What's happening in CC.OO?
Twenty years after the "transition" of the Spanish state,
Comisiones Obreras, the country's largest trade union, is trying to redefine its identity and strategy. The revolutionary left is divided in its support: some comrades give critical support to the majority current, others are active in the minority "Critical
Tendency". We invited representatives of both currents to present their analysis of the situation in the union, and their vision for its development.
Spain's largest trade union,
Comisiones Obreras (CC.OO.,
Workers Commissions) emerges strengthened from its 6th
Congress. The unjustified and dogmatic criticisms of the
"Critical Sector" were rejected.
But many questions about how the union should relate to the increasingly fragmented world of work remain unanswered.
by Joaquin Nieto
THE MAIN TASK FACING TRADES UNIONISTS iS the reconstruction of our movement to reflect the new, fragmented reality of the working population. If we cannot do so, the duality in the world of work will deepen salary inequality, and the gap between those in work and the unemployed. And it will have negative effects on trades unionism as such.
Spain *
A trade union's capacity to represent and organise the majority of workers is not given, once and for all. It is won and rewon, day by day, in the precise historical situation. Today, in many European countries, particularly in those where the percentage of workers organised in unions is very low, there is a real risk that the union movement will become increasingly distant from the most dispersed and unstable sections of the working class - the majority of the class. This will leave our movement implanted only in the more stable sectors: above all in the public sector. Never mind our dreams of social transformation: we will no longer be capable of playing our fundamental role, the defence of the immediate interests of the working
This is the main challenge against which trade union strategies must be judged. