The General Workers’ Union would like to make things appear as being normal within its own structures.

This week, it issued a statement saying that its media services section is being temporarily chaired by deputy general secretary Michael Parnis until a new executive for the section is elected.

This was one of three sections in the union that fell apart over the past weeks, either because of dismissals or resignations. The other two are the public service section and the maritime and aviation section.

Union top officials admit that these are difficult times for the union, but they are confident that it will emerge stronger and continue to defend the workers’ rights in the best way possible as it has done since its inception.

But it will take some time for the union to recover. No organisation, strong as it may be, can withstand the collapse of three of its sections and continue as if nothing has happened. Even more, the events in South Street, Valletta this summer have tainted the image of the union, perhaps more than after other events that took place in the recent and distant past.

And, apart from the crumbling of the three different sections, the union must also contend with the resignation of more than 300 workers, who have left the GWU to form the Malta Dockers’ Union. To rub salt into the wound, the new union’s legal adviser is Dr George Abela, for many years the GWU’s own representative.

Again, the union tries to make matters appear to be less difficult. Secretary general Tony Zarb has hinted that some of the port workers who have resigned have indicated that they are likely to rejoin. But this is probably just an attempt to give the union a boost. It would be interesting to know how many actually do go back.

But there was another significant comment made by Mr Zarb when he spoke during a seminar last Tuesday. He said that the people who left in high profile resignations had repeatedly gone against decisions taken by the highest institutions within the union.

“We do not need people like that. There is a new spirit within the union now, people can talk freely, we are all in agreement on the stances to take and we are not constantly watching our backs.”

Well, this statement does raise a few questions. Does this mean that in the past officials were not free to talk, unless of course they were in full agreement with what the central administration was saying? Does the phrase “we are all in agreement” mean that there is no room for others who do not share the same opinion? Is the union effectively blocking those individual officials who might not hold a similar position to that taken by the union?

In general terms, organisations are strong only if there is a mixture of ideas, and these ideas are expressed and discussed to find common ground, a balance that would unite such an organisation under one banner in its interest and that of its members. If there is only one side to the story, then this organisation runs the risk of taking decisions that do not represent or cover the whole spectrum, and as such they could be more harmful than beneficial.

In the long run, the GWU must analyse what has taken place over the past weeks and learn from the mistakes that were committed in dealing with the prevailing situation. It is useless pointing fingers and speaking about plots to destabilise the GWU unless the union is also auto-critical.

Matters might still be simmering, but once they cool off, the union must discuss what went wrong. Most of all, it must accept that mistakes were committed and that lessons should be learnt.