CNT-f Faces Eviction

CNT-F FACES EVICTION FROM LONG-TERM HEADQUARTERS

     The CNT-f is the larger of the two anarchosyndicalist/revolutionary syndicalist union federations in France. They have traditionally been called the 'CNT-Vignoles' after their headquarters at 33 rue Vignoles in Paris. They have survived a previous attempt to evict them in 1996, but now they are facing a fresh attack from the Mayor of Paris.

     The following is their statement on the events. The original French version can be here. You can follow events from either their website or from the site of their newspaper Combat Syndicaliste. These events seem reminiscent of the eviction of the Spanish CGT from their headquarters at 18 Via Laietana in Barcelona back in 2011. Hopefully this time around the good guys will win against the government.

@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@

EVICTION AT 33 RUE DES VIGNOLES

     In a recent letter the City of Paris has come to unilaterally terminate the ongoing discussions about the continuation of the CNT in its historic location at 33 Rue des Vignoles. We were also "invited" to leave on the pretext of carry out 'rehabilitation' work.

     Previously in 1996 the then-Mayor Tiberi voted for the demolition of 33. She had to retreat in the face of mobilization of the local residents, associations and the CNT.

     We, paramedics, masons, primary school teachers, labourers, nurses' aides, truck drivers, teachers' aides, metal workers, architects, technicians, journalists, postal workers, etc. who form the CNT unions in region of Paris:

     We who in this XXnd arrondissement walk in the footsteps of the Paris Commune and those of the Bourses du Travail of the CGT in the beginning of the 20th century:

     We who at 33 Rue des Vignoles walk in the footsteps of our older brothers and sisters of the Confederacion Nacional de Trabahadores, anti-fascists, survivors of the Nazi camps, the Resistance and the liberation of Paris:

     We who continue the struggle for the emancipation of the working world at the beginning of the 21st century:

     We who to maintain this place in acceptable conditions while the City of Paris has done nothing for almost 20 years:

     We will resist again. Yesterday in the face of Tiberi it was the violence of bulldozers. Today with Delancé it is the violence of King Money.

     This CNT has called a public meeting for information, solidarity and support from all who want a living Paris, a revolutionary Paris.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@
15 hours: Information on the status of 33

18 hours: Concert with Serge Utgé-Royo

20 hours: Convivial meal
@@@@@@@@@@@@@

INTERNATIONAL ANARCHIST MOVEMENT:
A TALE OF THREE COUNTRIES:


The usual historiography of anarchism traces its beginnings to the international socialist movement and the First International. Like most things in the social sciences this is only approximately true. The pre-International workers' movement in France, the most advanced on the European continent, generally held to a variety of anarchism called Mutualism. Still it is true that anarchism, for better or for worse, acquired most of its modern characteristics in the struggle against Marxism within the First International. This development is often portrayed as a stuggle between the Latin sections that held, more or less, to the ideas of Bakunin with the Marxoid German movement. The English trade unionists generally kept aloof from both factions.


This is, once more, approximately true. It was in the Latin countries (with the addition of Belgium- half Latin, Switzerland and the Netherlands) that the anti-authoritarian strain of the workers' movement gained purchase and laid the foundation for modern anti-statist socialism. Yet there was and is a wide difference between these countries as to the degree that anarchism 'caught on'. Why ?


I've just finished reading 'Bakunin and the Italians' by T.R. Ravindranathan, and it tells basically the same story as another book 'Italian Anarchism: 1864-1892' by Nunzio Pernicone. The Introduction and first chaper of yet another book, 'The French Anarchist Movement' by David Berry twells the story of early anarchism in France. Herein lies the question. Both France and Italy were much more likely to become the 'motherland of anarchy' than Spain was. France had the existence of a large mutualist labour movement as well as its tradition of revolution. Italy was the 'centrepiece' of the antiauthoritarian sections of the First International, and its early history of anarchism would seem to say that it should have become the centre. What if fact occured was that Spain went on to become the classic land of anarchism, ending up exporting it to much of the Spanish speaking world. The Italian movement while 'large' in a comparative sense never grew to the extent that the Spanish one did, and offered far less resistance to fascism in Italy than the Spaniards did in Spain. The French movement managed to escape its ghetto for a brief period in the glory days of the CGT, but was later to become a rump of its original self. Once more why ?


All three countries shared the same basic social structure ie a combative upper class, in the case of France and Italy one that rose to the top via previous revolutions or wars, and in the case of Spain an decaying aristocratic and clerical class. In terms of the difference between regions Italy was almost a carbon copy of Spain. The messogiorno was pretty well the same as southern Spain. Ther French situation was somewhat different insofar as most rural provinces were conservative after having their land hunger satisfied by the revolution of 1789.


So similar and yet so different. My own suggestion is that the difference came about via certain choices that the 'proto-anarchists' of that day made in different countries. In Italy as in France the choice of syndicalism was delayed by decades. The most prominant action of the early Italian anarchists were the comic-opera "insurrections" that they engaged in. To say thery were laughable understates the case. Meanwhile in Spain the anarchists were organizing strikes and actually "going to the people". Any premature insurrections in Spain in the late 1800s and the early 1900s were peasant rebellions that the leadership of the anarchists supported but not too much.


Let's put it another way. While the anarchist movement in France and Italy was mired ion tactics that were doomed to fail the Spanish anarchists did one salient thing. They organized the working class for bopth its immediate demands and for the eventual social evolution. This combination was something that eluded both the French and the Italians.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR FRANCE:
GENERAL STRIKE IN FRANCE DRAWS OVER TWO MILLION:


Today's one day general strike in France in protest over the government's proposed pension "reforms" drew considerably larger crowds in the demonstrations than the previous effort in June. Once more there are considerably different estimates from different people, with numbers ranging from 1.1 million (government figures) to close to three million (union sources). Even if you take the lower figure this is a considerable increase from the about 800,000 who took part in June. What this means, however, for either the workers or the Sarkozy government is unclear. Here's a brief report of the demonstration from the BBC.
FSFSFSFSFS

PENSION RALLIES HIT FRENCH CITIES
More than one million French workers have taken to the streets to protest against austerity measures planned by President Nicolas Sarkozy's government.

The rallies came as a 24-hour national strike disrupted flight and rail services, and closed schools.

Activists are angry at government plans to overhaul pensions and raise the retirement age from 60 to 62.

Union leaders say more strikes and protests are possible if the government fails to give an adequate response.

"If they don't respond and they don't pay heed, there'll be a follow up, and nothing is ruled out at this stage," Bernard Thibault, leader of the large CGT union, told a rally in Paris.

France's retirement age is lower than many countries in Europe, but analysts say the issue is polarising politics in the country.


Labour Minister Eric Woerth introduced the pensions bill to the National Assembly, warning of dire consequences if it did not pass.

"If we don't modify our pension plan, then tomorrow there will be no money left to pay the French pensions," he told parliamentarians.

Commuter woe

Under current rules, both men and women in France can retire at 60, providing they have paid social security contributions for 40.5 years - although they are not entitled to a full pension until they are 65.

The government says it will save 70bn euros (£58bn) by raising the retirement age to 62 by 2018, the qualification to 41.5 years, and the pension age to 67.

President Nicolas Sarkozy says reforms are needed to cope with an ageing population and the country's budget deficit.

EUROPE'S RETIREMENT AGES
France - 60
UK, Italy - 65 for men, 60 for women
Germany, Netherlands, Spain - 65
Greece - 65 for men, 62 for women
The government is also looking to find 100bn euros of savings in three years, and is planning cuts in the civil sector.

Some secondary-school teachers went on strike on Monday, protesting against plans to cut 7,000 jobs in education.

State railway operator SNCF said fewer than half of its TGV high-speed services were running, and there was a greatly reduced service on many other lines.

Eurostar said its trains between France and London would operate normally.

Some air-traffic controllers walked out, forcing the cancellation or delay of about a quarter of flights from Paris airports.

Air France said it was operating all of its long-haul flights as planned, but short and medium-haul flights had been affected.

Migrant laws

Amid the disruption caused by strikes, the Interior Ministry said 1.1 million people had joined Tuesday's protests but unions claimed the figure was more than double official estimates.

The figures make Tuesday's protest bigger than a previous one in June, where more than 800,000 people took part.

Huge crowds braved stormy weather across southern parts of France, while demonstrators in Paris and the north enjoyed autumn sunshine.

In Paris, protesters shouted through loud-hailers: "Slave-driving? No, no, no. Working more? No, no, no. Fair reforms? Yes, yes, yes."

