka Bong; Jerome had been Secretary General previously. Interestingly, three of the top five national leaders elected are women, including the Secretary General, the Deputy Secretary General, and the Vice Chair of International Relations: these are not merely “show case” positions!
There were elections for leaders presented to the Congress throughout the meetings; some had been agreed to in advance, while some were nominated, discussed and (sometimes) elected from the floor.
There was wide participation by workers elected as delegates and local officers of the federations and many of the alliances. There was wide, open debate about issues presented to the Congress; it wasn’t about bowing to the desires of leaders. Not only were issues debated vigorously, but new propositions were advanced from the floor and debated with the same rigor; these propositions were taken seriously, and some were adopted.
However, throughout, there was a spirit of “comradeness,” or care and concern for each other, where everyone treated each other with respect. Over the years, there were too many shared experiences to differentiate. There was no separation between leaders and workers; in fact, there was close interaction, a sharing of respect. Leaders sat with workers, not separately, stood in line for food together, helping ensure the well-being of all involved, and ate together.
There was shared attention provided for the few of us who had come from overseas. This was a working meeting, so everything was in Filipino. Yet, they provided translation for the foreigners, and almost all of the workers could speak English, so there was a lot of interaction with the visitors. And two of us, a French comrade from the CGT of that country and myself, were honored by being asked to address the entire congress.
Another aspect of the Congress that got my attention was the incorporation and inclusion of LGBT+ members into the proceedings, as well as trans-gender folks. They were there, they were visible, and they were treated with the same respect shown to every other member. The advances in gender sensitivity and inclusion were quite noticeable and accepted, at least by Congress attendees; I hope, but do not know if this respect is present throughout unions across the country, but it bides well that this respect was evident among elected leaders of all levels.
In short, as I have long argued, there is much North American workers can learn from their formerly colonized comrades. The best way to learn is to go there personally: in a program unique in the world, KMU invites workers and labor leaders to attend their annual International Solidarity Affair (ISA), usually around 10 days, which is generally held in late April/early May, around International Workers’ Day. The purpose is to show you the living and working conditions of KMU members, while building global labor solidarity among participants.
I participated in ISAs in 1988 and 2015: they were excellent. The most important part, at least to me, is to get into the provinces, outside of Metro Manila. I would encourage multiple members from every North American union to participate—and to get ideas firsthand from KMU members on how we can again build a fighting labor movement in the US and Canada. (For more information on the KMU and particularly the ISA, the e-mail address is kmu.intl@gmail.com.)
In this report, I have tried to give some idea of the vibrancy and determination of workers in the KMU Labor Center, as they have maintained their labor center over 45 years under conditions that, at times, have been extremely inhospitable to doing so. The 13th National Congress in late June 2025 witnessed a changing of the guard among leadership that suggests further progress in the years ahead.
Resources on KMU by Kim Scipes
1996. KMU: Building Genuine Trade Unionism in the Philippines, 1980-1994. (This entire book is on-line for free: go to my website at https://www.pnw.edu/personal-faculty-pages/kim-scipes-ph-d/publications, and just below book covers is the link to my book.)
1999. “Review of the Month: Global Economic Crisis, Neoliberal Solutions, and the Philippines.” Monthly Review, Vol. 51, No. 7, December 1999: 1-14. Republished in Scipes, 2021: 119-129.
2000. “Communicating Labor Internationalism: The KMU’s ‘International Solidarity Affair’.” January 3. (On-line version no longer available.) Republished in Scipes, 2021: 205-229).
2014a. “Building Global Labor Solidarity Today: Learning from the KMU of the Philippines.” Class, Race and Corporate Power, Vol. 2, Issue 2, Article 2.
2014b. “Social Movement Unionism or Social Justice Unionism? Disentangling Theoretical Confusion with the Global Labor Movement.” Class, Race and Corporate Power, Vol. 2, Issue 3, Article 9. Republished in Scipes, 2021: 231-262.
2015. “Celebrating May Day–KMU Style.” Countercurrents.org, October 8.
2018. “Another Type of Trade Unionism IS Possible: The KMU Labor Center of the Philippines and Social Movement Unionism.” Journal of Labor and Society, Vol. 21, No. 3, September: 349-367. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/327472612_Another_type_of_trade_unionism_IS_possible_The_KMU_Labor_Center_of_the_Philippines_and_social_movement_unionism.
2021. Building Global Labor Solidarity: Lessons from the Philippines, South Africa, Northwestern Europe, and the United States (Lanham, MD: Lexington Books; paperback in 2022.) Note: 1999, 2000, 2014b are all republished in this compilation of writings.