The UCL Manifesto defined the revolutionary trade unionist practice ofour political movement. But there remains an important question: inwhich organizations to register it? What logic of libertarianintervention should we develop? An analysis of the French unionlandscape is necessary, as well as a reflection on the breakup ofmilitant unionism and the paths to possible unification. ---- AREVOLUTIONARY AND LIBERTY ANALYSIS GRID ---- Our reading must start fromthe anti-capitalist and self-managing purpose that we wish to see thetrade union movement endorse. We must therefore cross:The capacity for action. Does the union have sufficient space, in termsof numbers, locations and representativeness, to put employees into action ?Orientation. Does the union articulate immediate demands and ananti-capitalist project, in continuity with the " double task " setout by the Amiens Charter ? Is it democratic ? Does it favor directaction by workers, or a delegated atmosphere ? Does it push forinterprofessional solidarity, and therefore class consciousness ? Doesit articulate specific demands (anti-racist, feminist, LGBTI,anti-validist) with general demands concerning the entire proletariat,in an intersectional logic ? Does he use legal representation toco-manage or to fight ? Is he using union unity as a pretext forinaction, or as a lever to drive action ?By combining these two approaches, both " quantitative " and "qualitative ", we will not be fooled either by the large numbersclaimed, nor by pure declarations of intent.Militant forces without equal but at low water...While, from 1955 to 1980, the unionization rate in France oscillatedbetween 15% and 20% of employees , it has plateaued, since 1990, ataround 10%. This average figure actually hides strong disparities, sincein 2019 the public service was 18% unionized, compared to 8% in theprivate sector, at very variable rates (16.5% in transport andlogistics, 11% in industry, 3.4% in construction). The gender differencewas less dramatic: 11% of workers were unionized in 2019, compared to9.5% of female workers [1].This numerical weakness must be put into perspective by the specificnature of French trade unionism. In countries where unions are veryinstitutionalized, employees join them primarily to access services ormutual insurance. In France, where joining a union does not " returnanything ", and is more of a commitment (sometimes risky), the numbersare significantly lower. From the point of view of commitment, precisely, the situation isworrying, since in 2019, only 40 % of union members participated in theactivity of their union, compared to 49% in 2013 [2]....but which remain essentialDespite this weakening, trade unionism remains an essential player inFrance, to the extent that no " non-company " social movement has sofar outclassed it, neither in terms of rooting in the proletariat, norin terms of mass action. It remains the first place where workers,precarious workers, the unemployed, in all their diversity (racialized,gender minorities, etc.) spontaneously organize to defend theirinterests. It remains the only force capable of putting millions ofpeople on strike and on the streets. From this point of view, combative unionism remains an essentialvehicle for a libertarian revolutionary strategy, based on the directaction of workers, outside institutions and governments.THREE POLES IN THE UNION LANDSCAPE IN FRANCEIn view of the developments of the last five years, we can discern threepoles in the union landscape in France [3]: a combative pole, aco-management pole , and a pole which we would describe as " ambivalent " .1/ A combative union center, focusing on the balance of powerThe CGT, at the crossroadsSince the 1980s, the CGT has experienced a slow but continuous erosionof its membership and audience, despite increases during periods ofstruggle. With 605,000 members in 2020, 23% audience in the privatesector and 21% in the public sector, it nevertheless remains a centralorganization in the class struggle.The weakening of the organizational culture is worrying, with many unionteams reduced to a core of elected officials at the CSE, without fieldpractice, with the decline of local unions, with the increase in thenumber of union members · are isolated · es (15% of the confederalworkforce), and with growing antagonism between certain federations.Since the 1990s, the Stalinist imprint on the CGT has continued todecline. On the negative side, in most sectors, it has only beenreplaced by reformism, corporatism, or even the most flatdepoliticization, or clientelism. On the positive side, pluralism hasincreased in the organization, where for example we come across more andmore libertarians, ecologists, feminists, or non-Stalinist communists.Among the achievements: anti-racist issues and support for undocumentedimmigrants are well integrated... On the other hand, the visibility ofracialized minorities in coordination and representation positionsremains very out of step with the unionized base.Among the questions that are progressing: feminism is on the rise, andis shaking up the Stalinist-conservatives, but has not yet made thembend. Women make up 39% of the workforce, and are called to federal andconfederal responsibilities by a proactive parity policy. At the March2023 congress, the election of Sophie Binet as general secretaryobviously had a strong symbolic significance.At the confederal congress in March 2023, distancing itself from theEcological and Social Alliance-PJC sent a very negative signal. Thisdoes not prevent environmental issues from becoming more and morepresent due to the climate crisis.The Stalinist-conservatives, especially present in the management ofcertain federations, today constitute the heavy rearguard of the CGT,putting the brakes on all the stops on environmentalist, feminist issuesor on union unity. Their demand for a " return to the World Federationof Trade Unions ", a bureaucratic and anti-class struggle body led bydictatorial states, was fortunately swept aside by the confederalcongress of March 2023.The potential of the CGT lies in its anti-establishment image, whichinstinctively makes it the union of choice for many angry employees ;when they politicize themselves via the CGT, it is mainly on anilliberal, sometimes anti-capitalist basis.Solidarity, assets to go furtherAfter strong development in the 2000s, the Solidaires trade union hasstabilized at a level of 110,000 members , 6% audience in the publicservice and 4% in the private sector.The common culture which has long been lacking in Solidaires isprogressing at the national level, due to the good will of mostfederations to converge points of view within Solidaires, rather thanplaying the balance of power. On the other hand, the development oflocal unions is stalling, with unions operating in a too oftencompartmentalized manner.Struggling unionism and the reference to the general strike areconstitutive of the identity of Solidaires. But the extraordinarycongress of 2020 saw a major qualitative advance by explicitly adoptingsocialization and self-management as an " alternative to the capitalistsystem ".The appropriation of this orientation, and even the combativeness in thefederations and in the union base, are obviously unequal. As with theCGT, the ambient depoliticization is causing damage, and the militantculture of the founding generation has been poorly transmitted.However, when it is based on solid sectoral establishments (rail,education, PTT, health and social, public finances, etc.), thisanti-capitalist, self-managing, internationalist, feminist,environmentalist, anti-colonialist and anti-racist line can constitute apoint of support for the revolutionaries and libertarians who want tobring it to life.Regionalist and overseas unionsIn their respective regions, the Corsican STC, the Basque LAB, theGuadeloupe UGTG, the Martinique CGTM, the Guyanese UTG and theCaledonian USTKE are well established, and sometimes even the strongestunion organizations.These unions, which try to combine national emancipation and socialemancipation, can have combative and direct action practices from whichthe French combat unions could draw inspiration. This does not preventpossible contradictions, as in Kanaky where the USTKE finds itselfco-directing companies with French capitalists in the name of national " rebalancing ".The CNT-F fails to change its natureThe CNT-F, anarcho-syndicalist and revolutionary syndicalist, hasbetween 500 and 1000 members , and boycotts most professional elections.In certain sectors (education, construction, labor and social affairs),CNT teams carry out real union work. However, the vast majority of CNTgroups are called " interco ", which means that their real nature ispolitical. These are far-left groups involved in struggles, but notunions, nor trade unions, nor trade unions, nor business unions.The paid work of the CNT-SOThe CNT-SO, a revolutionary trade unionist, has around 1,000 members ,with a very localized electoral audience. With a methodical strategy, itestablished itself in industrial cleaning, the hotel industry, evenconstruction, where it led notable struggles with chambermaids,undocumented immigrants... However, it did not manage to establishitself in other sectors, where the space for combative unionism isalready occupied by SUD or the CGT.2/ A co-management pole, attached to the ideology of " social dialogue "The CFDT put to the test of realityAfter the departure of its left wing in 1988-2003, the CFDT was rebuilt.It now has more than 600,000 members , with an audience of 18.5% in thepublic sector and 27% in the private sector ; its presence in SMEs isquite significant and it has 50% women in its workforce.The CFDT is committed to liberal ideology, but its primary motivation isto be recognized as an institutional interlocutor (" I negotiatetherefore I exist "), even without any results. A centralizedorganization, it is capable of providing leadership and bringingdissident federations and unions into line.Its non-betrayal of the 2023 fight for the defense of pensions - a firstin thirty years - is due to cyclical factors (the pressure from part ofits base, government intransigence, the absence of excesses and strikeshard) and will not change its deep nature.The timeless CFTCClaiming 140,000 members, the CFTC has an audience of 2.7% in the publicsector and 9.5% in the private sector.Inspired by the social doctrine of the Catholic Church, it practicesclass collaboration in the interest of the company, which is " firstand foremost a community of people ". But it sometimes happens to CFTCsections to rebel when the employers trample too much on " the sacreddimension of the human being ".The CFE-CGC, the faithful " social partner "Claiming 100,000 members among engineers, executives and technicians,the CFE-CGC has an audience of 4% in the public service and 12% in theprivate sector.The CGC defends the corporate interests of executives, while deemingthem non-antagonistic to those of employers. In recent years, thedefense of social protection has nevertheless sometimes positioned itfurther to the left than the CFDT.3/ An ambivalent pole, oscillating between co-management and struggleThe FSU, attempts to escape corporatismEssentially based in the teaching profession, the FSU has, since the2010s, affiliated a few unions in local authorities and with Pôleemploi. It has 160,000 members , is non-existent in the private sector,but represents 9% in the public service (90% in National Education).Structured by profession, its priority remains the defense of publicservice and civil servant status. Opposed to neoliberalism, it hasofficially considered unification within the CGT since its beginnings in1993. Service to members is its strength, but also explains its lack ofdynamism, showing it to be more capable of supporting struggles than ofleading them. impulse. A trade union organization that is often in themajority where it is present, its activist bases are heterogeneous andcan sometimes contain allies .Its functioning in " trends ", presented as a guarantee of pluralism,maintains a perpetual division and results de facto in adisproportionate weight of certain political fractions internally.Working force, principled isolationismFO