Protester Michel Prouvier told AFP news agency: "We're going to have old people living in the street."

Activists were also keen to maker a wider point, angry at the recent deportation of about 1,000 Roma (Gypsies) and a host of proposed laws which they say unfairly target immigrants and minorities.

"Pensions are a pretext for protesting against the Sarkozy system," said Adji Ahoudian, a Socialist Party activist.

Among those concerns is a proposal banning the full face veil worn by Muslim women, which was passed by the lower house in July but is now up for debate in the Senate.

Senators are also expected to debate a controversial new security law which would see recent immigrants stripped of French citizenship if they committed serious crimes such as killing a police officer.

The law would also allow electronic tagging for foreign criminals facing deportation.
FSFSFSFSFS
Here's how this strike was seen by the British Lib Com site.
FSFSFSFSFS
Mass strikes in France over proposed increase to retirement age
7th September 2010 - In response to the government's proposal to raise the pension age from 60 to 62, French workers have held widespread strikes that brought severe disruption to the French economy.

French unions have claimed that up to three million people have taken part in street protests amid a national strike against France's economic policies.

Police gave an estimate of 1.2 million people at rallies nationwide.

Schools have been closed and public transport disrupted, with demonstrations held in about 200 towns.

Unions are demanding more is spent to protect workers in the recession. Unemployment has reached two million and is expected to rise further.

Union members marched towards the Place de la Nation in Paris behind a banner that read: "United against the crisis, defend employment, spending power and public services."

"They have a profound sense of social injustice," said Jean-Claude Mailly, head of the large Force Ouvriere union, "and that, I think, is something that neither the government nor the employers have understood."

Benoit Hamon, a spokesman for the French Socialist Party spokesman said France was experiencing similar problems to other countries, but that the situation was being made worse by President Nicolas Sarkozy.

"We have a president who aggravates the crisis by making the wrong economic and social choices, by his deafness regarding the general dissatisfaction," said Mr Hamom.

"He refuses to give answers regarding layoffs, regarding the cost of living, regarding the way to objectively avoid the rise in job losses in the public sector or in the public health system."

Marches were also being held in Marseille, Lyon, Grenoble and many other towns and cities.

Noel Kouici, demonstrating in Marseilles, said protesters had a "grudge" against the government.

"Of course we are angry against the government when you see the way they serve the banks and leave the people starving and losing their jobs," he said.

But the deputy mayor of Marseille, Roland Blum, told the BBC the government had done a lot to help people.

"Of course I understand the distress of people who've lost or are going to lose their jobs, but what I think is necessary is that we all work together," he said.

There protests were largely peaceful but minor scuffles were reported in several cities later in the evening.

In Paris, police used tear gas to disperse small groups of youths who were setting fire to rubbish bins and throwing bottles.

It is the second time in two months that major demonstrations have been held, following a similar display in January which drew about a million protesters.

Beleaguered industries

The strikes began on Wednesday evening on transport networks.

An employee assists commuters at Gare Saint-Lazare train in Paris (19 March 2009)
French commuters face a limited rail service because of the strike

The national rail operator, SNCF, cancelled 40% of high-speed trains and half of regional services.

A third of flights out of Paris's Orly airport have been cancelled, while a tenth of France's electricity output has been shut down with workers on strike.

However, buses and the Metro rail system in Paris were running normally, thanks to a new law enforcing a minimum transport service during strikes,.

But with many schools and public buildings shut for the day, the number of workers travelling into the capital was reduced.

Private-sector firms were also expecting a depleted workforce, with staff from the beleaguered car industry, oil and retail sectors taking part in the strike.
FSFSFSFSFS
It is, of course, easy to expect too much from such ephemeral wonders. A one day general strike is, after all, nothing but a do it yourself opinion poll with a lot of noise. It has exactly zero immediate effect other than a brief loss of production which, in the case of public enterprise, is often a gain rather than a loss of revenue. As the following article from The Economist points out such symbolic actions have forced the government to back down on the issue of pensions at least once in the past (1995). Whether that will be the case this time is uncertain. President Sarkozy has sunk to record levels of unpopularity, but the reasons are not confined to this one issue or even to a collection of issues related to his neo-liberal agenda. Like most conservative ideologues who preach "morality for the masses" his government has more than its fair share of sleaze and scandal, and this has weighed heavily on his administration.


On the other hand, as the following points out, Sarkozy is constrained by political considerations to at least appear to "give a little". In this he has unlikely allies in the form of the larger union federations, the CFDT and the CGT, both of which are quite happy with their present position in French society and who are unlikely to want to toss the dice in the air in terms of a fundamental rearrangement of same. All the ingredients are there for a compromise whereby both sides declare victory while hoping for electoral gains in 2012. Talk of further general strikes are merely bargaining chips for these unions to "appear" to be useful for their members and in the case of the CFDT for its bedfellow the Socialist party. If the unions were serious about pushing their advantage they would definitely set a general strike for September 29 to coincide with the one planned in Spain and lobby their fellow continental unions for a European wide general strike on that day. Not just talk about it and bluster.


The French anarcho-syndicalist union the CNT (CNT Vignoles) participated in the general strike, but they see the limitations of such actions. Recognizing the ephemeral nature of such protests they have recommended a gradual build up of general assemblies at workplaces. Such general assemblies, independent from the union bureaucracies, would not be tied to any institutional benefits from the state and would be much more effective organs of resistance. They lack the flash and noise of one day demonstrations but unlike the mayfly-like lifespan of such protests they are enduring methods for people to resist the government and its corporate masters.


Something to consider. In any case here is The Economist article.
FSFSFSFSFS
French politics
The retiring type

Sep 8th 2010, 9:27 by The Economist PARIS


FRANCE is bracing itself for more disruption after 1.1m-2.7m demonstrators took to the streets, in hundreds of towns across the country, as part of a 24-hour national strike against President Nicolas Sarkozy’s pension reform. The turn-out was better than trade-union leaders had hoped for, and far higher than a previous day of action in June. Train drivers, teachers, post-office staff, air-traffic controllers, and other mostly public-sector workers, some wheeling children’s buggies, others banging festive drums, took part. Flush with their success, union leaders are now hoping to press the government for further concessions.

Mr Sarkozy wants to raise the minimum legal pension age from 60 to 62 years. This is a relatively modest change by the standards of some other European countries, which are pushing the retirement age up to 65 or even 67. The government forecasts that retirement at 62 will reduce by €18.6 billion the €42 billion state pension-fund shortfall expected by 2018. Tax increases, including a raise in the top income-tax rate from 40% to 41%, will make up a further €4 billion; the rest will come from general government spending.

Yet the reform is symbolically important. France has not touched the legal retirement age since the early 1980s, when it was cut to 60 years. Previous governments have tinkered with contribution rules to try to make the numbers add up, but never dared to meddle with retirement at 60. Back in 1995 Alain Juppé, prime minister under President Jacques Chirac, was forced to withdraw a more modest pension reform after weeks of chaos on French streets.

Union leaders and the opposition Socialist Party, which is also against the reform, argue that the government cannot afford to appear deaf to such this week's show of public opposition. Martine Aubry, the Socialist boss, called the reform “unfair”, and called on the government to “go back to square one”, and withdraw the legislation, which is currently going through parliament. “If we are not listened to, there will be further protests,” declared Bernard Thibault, leader of the powerful Confédération Générale du Travail. Union chiefs now need to decide whether to call another national strike this month. Some are talking about another one-day strike later this month, when parliament is due to vote on the reform.

Mr Sarkozy is in an awkward corner. His popularity has dropped to record lows. His own political camp is restless, and some deputies fear he has lost his political touch. The Socialist Party is freshly confident, and has started to believe in its chances of election at the next presidential poll in 2012. Mr Sarkozy says he will not budge on the retirement age. But he will be tempted to give some ground, in order to thwart further disruption. Certain concessions at the margin, over issues such as special rules for those who have done hard labour (pénibilité), would not necessarily make for a bad deal. But to go too far would only save him trouble in the short run. It would do nothing to restore his credibility as a reformer and a leader ready to take unpopular decisions, without which he has no chances of re-election in 2012.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR:

GENERAL STRIKES ROLL ACROSS EUROPE:

Following previous general strikes in Greece and Spain unions in Europe are increasingly reaching for the weapon of the general strike to protest government austerity measures across the continent. Recently workers in France and Italy held one day general strikes, and Greek unions have set a date for yet another such strike as well. Here's news from the Epoch Times of the strike in France last Thursday June 24.

EEEEEEEEEE
Millions in France Protest Raising Retirement Age to 62
Workers from both the public and private sectors joined hundreds of organized protest activities, reported AFP.

Bernard Thibault, head of France’s biggest union CGT estimated “about 2 million” protesters turned out. About 1-in-5 civil servants did not go to work, shutting the doors to some schools.

Authorities said 50 percent of train service was interrupted coming in and out of Paris and 15 percent of flights to city airports had to be canceled Thursday morning.

Striking print workers asked national daily newspapers to scrap their Friday editions.

On June 16, Labor Minister Eric Woerth announced plans to raise the retirement age to 62 by 2018 as part of a program to save the country US$55 billion.

Unions say the proposal puts an unfair burden on workers. Woerth said Wednesday the reform was “necessary and fair” and the government would stick to its plan. The bill will go before cabinet next month and Parliament is scheduled to vote on it in September.

In 1995, Paris had to drop a savings program after weeks of strikes.

France currently has one of the lowest retirement ages in Europe.

EEEEEEEEEE

On Friday June 25 it was Italy's turn. Here's a report from Deutsche Welle.

EEEEEEEEEE
Italians protest Berlusconi's austerity plans

Italian workers walked out in a protest against austerity cuts, disrupting transport services across the country. Italy's largest union organised the day of strike action, with marches in nearly every major city.

Italy's largest union staged a national general strike on Friday in a protest against austerity measures by Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's centre-right government. Transport services across the country were disrupted, though support for the strike was not universal.

The left-leaning CGIL union, which has six million members, staged rallies in nearly every major Italian city in a bid to force the government to rethink a 25-billion-euro package of cuts. Berlusconi has defended the package as “absolutely necessary” and hopes it will help save the euro currency.

The austerity measures include a 10 percent budget reduction for ministries, 4.5 billion euros in reduced transfers to regional governments, a partial amnesty on illegal building and a 3-year wage freeze for civil servants.

"No one denies that we need to make cuts, but they must be cuts which are fair and look to the future, rather than just slashing spending," said Susanna Camusso, deputy leader of the CGIL, at a rally in Bologna.

The strike was a key test of strength for Berlusconi, whose poll ratings have reached new lows as unemployment has risen and the euro zone's third largest economy has struggled to emerge from recession.

Loyalties divided

The strike split Italy's trade union movement, which is roughly divided along political lines. The other two main unions asked their members to stay on the job.

While most private sector CGIL workers went on strike for four hours, public sector members demonstrated their anger by staying off work all day. Bus, subway and rail services were disrupted throughout the country, although support for the strike was patchy and some services continued to run. Airport staff also planned to strike, but flights at Rome's Fiumicino airport appeared to suffer little disruption.

The strikes followed union protests in France and Greece this week against plans for pension reform and budget cuts. Members of the 16-nation euro zone have rushed to approve austerity measures in a bid to restore confidence in the single currency and stop Greece's debt crisis spilling over into other countries.

Thousands marched in Rome on June 12 to protest against the government's austerity measures. Polls say a majority of Italians believe the cuts are unfairly distributed, even though part of the package includes pay cuts for parliamentarians.

Author: Joanna Impey (AP/Reuters)
EEEEEEEEEE

Meanwhile Greece which has seen four general strikes this year is set to repeat its protests on June 29. Here's the story from the Wall Street Journal. This strike is likely to be the most widely observed one of the current batch.

EEEEEEEEEE
Greece's Largest Unions Plan Paralyzing Strike For June 29
ATHENS (Dow Jones)--Greece's two largest unions, which have about 1.2 million members, have agreed to hold a 24-hour, combined paralyzing strike on June 29 to protest prospective labor and pension reforms.

This confirms what the unions had said to Dow Jones on Wednesday.

The Greek ruling socialist government has said that it has no choice but to impose tough measures that it has agreed to in exchange for the EUR110 billion bailout package provided by the European Union and the International Monetary Fund.

Some of the proposed reforms that unions fear will lead to easier layoffs at a time of high unemployment, rising retirement ages and lower pensions.

Unions see the reforms as a denigration of workers' hard-earned rights and the dismantling of the welfare state, while the socialist government argues it has no other options.

This will be the fifth general strike this year and is likely to again bring the country to its knees as businesses, public services and transportation, among several other sectors, will grind to a halt.

The private sector umbrella union Greek General Confederation of Labor, or GSEE, which has 800,000 members, said in a statement that it's taking this action to oppose the prospective bills to liberalize the labor market and to protect pension entitlements that they see as being undermined.

"We need to reject these anti-worker and anti-pension legal initiatives, as well as the government's inflexible and negative stance," the GSEE said in a statement.

The GSEE added that the strike was also being organized to express workers' dissatisfaction that a national collective-bargain wage agreement looks unlikely to be achieved soon due to the intransigence of employer groups.

The second largest union, ADEDY, which has 400,000 members and represents public sector employees, confirmed to Dow Jones that it will also participate in the strike even though a formal decision has not been made yet.

"We have to take to the streets to protect our members from these harsh and unfair changes that are looming," Ilias Iliopoulos, secretary general of the public sector umbrella union, told Dow Jones.

"Greece is a test case for these neo-liberal ultra-conservative policies, and if they succeed here, they will be imposed across all of Europe--to even the wealthier Northern European countries--at the expense of workers and for the benefit of big business," Iliopoulos added.

-By Nick Skrekas of Dow Jones

EEEEEEEEEE

There is also a planned general strike on June 29 in the Basque countries in Spain. This one will likely also be well observed as a previous one on May 21 was a success despite the opposition of Spain's two largest union federations the UGT and the CCOO. In the Basque countries independent local unions outweigh the larger national federations. The anarchosyndicalist CGT has come out in support of this strike, and they have been pressuring the larger unions for some time to not wait until the end of September but to come out with the Basque unions at the end of the month. The CGT has also been calling for some time for a general strike of unlimited duration.

When all is said and done, after all, a one day general strike is of only symbolic value. Sometimes the duration of the supposed general strike is even less than a day (see the article on Italy above). The following article originally published in the English anarchist paper Freedom and reproduced at the Libcom website gives the cautionary warning from the Spanish anarchosyndicalist CNT that only a real general strike with no time limit is an actual way to make governments back down from their austerity "reforms".

EEEEEEEEEE
CNT: Make Spain’s general strike indefinite
Submitted by Rob Ray on Jun 23 2010 20:43
As a general strike is mooted to coincide with Europe-wide action, the anarcho-syndicalist CNT union is warning that one day outings will not be enough to deter deep public sector cuts

Spain's fifth general strike has been set for September 29th amidst massive public sector cuts and attacks on job security passed by the ruling Socialist Party - and the Confederación Nacional del Trabajo is calling for it to be made indefinite.

Following a one day public-sector strike earlier this month the union is warning that “gesture strikes” will not be enough to force the government to change course.

In a statement after the June 8th event they said: “The government’s plans to stabilise the economy through reducing the public deficit by 11% have placed the cost of the economic crisis on the shoulders of the disadvantaged.

“It is evident that the proposals are designed to satisfy banks and employers by compromising with the neoliberal designs that prevail in the EU.”

“If there had been earlier mobilisations the government would not have dared to present the measures announced and would have had to cut elsewhere. It would have had to seek income where the money really is – on the bench, through corporate taxes, inheritance, hedge funds etc.

“We believe it is a mistake to continue ‘negotiating’ labour reform, which is simply a concession to employers. The only possiblility for correcting this situation is to fight this economic aggression through social confrontation, to continue and expand protests to all sectors.”

“These great evils can only be treated with great remedies, and such remedies do not include, of course, a 24-hour general strike which, assuming that UGT and CCOO (the two major reformist unions in Spain) dared to actually convene one, would act only as a giant safety valve for employee discontent.

“An indefinite general strike paralysing the country until the government withdraws anti-worker and anti-social actions would by contrast act as a binder for workers to recover their class consciousness and act together, with an eye to the destruction of the capitalist system through social revolution which is the only truly effective medicine against congenital diseases of the system.

Larger TUC-style unions called the public-sector strike on June 8th, which the left claimed got 75% of public sector workers out (state sources put it 16%) and saw tens of thousands of people on the streets in protest. The public sector accounts for around 2.5 million jobs in Spain. However the measure has made little impact on narrowly-passed plans to slash 5% from public sector pay, part of a 15 billion euro package of austerity measures being implemented in the next few years.

Other measures include the uncoupling of pension payments from inflation, an end to tax breaks for new parents and cuts in public investment and development aid of up to 6 billion euros. The Party is also taking the opportunity to “free up the labour market” by making it easier to hire and fire workers, a measure which would be likely to help drive a general strike outside the public sector.

Its actions, taken as Spain is threatened by international markets over its debt ratio, are widely seen as a betrayal of the electoral promises which put the Socialist Party (PSOE) and Jose Zapatero into power in 2004 on the back of widespread discontent with the right, though anarchist groups in the country have pointed to the situation as emblematic of party politicians’ inability to represent working people.

In an editorial for the periodical CNT, the union noted: “Economic crises are inherent in the capitalist system and will, unfortunately for humanity, regularly occur as long as the system exists.

“At the end of the day, the problem lies in the balance of power between two social classes with conflicting interests - the bourgeois class, which holds exclusive ownership of the means of production and distribution, and the proletarian class, which has no more than their manual and intellectual labour to sell as dearly as possible. The salary of the employee, and therefore the worker himself, is just another cost of production like machinery, electrical power or fuel.

“And when the worker is considered this way, not as a human being but as a cost to be cut without a second thought, you can do with them what you will, without remorse. That is neither more nor less than what capitalists do with us now.

“We can not remain silent before these measures announced by the government, which will result in yet more desecration of labour right to add to a long list of infamies imposed since this pompously-named “democracy” came into existence. Lowering the salaries of officials and freezing or eliminating pensions, among other measures, are not appropriate ways to solve the so-called crisis, and will have the determined opposition of the CNT.”

- Discussion thread on libcom.org

- An edited version of this article first appeared in Freedom anarchist newspaper

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR- FRANCE:

FRENCH WORKERS AGAINST PENSION THEFT:

Last Thursday, May 27, tens of thousands of workers struck and took to the street in response to a call from the major labour unions to oppose the proposed pension "reforms" that would raise the retirement age in France from 60 to 62 years. While large the demonstrations and the response of workers to the strike call was decidedly smaller than expected by the unions and perhaps suggests disillusionment with the endless rounds of "half-strikes" and street marches that the major unions have relied on in their continued disputes with the conservative Sarkozy government.

It might also suggest that efforts to convince the population of the "necessity" of reduction in government benefits are bearing fruit in the atmosphere of the fiscal crisis of much of southern Europe. The drive to reduce pension benefits, however, predates the present crisis and is an ongoing campaign by governments across the world to roll back pension benefits while maintaining or increasing give-aways to corporate business. With the demise of the pseudo-alternative of the state-communist countries the ruling managerial class has long seen its way open to "rationalize" the system of social support in various ways, and one of these is the reduction of pension benefits, especially by raising the age of retirement. they are aided in this by the fact that most social democratic parties worldwide have abandoned all but the slightest pretence to a "class perspective" in their policies. Either trendy leftism such as "greenishness" or self-promotion as "better managers" has become their raison d'etre. The present fiscal crisis is merely an opportunity for long term plans to be accelerated, not some unique crisis.

It should also be noted that the raising of the age of eligible retirement is a worldwide phenomenon that happens whether a state is in a deficit position or not. In Europe Germany will bring in a retirement age of 67 next year. The trend to raising the age of retirement extends across Europe and way beyond. Retirement ages are increasing outside of Europe in places such as Australia, India, Singapore and South Korea amongst many others. It should also be noted that while a retirement age of 60 (in France) may seem generous by North American standards that there are countries such as China where the age is 60 for males and 55 for females. Appeals to "competitiveness" hardly hold water when you look at the numbers in an international context.

The attack on pension benefits in France has to be seen in the context of the worldwide tendency of government managers to shift income from the working and other lower classes to the ruling classes. They do this in the context of assurance that they have no serious consequences to face beyond possible disorder ie there is presently no widely accepted "alternative" to their rule outside of South America and its neo-caudillos. The so-called fiscal "crisis" that much of Europe faces today is, from the point of view of its managers more an "opportunity" than a crisis. Watch carefully. If France's retirement age goes from 60 to 62 it will become 65 a few years after.

Meanwhile Canada's age will creep up from 65 to 67 to 69 and finally to 70. If you are so unlucky as to have health problems come upon you before then, well tough shit. The hope of government managers is that you die before you can collect a penny.

It will be a long hard slog before a popular alternative to such policies will be built, but doubtless the anarchist movement - in more realistic aspects - will be a major force in the formulation of such a thing. Until then defensive struggles to fight back against the plans of the managers have their place, but perhaps the French are right in their lack of faith in the traditional ways of doing this.

Here's an item from the Globe and Mail about the recent "semi-strike" in France.

ILILILILILILILIL
French workers hit the streets
Paris — Reuters
Published on Thursday, May. 27, 2010 9:56AM EDT

Last updated on Thursday, May. 27, 2010 6:34PM EDT


Tens of thousands of workers took to the streets in cities across France on Thursday to protest against government plans to raise the minimum retirement age of 60 as part of a reform of the costly pension system.

Trade union leaders said the marches were the first step in a long struggle to defend the retirement age, a trademark reform of the late Socialist President Francois Mitterrand, against the current government which says it has no alternative.

Transport was working almost normally and between 10 and 20 per cent of public service workers went on strike in schools, the post office and France Telecom. A poll for the Le Parisien daily said 62 per cent of those responding were ready to demonstrate.

One of the earliest marches, in Marseille, drew a larger turnout than a previous protest day in March. Unions estimated the crowd at 80,000 while police gave a figure of 12,000.

Estimates for the Paris march were due later on Thursday.

“Only a show of force on the streets can defend the 60-year retirement age and the social achievements that [President] Nicolas Sarkozy is methodically attacking,” Bernard Thibault, secretary general of the powerful CGT union, said.

Labour Minister Eric Woerth said on Wednesday that the current retirement age was “not dogma” and Budget Minister Francois Baroin said on Thursday a pension reform bill would be debated in parliament after the summer break.

“There are basically no other measures on the table that are convincing,” Mr. Woerth told reporters.

Mr. Sarkozy added a partisan sting to the debate on Wednesday by saying, to loud protests from the opposition Socialists, that France would have “much fewer problems” if Mr. Mitterrand had not lowered the retirement age in 1983.

According to a report last month by the government-appointed Pensions Advisory Council, France’s pension system faces a funding gap of around €70-billion ($86-billion U.S.) in 2030 and that could balloon to more than €100-billion by 2050.

Like other countries in the euro zone, France is struggling to bring its swollen public deficit under control. It has announced a freeze on central government spending over the next three years but has ruled out tax increases.

According to French media reports, the government is considering increasing the retirement age to 62 or 63 years and extending the period during which contributions have to be paid to 42 years from the current level of 40.5 years by 2030.

However, President Nicolas Sarkozy’s office said that no decisions had been taken as yet.

Mr. Sarkozy has singled out an overhaul of the pension system as his government’s key reform project this year but his plans already have aroused strong opposition from unions.

The CGT’s Thibault said further protests could come before the summer break. CFDT union leader Francois Chereque said: “Things will happen over time. One protest will not suffice.”

There have been expectations for several months that a rise in the retirement age would be part of the planned reform but French media have focused closely on the issue in recent days.

The transport chaos that often accompanies strikes in France was mostly absent on Thursday, partly because the reform plan would not touch costly special pension schemes for transport workers, a powerful sector that brought an earlier conservative government to its knees in 1995 when it tried to reform them.

“The government’s plan is not the toughest that could be, despite what the banners will say,” the business daily Les Echos wrote in an editorial.

MOUVEMENT ANARCHISTE DU CANADA/CANADIAN ANARCHIST MOVEMENT:

ILS FONT L'ATTENTION EN FRANCE/THEY PAY ATTENTION IN FRANCE:

Ce qui suit est du blog Voix de Faits de ville de Québec. Il est agréable de Molly que les gens en Europe doit reconnaître les progrès que nous avons ont fait ici en Canada. Mon seul problème avec l'article initial de la France est que l'anarchisme au Québec n'a pas commencé avec l'année 2000.

The following is from the Voix de Faits blog in Québec City. It is pleasing to Molly that people in Europe should acknowledge the progress we have made here in Canada. My only problem with the original article from France is that anarchism in Québec did not begin with the year 2000.

↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔

[À signaler] Hostie d’vieux monde ! L’anarchisme au Québec:
Le périodique La Sociale, du groupe lillois de la Coordination des groupes anarchistes (CGA), propose ce mois-ci un survol ma foi fort bien documenté du mouvement anarchiste québécois.

* * *

Hostie d’vieux monde ! L’anarchisme au Québec

Depuis le début des années 2000 le mou­ve­ment liber­taire au Québec reprend force et vigueur. Soit qu’elles le reven­di­quent expli­ci­te­ment dans leurs prin­ci­pes, soit qu’elles le reconnais­sent en pra­ti­que, les orga­ni­sa­tions d’affi­lia­tion anar­chis­tes par­sè­ment la société civile et ten­dent à gagner en visi­bi­lité, mal­gré leur mor­cel­le­ment rela­tif..../...

Lire le texte

↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔

...And in English

↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔

[Notice] Fuck*** the old world! Anarchism in Quebec:

The periodical La Sociale, of Lille Group of the Coordination des groupes anarchistes (CGA), offers this month a faithful and well docomentedurvey of the anarchist movement in Quebec.

* * *

Fuck the old world!

Anarchism in Quebec:

Since the early 2000s the libertarian movement in Quebec has once again gathered strength and vigor. Whether they claim it explicitly in their principles, whether they recognize it in practice, the anarchist organizations scattered amongst civil society have tended to gain visibility, despite their relative fragmentation..../...

Read the text

↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔↔

***MOLLY NOTE:

While I can read French very well (as opposed to how I can speak, write or understand the spoken word) I am often thrown for a loss when I come to translate profanity. "Hostie" refers to the "host" at a Catholic Mass(take it from the ex-catholic Molly). The usage above goes a little bit beyond "damn" in the English language, and I have decided to use the more expressive "fuck" as opposed to the less expressive "screw". Perhaps I am wrong in reading the connotations of this word, and I await correction from a francophone. Profanity can be the hardest thing to translate from one language to another and retain the original connotation as opposed to the denotation. English, despite some of its other disadvantages, is one of the better languages for swearing, I have, however. heard tales that Russian, Hungarian and Italian are pretty good as well. The advantage that English has is that it can combine blasphemy (a big thing in French) with sexual, animal, geneological, scatological and other references, often in one string of invective. Ah, but that's the subject of another rambling post.

MOUVEMENT ANARCHISTE INTERNATIONAL -FRANCE/INTERNATIONAL ANARCHIST MOVEMENT-FRANCE:
CONTRE LA RÉPRESSION D'ÉTAT À POITIERS/AGAINST STATE REPRESSION IN POITIERS:

L'histoire et attrait qui suit est de CNT-F anarcho-syndicaliste./The story and solidarity appeal that follows is from the anarcho-syndicalist CNT-F.
@@@@@@@@@@

Contre la répression d'État à Poitiers:

Contre la répression d'État à PoitiersLa Fédération CNT des travailleurs de l'éducation s'élève contre la répression féroce qui s'abat sur des camarades à Poitiers depuis le 10 octobre.





Suite à la manifestation contre l'enfermement et la construction de la prison privée de Vivonne, dix-huit personnes, dont certains militants, ont été arrêtées et placées en garde à vue. Certaines ont même été arrêtées alors qu'elles n'avaient pas participé à la manifestation ! Jugées en comparution immédiate – nom juridique de la justice expéditive – trois d'entre elles ont été condamnées à de la prison ferme.





Pour faire taire le mouvement social, l'État a choisi arbitrairement trois boucs émissaires innocents et utilise ce prétexte pour ficher tous les militants locaux. Hortefeux réactive la peur de l'ennemi intérieur et en profite pour faire passer des nouvelles lois liberticides : « inventaire des lieux de vie communautaire où se regroupent des mouvances anarchistes potentiellement violentes », « identification très précise des groupuscules qui organisent ces incidents », dissolution de ces groupes.





La Fédération CNT des travailleurs de l'éducation invite à créer des comités de soutien aux inculpé-e-s ou à rejoindre ceux qui existent déjà. Nous dénonçons un État qui utilise les violences policières, les lois scélérates et une « justice » d'exception pour détruire toute contestation sociale. Nous continuerons à lutter contre l'enfermement, nous continuerons à participer à des manifestations contre toutes les violences économiques, sociales et politiques. Nous serons toujours dans les luttes et y développerons l'autogestion et la solidarité contre la peur et l'injustice.

CNT FTE

Toulouse, le 17 octobre 2009

Contacts de la CNT FTE : http://www.cnt-f.org/fte/ (site), fede-educ@cnt-f.org (mail), 06 26 50 01 36 (téléphone).
Précisions sur les condamnés :

- Patrick, quatre mois fermes, quatre mois avec sursis et 800 € d'amende pour violence sur commissaire ; Sam (trésorier de la CNT éducation 86), un mois ferme, cinq mois avec sursis pour violence sur commissaire ; Jean-Salvy, un mois ferme, cinq mois avec sursis pour violence sur officier de police ; Nathalie et Charles, deux mois avec sursis pour détention de feux d'artifices ; Serge, six mois avec sursis, deux ans de mise à l'épreuve et 2 850 € d'amende pour dégradations volontaires de biens privés ; Léo, six mois avec sursis pour dégradations volontaires par incendie et jets de pierres ; Candice, six mois avec sursis et 950 € d'amende pour dégradations volontaires sur un bien d'utilité publique. Par ailleurs, le parquet a fait appel pour quatre d'entre eux.



- Procès à venir : le 5 janvier 2010, une mineure (14 ans) pour rébellion et refus de prélèvement ADN à Limoges ; le 23 février 2010, Angel (CNT éducation 86) et Sarah pour refus de prélèvement ADN (et refus de prise de photos et d'empreintes pour Angel).

Renseignements :

- Le comité poitevin contre la répression des mouvements sociaux ( http://antirepression.unblog.fr/ ) appelle à un rassemblement lundi 19 octobre à 17h30, place d'Armes, Poitiers.




- Un blog de soutien pour Sam et Jean-Salvy : http://soutiensametjeansalvy.over-blog.org/Pour signer l'appel à leur libération : http://5237.lapetition.be/ <http://5237.lapetition.be/

Pour contacter le comité de soutien : soutiensametjeansalvy@gmail.com

@@@@@@@@@@
And in English.

@@@@@@@@@@
Against state repression in Poitiers:

Against state repression in Poitiers

The CNT Federation of Education Workers protests the harsh punishment that has fallen on comrades in Poitiers since October 10.





Following the demonstration against the closure and the construction of the private prison in Vivonne, eighteen people, including certain militants, have been arrested and placed in custody. Some have even been arrested when they did not attend the demonstration! Judged at first appearance - legal name 'expeditious justice' - three of them were sentenced to prison.





To silence the social movement, the state has arbitrarily chosen three innocent scapegoats and uses this pretext to implicate all local activists. Hortefeux (Molly note=I just can't translate this. My Larousse and two online translation services gave me no help. I assume it means something like "quickly" ie "pants on fire" because of the "feux" part or perhaps something like "slyly" or perhaps something totally different. Perhaps a francophone could help me out here )reactive fear of the internal enemy and used it to push through new 'libericidal' laws ie "an inventory of places of community life that bring together the potentially violent anarchist mileau", "a very precise identification of the small groups that organized these events," and the "dissolution of these groups".





The CNT Federation of Education Workers calls for the creation of support committees for those charged or joining existing ones. We denounce a state that uses police violence, the wicked laws and a biased "justice" which aims to destroy all social protest. We will continue to fight against the closure, we will continue to participate in demonstrations against all violence, economic, social and political. We will continue to struggle and develop self management and solidarity against fear and injustice.


CNT FTE


Toulouse, October 17, 2009


Contacts of the CNT FTE: http://www.cnt-f.org/fte/ (site), fede-educ@cnt-f.org (mail), 06 26 50 01 36 (phone).


Details of the prisoners:


- Patrick, sentenced to four months, four months suspended sentence and a fine of 800 € for assault on a police officer, Sam (treasurer of the CNT education 86) a month in prison, five-months suspended sentence for assault on a police officer, Jean-Salvy, a month in prison, five-month suspended sentence for assault on a police officer; Nathalie and Charles, two-month suspended sentence for possession of fireworks, Serge, six months suspended sentence, two years probation and € 2 850 d fine for malicious damage to private property, Leo, six months suspended sentence for deliberate damage by fire and throwing stones, Candice, six months suspended sentence and 950 € fine for deliberate damage to public property of . Moreover, the prosecution has filed an appeal for four of them.


- Upcoming trials: January 5, 2010, a minor (14 years) for rebellion and rejection of DNA sampling in Limoges, February 23, 2010, Angel (CNT education 86) and Sarah for refusing DNA collection (and refusing photos and fingerprints for Angel).


Information:


- The committee Poitevin against repression of social movements (http://antirepression.unblog.fr/ ) calls for a rally Monday, October 19 at 17:30 Place d'Armes, Poitiers. - A support blog for Sam and Jean-Salvy: http://soutiensametjeansalvy.over-blog.org/ To sign the call for their release: http://5237.lapetition.be/


To contact the support committee: soutiensametjeansalvy@gmail.com

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR-FRANCE:

VICTORY FOR FRENCH CNT IN METALWORKS ELECTIONS:

The CNT of France (CNT Vignoles) is the larger of two French anarchosyndicalist union federations that bear the same name. The basic difference between them and the CNT AIT of France is that the latter refuse to participate in any of the union elections (of which there are many- see later) that are periodically held in French workplaces. There is much debate about whether the CNT's participation is a good or bad thing, but only results can determine which it is. As least in one place the CNT has managed to gain considerable popularity amongst a section of workers without compromising its principles. The following is a translation from the French, and it recently appeared as a notice of the CNT Seine-Maritime.

@@@@@@@@@@
Workplace elections in metalalurgy in Seine-Maritime:

Communique of the CNT Seine-Maritime

http://www.cnt-f.org/cnt76/

Elections in the metal business ( John Crane shop)

An impressive victory of the CNT in colleges 1 and 2, that is the lesson we can draw from these elections where the CNT presented itself for the first time in the company.

College 1

With a high turnout of almost 90% in the first round of elections to the Works Committee, the CNT obtained in the workers college61.70% of votes, in fron of the FO with 34% of the vote and the CGT came in dead last with 4.2%. Only the CNT will be elected in this college. This is not a marginal vote or a protest vote but rather is a vote of union density for which the work was performed beforehand. The turnout speaks volumes about the workers' desire for change . College 2

With a turnout of 83.33% in the first round of workplace elections , the CNT leads with 50% of the votes in the college of professionals, in front of the FO which obtained 36% and CGT at 14%. The CNT received an elected delegate and an alternative delegate. Ditto for the FO.

The CNT and CGT did not present candidates in the third college, the managers. In this college the FO was very much ahead of the GGC and the CFDT.

With the new law of union representation, the CGT and CFDT are not considered representative, not having achieved more than 10% of the votes cast, in contrast to the CNT and the FO. By analyzing these results we find that the union density of the CNT was made among the workers and professionals. FO was especially distinguished in settings where their representativeness was undeniable. (the managers-Molly )

The big losers of this election were the CGT and CFDT, which no longer have the conclusive presumption of representativity.

Militants of the CNT thank everyone and all those who worked on this success that will , we are convinced, appeal to others.

@@@@@@@@@@

MOLLY NOTES:

A few things are in order if the above is to comprehensible to a North American reader. First of all the pattern of union representation throughout most of Europe, including France, is not the "one workplace, one (or none) union" that we are familiar with here. This has both good and bad points. The good is that, by law, each workplace with over 50 employees must have a 'Works' Council' and any with over 10 employees must have at least one of what is called a 'Workforce Delegate'. The latter are somewhat analogous to a 'shop steward', but not exactly as the delegate need not be a union member. This also means that pretty well all French workplaces have at least some of the protections only afforded by an union shop on this continent. The bad is that bargaining with employers all too often gets mired in simultaneous bargaining amongst the unions themselves as the functions of various bodies are unclear. The competing unions also often make solidarity a difficult thing to achieve, as there is great temptation for one union to try and undercut the other. The final bad is that the complicated system now in place was a response to the radical demand for 'self-management'. It is no such thing, and the fact that it was brought in as if it was tends to taint the very idea of self-management in people's minds. The criticism of people such as the CNT AIT that these bodies function as much for the transmission of management orders and molifying the workforce as they do to protect the workers has at least some validity. The solution of waiting until there is interest in a general assembly of the workers, however, leaves the unionists with very little to do between industrial disputes. It is only at those times that a majority of workers might be interested in scuh things, and when the dispute fades so do the assemblies, whatever the desires of the more militant.

How complicated is the system ? Let's begin with the fact that, at least in France there are not one but three different types of workplace elections (four if you count the haggling with the boss and with other unions when there is actual bargaining involved). The elections for 'Industrial Tribunals' are for bodies whose function is to rule on disputes arising from interpretation of contarcts already made. Think of them as something like permanently sitting Conciliation Boards, with greater scope and more judicial power. They are comprised half and half of representatives of employers and employees. Sounds like a formula for deadlock ? It is strongly supported by the larger, more bureaucratic, unions who take it as test of their national popularity, but draws little attention from the average worker. The elections are not connected with any particular workplace and mail in ballots are considered legitimate. The industrial activity of the country is divided into 5 'electoral colleges', managerial and professional staff, industry, commerce, agriculture and miscellaneous. Seen as something of a porkbarrel for the placement of union loyalists who will be from that point forward without any responsibility to the average worker, the last round of elections in late 2008 had a participation rate of 25.5% !!

The fact that the larger bureaucratic unions favour these elections as the test of "representativeness" (what is referred to in the CNT communique above) may be significant. The new law on "industrial democracy" adopted on August 20, 2008 no longer takes the Industrial Tribunal elections as the test of this. At the present time 5 union confederations are considered as "recognized" in terms of national bargaining. The dinosaurs such as the CGT, CFDT and FO (see below) are gradually losing out in the elections for 'Works Councils' and 'Workforce Delegates' which the new law recognizes as the test for such recognition. Both of these lections take place at workplaces, and those elected to them are much more under the supervision and control of the electors than the those in the Industrial Tribunals. These elections, accordingly, draw a far higher turnout- as can be seen from the figures in the CNT communique above.

The 'Workforce Delegates' mentioned above are tasked with bringing grievances to management, to the government Labour Inspectorate and to the Industrial Tribunals if a request to the employer concerning the infringement of the rights and freedoms of an employee is refused. Sorta like shop stewards, but a bit more complicated and not necessarily connected to any particular union (though the delegate may indeed be elected under a 'Union banner'). All enterprises with more than 10 employees is required to have Workforce Delegates. An admirable system if it works well, which it does not always do.

Then there are the elections for the 'Works Councils'. this is what the CNT communique above was talking about. These councils are required in every business with more than 50 employees. The councils consist of the elected representatives of the workers, along with the chief manager of the enterprise who acts as the chair but whose voting capacity is limited. Representatives appointed by the 'representative' trade union also sit in a non-voting capacity. The Council is in charge of the company welfare and cultural programs. It has the responsibility of formal bargaining in the case of profit sharing plans, but its role on other matters is supposed to be purely consultative. Actual bargaining is supposed to be done by the unions, but in practice it is often done by the Councils, and agreements between them and management can have the force of law. Different unions also have different ideas of what the roles of the Councils, the union organizations and actual general assemblies of the workers involved should be. Thus, where anarcho-syndicalist unions such as the CNT or libertarian inclined unions such as the SUD (see below) are popular the process will bend towards a more open involvement of the workers while where dinosaurs such the CGT are involved there will bea lot of backroom deals involved. The actual dividing lines between the powers and responsibilities of the unions and of the Councils varies quite considerably from place to place and from time to time.

If all of this sounds like it is maddeningly complex that is only because it is. With true Gallic rationalism France has created a sort of Rube Goldberg apparatus where the parts whirl madly in all directions and what is actually happening is not always clear. The very complexity, and its tendency to far too often work against rather than for the workers, has led to a certain cynicism about the very concept of 'self-management'. If this is what it is all about then the idea may not be so attractive after all. Perhaps that was an actual intent amongst some of the more clear thinking designers of the system as it was cobbled together from various traditional forms and various laws through the years.

Leaving such questions aside for the moment the fact that libertarian influenced unions such as the SUD and outright anarcho-syndicalist ones such as the CNT are gaining influence in the more democratic and responsive parts of this system can mean nothing but good. But let's conclude this with a little sketchy giude to French unions. I deliberately leave out of the following those "unions" that are undisguised bosses' federations. The (R) after the name of an union indicates that it is presently one of the recognized union federations. And you thought the system of workplace elections was complex ?

1)The CGT. (R)The Confédération générale du travail. Made up of more or less "ex" commies who have broken formal ties with the ever shrinking Communist Party but who have certainly retained every sneaky bureaucratic bad habit that Marxism Leninism ever encouraged...and these are many. Like many other previously communist union federations the functionaries of the CGT managed to survive the collapse of their political party by the sort of masterful cunning that only a lifetime spent in dealing in the shadows gives one.

2)The CFDT. (R)The Confédération française démocratique du travail. Basically a social democratic federation, but with the fissiparousness so characteristic of French politics made up of a number of mutually antagonistic factions.

3)FO.(R). Force ouvrière. Speaking of "factions"...historically a coalition between right wing unionists and (presumably right wing) Trotskyists. Historically held together more by hatred of the Communist Party than anything else. A worthy sentiment for sure, but hardly a "complete program". Having a hard time holding together now that the mutual enemy is in its dotage. Undoubtedly even more faction ridden than the CFDT.

4)CFTC.(R) The Confédération française des travailleurs chrétiens. The French Confederation of Christian Workers. God's shop stewards ??? Social Christian in orientation which can mean a great number of different things in different places. Nowhere near as sinister as the so-called "unions" that evangelists have tried to set up on this continent-especially Alberta. Something of a social club for that small proportion of the French population who actually take Catholicism seriously. A constant presence, undoubtedly under the special protection of St. Joseph.

5)The CFE-CGC (R). The Confédération française de l'encadrement-Confédération générale des cadres. Hardly belongs as an "union", but recognized as such. Membership made up of managers and executives. Its existence very dependent upon the desire of the French state to have everything in perfect 'rational' order.

6)The SUD. Solidaires unitaires démocratique. Newer, more radical, union federation with a membership of varying sympathies from left social democrat, to left socialist, to ecologist to anarchist. Works closely with other 'social movements'.

6)The UNSA. The Union nationale des syndicats autonomes. Another right wing union for white collar workers. Basically the same as the CFE-CGC, but perhaps less exclusive.

7)The CNT. The Confédération nationale du travail. What can I say...the good guys.

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR-POLAND:
POLISH ZSP AGAINST THE 'WORKS' COUNCILS:
Molly has recently been the grateful recipient of a pdf copy of the English language version of 'Strike', a review published by the Polish Union of Syndicalists (in Polish-take a deep breath- Zwiazek Syndykalistow Polski-ZSP). It's quite an interesting publication, but unfortunately unavailable over the internet. Get ahold of the ZSP via their website, however, and they could probably forward a copy your way. See also our Links section for more contacts for the ZSP.




Molly has dealt with the question of the Polish anarchosyndicalist unions before, making some mistakes that were corrected by the ZSP comrades. While not "yet" formally part of the AIT-IWA, the anarchosyndicalist International, the ZSP is generally in sympathy with same. Unlike the situation in western Europe the anarchosyndicalists in eastern Europe are generally either AIT members or sympathetic to said organization. In Poland there are two anarchosyndicalist federations, the ZSP and the non-AIT Workers' Initiative. Unlike in countries such as France and Spain the AIT sympathetic group is, as far as Molly can tell, definitely the most dynamic and probably the larger of the two. There may be historical and socioeconomic causes for the difference between eastern and western Europe in terms of the attractiveness of the two models of anarchosyndicalist action held by the two types of organization. What these are Molly is unclear about.




What is clear is that there is a basic difference in western Europe between the AIT and non-AIT groups in relation to one central question. This is the question of the "works' councils" (also known as enterprise councils). This is a system of labour representation that is unfamiliar to us here in North America (and also in Britain- though there was a failed attempt to introduce this system there about a decade ago). Here is North America we are used to basically three forms of workplace unionization ie 1)no union or representation, 2)the closed shop, one workplace, one union or 3)several unions in an enterprise representing different 'crafts" or 'employment categories'. In most of Europe there are what are called 'works councils' for enterprises above a certain number of employees. Since 1994 the EU has been attempting to mandate this sort of system for member states.




The exact form and regulations of these councils differ from country to country in the EU, but they all take the form of workplace elections for employee representation in a given workplace of enterprise. In many cases several different unions with different political perspectives and programs compete for representation on these councils. the powers of these councils also vary. In some cases, as apparently in much of Poland, they are little more than legal window dressing. In others those elected function very much like our familiar shop stewards. In yet other cases the councils function very much as adjuvants of management, allowing for suggestions about minor matters from the workforce but also acting to control said workforce by bureaucratizing workplace disputes. Can we say grievance process on steroids ? In yet other cases the councils do act as brakes on the arbitrary power of management.




The powers and structures of these councils vary, and so does the anarchosyndicalist response to them. In countries such as Spain and France where there are competing visions of what anarchosyndicalism should do the main (perhaps the only real substantive) issue dividing anarchosyndicalists is whether to participate or not in elections to such councils. In the cases of Spain (with the non-AIT CGT and the AIT CNT) and France (with the CNT-AIT France and the CNT-France) the split in anarchosyndicalist ranks has led to a situation where those who do participate in th elections have become the larger and more effective unions, especially in the Spanish case. In the French case the CNT-AIT France is little more than a small propaganda group. In the Spanish case (complicated by other fissures in Spanish anarchosyndicalism- a whole other story) the CNT is a small union that is marginally effective in a few places while the CGT is a national union of major effectiveness and popularity. I do not know enough about the Italian case with its two USIs (both of which bizarrely enough claim the AIT label even though one is quite obviously no such thing) to comment on it. There is also the German case of the FAU where the major anarchosyndicalist union (there is a small IWW presence in Germany) adheres to the AIT, but is quite unorthodox by AIT standards as to what it does.




The evidence from western Europe has so far been unequivocal. Choosing to participate in the elections is a much surer way to growth and actual influence on ordinary workers. Neither the Spanish CGT nor the CNT-F has "degenerated", as their critics predicted. An objective look at their actions over the past few decades shows them as consistent advocates of the principles of anarcho-syndicalism. Where they have "deviated" in such matters as advocacy of particular legislation more favourable to ordinary people or in campaigns against "privatization" they have merely bowed to temporary reality, and they have been no more "deviant" in these matters than their "orthodox" critics have been. In a few cases in France branches of the CNT-F have supported leftist parties in elections, but the general organization has remained aloof from party politics as has the Spanish CGT. Over the years the non-AIT unions have been consistent advocates of workers' self management and the eventual goal of a libertarian society, and in Spain the CGT has usually been at least as vociferous as the CNT in advocating the rights of the general worker assemblies over their representatives.




In actual fact the danger of "degenerating" via "reformism" has hardly ever been engraved on the tombstones of many of the organizations that comprised the golden age of syndicalism. The Mexican case may be an exception, and arguments might be made for the pre-WW I French CGT and even the CNT in the Spanish Revolution, but in the vast majority of cases the demise of syndicalist unions was either due to repression or to the precise opposite of "reformism" ie the siren call of revolutionary "efficiency"- Marxism Leninism. This particular Frankenstein is now really and truly buried, at least for another generation, but there is still the question of what seems more important-"revolution or anarchism". The former is not necessarily the only eternal way to the latter.




This tension between "practicality and idealism" was also played out in a different form here in North America in the long standing debate about whether the not-quite-anarchosyndicalist IWW should sign collective agreements. In the end practice rather than theoretical arguments won the day, and the IWW today strives for collective agreements whenever it can. This, of course, is a compromise just as participating in the works council elections in Europe is, but I fail to see how the adoption of this way of acting has made the IWW any less an advocate for its ultimate ideals. Merely a more effective one !!!



I think you can gather where my sympathies lie here. Yet, and it is a big "yet", while the major dangers feared by those who adhere to the AIT may be unlikely there are many minor dangers of which they are accurate critics. My own feeling is that those anarchosyndicalists active in the AIT would be much more effective within the larger non-AIT groups as a safeguard against bureaucracy, and I hope for the unlikely, in the near future, reunification of international anarchosyndicalism. There is also the question of whether the decision to participate in works council elections is always and everywhere the proper decision. I must admit that the Pollish case has raised doubts about this in my mind. There is actually very little in this world that is "right" (both moral and effective) in all places and at all times.




The following items from the Polish ZSP give their case against the works councils in their country, and I find their arguments more cogent and certainly less sectarian than those I have seen from France and Spain. It may be that what the Polish comrades say is generally applicable to the rather artificial works councils in eastern Europe that the EU is encouraging. They might also be applicable to some sort of "leftist scheme" to set up similar so-called reforms in the world outside of western Europe. I can, for instance, see an almost one to one correspondance between what the Polish comrades say and what would be wrong with such "councils" in a Canadian context where some such schemes actually exist as a non-legislative management tool in some enterprises- employee "consultation".




The first article below is reprinted from the Polish review 'Strike' mentioned above. The second, longer and more detailed, is from Laure Akai, an activist within the ZSP. See what you think. What I personally find most attractive in the following is its practical nature, in contrast to the rhetorical campaigns that I have seen in the past from the AIT in France and Spain.
@S@S@S@S@S@S@S
ZSP Against the Campaign
for Works Councils:

ZSP, unlike some other anarchists who campaigned for the introduction of works councils, has repeatedly criticized them for a number of reasons. The most important reason is that they simply have a more limited range of entitlements than unions. All companies employing more than 50 people in Poland now must have either a works council or a union- but workers are much better off having an union.


The government recently amended legislation with a view towards dealing another blow to unions. They are presenting works councils as some freedom of choice- which is rather grotesque given the fact that so many works councils were actually set up without any input from the workers themselves-the bosses simply put their choices in that role, and the heads of such councils do nothing.


Over the last couple of years we have printed several articles about the role of the works councils and produced some simple charts to help people see what the differences between councils and unions really are. Over 10,000 have accessed this chart over the internet.


This is not to say that we are not critical of many unions or that we don't see limitations to legal unionism. In fact we encourage people to work outside of legal unionism as much as possible. But when it comes to the practical issues of deciding certain things at work, and since workers are forced to have some sort of representation, we think they should choose the type that actually can do things such as agree on work schedules,etc.,etc..


Besides this we are extremely critical of hierarchical unionism where the rank and file are excluded from making decisions and negotiations and deals are made by union bosses. We are still trying to popularize the ideas behind KFP, the non-hierarchical union that we founded. But too many people want somebody to do everything for them; there is still a big gap between the mentality of the average worker in Warsaw and the anarchist ones. But we insist on rank and file unionism, not bureaucracy, not authoritarian leadership and vanguardism.


This is one of our campaigns, and the struggle for radical unions and union democracy continues.
@S@S@S@S@S@S@S
Work Councils : Pacifiers of the Workers:
As new legislation comes on works councils comes into force in Poland, it becomes more urgent to dispel the myths of the councils and expose how they are promoted by entrepreneurs and the state to further weaken the work force's bargaining power.





For years in Poland (a certain for decades elsewhere), workers have had to contend with the compromising attitudes of many unions, especially of those acting through agents of "social partnership". Yet in comparison to the work councils scheme introduced a few years ago in Poland, workers have many more opportunities when forming unions. The work councils scheme offer them practically nothing.





Many unions act in fact as a ventilation valve with their leadership acting to quash rebellion and keep all action within a legal framework. All unions are confined by law into bargaining and strike procedures designed to discourage worker direct action - yet there is resistance to these laws, evidenced by the large number of cases of repression connected with "illegal strikes". The degree of class collaboration, hierarchical leadership and other unfortunate aspects of mainstream unionism does vary. The (legal) option to even hold a strike at all is a right often exercised in this country, despite growing efforts to make such strikes more and more difficult. This is one reason why the state and employers prefer to promote forms of worker representation with even fewer legal rights and which will work in isolation, not in nationwide structures. *





(*The exception in terms of structure would be councils in a European Works Council Scheme.)





The state promoted the idea of work councils claiming that all workers should have representation on the job. Therefore, if there were no unions at the workplace and more than 50 people were employed there, a work council could be set up. (This was supposed to be a mandatory procedure, but due to unclear wording in the law, this may be interpreted differently. There is no clarification given.)





The councils were often set up by the employers themselves. If there was a union functioning in the workplace, they could assign union reps to the council. Some unions thus set up councils so that they would be sure to keep control of worker representation. However this was ruled by the Supreme Court as being "unconstitutional" as a result of a campaign against unionists. The legislation was amended.





The bosses have no interest in any real worker representation or in dealing with demands on a regular basis, therefore they prefer bodies with fewer rights and hope that workers, once convinced that they are "represented", will see no need to join unions. But a quick look at the rights of the councils vs. the rights of unions shows the difference.
Work councils may:
- Have access to information about the activity and economic situation of the employer and any changes that may occur in them.
- Have access to the state and structure of employment and any changes predicted regarding this or any actions with an aim to maintaining the level of employment.
- Be informed of activities which may cause changes in the organization of work or employment.- Consult on the state and structure of employment or activities which may cause changes in the organization of work.
Unions can:
- Consult and give an opinion on any terminations
- Negotiate severance and redundancy packages
- Negotiate pay, work conditions, collective agreements
- Negotiate accounting periods
- Negotiate which work requires extra safety measures or needs to be paid extra for safety reasons
- Organize drinks and meals for workers in certain positions
- Protest unfair dismissals and disciplinary fines
- Negotiate work and vacation schedules
- Oversee the social funds and control how money is spent
- Send a unionist on a delegation or to do union business during working hours and have a union representative at the workplace, employed full-time only on union work,if a union represents over 150 employees
- Obtain space at the work place for carrying out union activity (ie a union office)
- Collect dues
- Go into collective bargaining
- Hold a strike
- Collect strike funds, hire and provide legal council
- Organize workers into various industrial, regional and national branch organizations
- Negotiate work conditions throughout a sector, nationwide in a given company
- Provide support on a larger scale in case of conflict / strike
- Negotiate the terms of privatization





In addition, union reps are protected against discrimination or termination related to performing their functions (although in practice bosses frame them for other infractions to get rid of them anyway).





It is clear from this list that the role of work councils is limited in comparison with unions. In addition, it should be noted that unions may include regulations in their statutes which allow the rank and file more democratic control over the union and their representatives than they could have with the councils.





For example, in a union, certain decisions could require a vote of all local union members or the decision of a local branch meeting. This depends of the statute of the union and the amount of rank-and-file democracy it implements. However, work council reps make decisions themselves and have no legal requirement to consult with the workers.





The representatives of the work councils, which is funded by the boss, decides wth the boss how information is to be obtained and how they will be informed. If the workers do not agree with the boss on how elections to the work councils should be held, the boss is allowed to decide that. In practice, many work councils have been set up by the bosses.





If 50% of the eligible work force does not vote in the work council elections, a new election can be held 30 days later which will be valid no matter how many people take part in it. Thus a work council can be elected by even one person, if for some reason people don't vote. The term of the representatives is 4 years long.





The work council representatives, not the workers, decide on how they will work and who their chairperson will be.





Besides these problems related to lack of worker control over the councils, there is a problem even with the limited rights the work councils are purported to have. It is clear that the main right the councils have is to obtaining "information". Yet the act on works councils clearly states that the boss does not have to supply any information that it considers a commercial secret. And in Poland, the definition of "commerical secret" is vaguely defined and usually interpreted very broadly. Thus employers usually maintain that information on the value of some contracts, on salaries and even the profits of a company are commerical secrets.





An employer may also refuse to give information if this would "act to the detriment of the company's best interests".





In practice, work councils that want information often have to go to court to get it. There have been dozens of cases already since the introduction of work councils in 1996.





(It should be noted that court proceedings are long in Poland and cases can take many months before even getting to court. )





So what is it that the councils are entitled to get information on? Well, they can find out if the company is planning on conducting group dismissals - but there is nothing they can do about it. (They are not entitled to know about individual dismissals, unlike unions.)





Unions also have bullshit legal entitlements. For example, they may not agree that a worker be fired and the bosses can do it anyway. However, where unions are more independent of the bosses and have a stronger class character and idea of workers solidarity, they have a much wider scope for action.





The councils are clearly being promoted as part of a more pernicious social policy which is common around Europe. The cheerleaders of "social consultation" schemes try to convince working people of all the legal rights they have as a deradicalizing measure to obfuscate the reality of the class struggle. The councils narrow down the relation between workers and employers and discourage independent worker organization.





We call on workers not to be taken in by either the false consulatative nature of the councils, nor the class collaborationist and hierarchical unions. We need to foster a more critical rejection of the process of social partnership, which always is used to bolster the logic of capitalism.





Class consciousness is quite low in Poland these days, but work conditions are so poor for so many that, despite this, tens of thousands of people strike each year to win some improvements to their material conditions. We believe that ultimately, this is accomplished mainly through a high degree of self-organization or through radical workers' action. In the current situation, many workers lack tactics and the will for effective mass action. Thus the state attack on unions, realized through legislative means and unfavourable court decisions attacking organized labour, threatens to further weaken the unions, but does not mean that their weakening will open new opportunities for worker radicalism. Rather, the rechanneling of the workforce into councils only promises further deradicalization. In such a situation, we generally prefer unions to councils although we do are not fooled by the efforts of some unions to reorganize unionism in Poland into the playing field of a few giant central organizations. These organizations have already proven that, instead of providing increased "bargaining power" as they claim, they tend to concentrate power in the hands of the most moderate.





Radicalization will be a difficult road, but one best accomplished through the collective efforts of the rank-and-file, not through the bureaucrats and class collaborators.
Akai