The SUD Education federation recently published a policy document stemming from its 10th congress. As discussed in a previous issue of Alternative libertaire that already addressed this topic, this new article is more critical. It is indeed necessary to highlight the contradictions in which a trade union federation is becoming increasingly unable to reconcile the objective of social transformation with trade union practice into a coherent whole.
The choice of themes for the 10th SUD Education federation congress set the tone: none of the motions provided a general direction for trade union action during this period. Never mind that the possibility of an FSU/CGT alliance is increasingly strong[1], and even before professional elections, no consideration was given to the issue of union unity. No general tactical, demands-based, or practical thinking was undertaken to organize a balance of power, or even simply to consider the question of the balance of power.
A lack of practical consideration
The topics of the policy motions gave the impression of having been drafted with the aim of endorsing the independent positions of federal committees on divisive issues. These positions had, moreover, sometimes been the subject of federal documents before being democratically debated, or even subsequently invalidated!
The closure of the Medical-Educational Institutes (IME) was at the top of the list. The demand had to be reformulated with a view to consensus through the "gradual integration of IMEs into the National Education system." But this was not the result of any real discussion with the SUD Health and Social Services federation. This federation, however, represents the workers in these institutions, making the issue a source of tension. The relevance of an interprofessional approach will only appear in the final draft of the motion... Moreover, how is this transition being advocated for? Particularly in terms of working conditions, whether in the national education system or for medical and educational staff? This lack of consideration for daily union activity is glaring throughout the text on inclusive education. It never acknowledges that this government slogan is one of the main causes of workplace distress in the national education system. Thus, unions like Force Ouvrière (FO), which clearly opposes the inclusion of students with disabilities, have free rein to exploit this issue. This kind of approach, even if accompanied by more concrete demands[2], will therefore likely do little to meet the expectations of colleagues...
Another divisive issue was, for example, the repeal of the 2004 law on the wearing of religious symbols in schools. This second demand, however, represents a definite step forward.
The 10th SUD Education congress took place in May 2025.
Sud Education 72
But some texts are even more vague, including regarding social transformation. To say, as our libertarian communist comrades did[3], that a "materialist anti-racist analysis had been adopted" seems rather generous. Admittedly, some amendments advocating an abstract, ideological universalism were rejected. But the motion offers no materialist analysis of the rise of racism, and even tends to conflate racism and fascism, explaining, for example, that they "lead to the forgetting of class struggle and divide workers," without examining the underlying mechanisms, as if they were merely smokescreens and not a hierarchy of people with material consequences. In reality, the motion speaks of racism primarily in interpersonal interactions and never as a systemic ideology in which schools play a key role in legitimizing inequalities. Thus, it offers no significant leverage for waging the anti-racist struggle in schools.
"D" for Democratic?
In recent years, new tools have been implemented, which we have often supported (single-sex classes, the right to raise concerns, etc.). These are legitimate when used to amplify the voices of groups, sometimes minorities, experiencing specific forms of domination, particularly in order to propose concrete directions for our union movement. In practice, unfortunately, they are very regularly used to suppress political differences or criticisms of the mandate. By halting debates in the face of contradictory positions, and by seeking to bypass conviction and consensus, these tools become counterproductive to self-governing democracy. This then establishes a process of permanent purging where factions are organized to serve the interests of those who do not respect self-governing practices. A striking example is the use of whistleblowing rights during debates on the regulation of release time. This is a subject already settled by the federation on numerous occasions...
Finally, it should be noted that the delegation from the largest union, SUD Éducation 93, composed of several members of federal commissions[4], used all their mandates to influence every vote. Yet, there had been no real and democratic preparatory discussions for the federal congress within this departmental union. A warning had indeed been received during the debates, but the majority of delegations preferred to look the other way, which raises questions about the true democratic vitality of the federation.
How then should we view this congress? Can we be certain that the demands emerging from it are widely shared?
We have chosen the SUD unionism, as self-managers and libertarian communists, which we believe can serve as a valuable union lever for creating power dynamics. While we remain committed to this tool, we are concerned about the practices developing within it, practices that this congress has particularly highlighted. Trapped in this way, it can only either retreat into itself or ultimately lead to division. The debates on the union tool initiated at the interprofessional level within Solidaires must serve as a wake-up call to rethink our militant unionism. We will conduct these debates everywhere so that it can be made available to all workers, leading to concrete victories, and not just superficial victories for the party apparatus.
Libertarian Communists from SUD Education
Submit
[1]Read our article "Unite to Fight Better," Alternative libertaire no. 359, April 2025.
[2]Including accessibility of schools, the recruitment of Teaching Assistants for Students with Disabilities (AESH) under civil service status, and a reduction in class sizes.
[3]Read our article "SUD Education: Ambitious Political Directions," Alternative libertaire no. 362, July-August 2025.
[4]These members were subsequently outvoted at the departmental congress that followed. This departmental congress was recognized by the federation. These individuals then filed a complaint against the union.
https://www.unioncommunistelibertaire.org/?Point-de-vue-10e-Congres-de-SUD-education-L-avant-gardisme-pour-quoi-faire
_________________________________________
Link: (en) France, UCL AL #368 - Trade Unionism - Viewpoint: 10th SUD Education Congress, Avant-gardism for What Purpose? (ca, de, fr, it, pt, tr)[machine translation]
Source: A-infos-en@ainfos.ca
Geen opmerkingen:
Een reactie posten