claims 350,000 members , has a 15% audience in the private sector and19% in the public sector. At the national level, FO makes the bigdifference between a co-management pole, around metallurgy, and a morecombative pole led by POI and POID activists, but above all focused onthe defense of what exists, without demands transformative, without analternative social project, and a perfect indifference to feminism orecology. Assuming a party/union division of labor which subverts theAmiens Charter, the organization aims to be " apolitical ", whichexplains why FO is the confederation most permeable to the extreme right.Unsa, the surprises of unionism without a compassUnsa brings together 200,000 members , with 6% of audience in theprivate sector and 12% in the public sector. Ideologically invertebrate,Unsa is a conglomeration of federations with little in common. Dependingon the atmosphere of the moment, some are capable of moving from theflattest co-management to the harshest conflict, as we saw during thestrikes at the SNCF and the RATP in 2019-2020.THE SAME LOGIC OF LIBERTY INTERVENTIONWe claim to have a revolutionary trade unionist practice and strategy,as explained in the UCL Manifesto. During the period, libertarian tradeunionists must share as a priority, whatever their union organizationand their level of intervention (local, federal, confederal/national),this same logic of action:build, as a priority, broad combative unions, promote grassrootsdemocracy and promote socialist and self-management ideas ;promote union training for members to have the maximum number ofactivists and allow maximum self-management in the union ;encourage direct collective action by workers ;promote interprofessional action by boosting local and departmentalunions ; instigate regular union tours in union deserts and launchorganizing campaigns.favor branch unions, rather than the scattering of skeletal company unions ;promote and support the struggles of undocumented immigrants, push forunionization in sectors concentrating racialized workers ;push for the unionization of feminized sectors, strategic for organizingthe proletariat and blocking the economy ;fight the obstacles to women and gender minorities taking responsibilityin our unions.push for clear protocols to combat gender-based and sexual violence.demand the socialization of the means of production by relying inparticular on the questions raised by the ecological crisis ;fight against the extreme right in the unions ;promote unity of action beyond sectarianism and push the debate on theinterest of unifying militant unionism ;promote internationalist solidarity: responding to the same employeracross borders ; develop union networks, solidarity in our professionalbranches and our federations in connection with unions in othercountries, support for peoples fighting against imperialism (Kurdistan,Palestine, Ukraine, etc.).develop the policy of employing comrades that we started.FOR A UNIFICATION OF STRUGGLE UNIONISMIt is within the CGT-FSU-Solidaires trio, often united in action inrecent years, that this perspective has found the beginnings ofreflection and some openings [4].Libertarian trade unionists are in favor of it. Not to hammer out anunrealistic slogan for immediate unification, but to disseminatereflection on possible scenarios, if the circumstances were favorable.A scenario of simple absorption into " the great CGT ", which wouldcrush the militant cultures of Solidaires and the FSU, is illusory: itwould be swept away into the union teams.A scenario of unification from the top, at the end of staffnegotiations, is fortunately impossible due to the confederalistfunctioning of the CGT and Solidaires. Agreements at all levels of thefederations, congresses well appropriated by the base, would beessential, and that is so much the better.Offensive unification in a new confederation is the most desirablescenario. It can proceed from voluntarism at the confederal and nationallevel, with slow construction, reinforced unity, and including commoncoordination tools.But nothing could be done without the will of the intermediate levelsand the base, where unity could emerge as a result of common practices,unitary campaigns, joint resistance to a possible far-right government,a large-scale social movement. It is only by gaining mutual trust, atthe grassroots level, that an agreement could be reached on the sharingof positions and resources, an inevitable factor in local tensions.To go beyond this, we would also need a vision of unification as a steptowards massification, of which three strong axes could be:a real priority for local inter-professional unions ;openness to all social movements ;a process of conquering union deserts and workers on the fringes of wageemployment.a reduction in tensions between trade union organizations, whichlibertarians will encourage by promoting joint work and camaraderie whenpossible (union tours, moments of sociability, reports and leaflets,meetings, protest notebooks, etc.).A unification of militant unionism would create a dynamic and create akey player in the class struggle in France. It would help theproletariat to regain confidence in its collective strength. And inthis, it would promote a resurgence of revolutionary trade unionism.To validate[1] Ministry of Labor, Dares Analyzes n°6, February 2023.[2] Ministry of Labor, Dares Analyzes n°6, February 2023.[3] To measure their respective weights, we use here, with a criticaldistance, the claimed numbers ; the results of the 2022 civil serviceelections ; the 2021 measure of representativeness in the privatesector, based on the results of the CSE elections (2017-2020), the TPEelections (2021) and the elections to the chambers of agriculture (2019).[4] " Union unification, for what purpose ? » , LibertarianAlternative, May 2022https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Reflexion-syndicaliste-revolutionnaire_________________________________________A - I N F O S N E W S S E R V I C EBy, For, and About AnarchistsSend news reports to A-infos-en mailing listA-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten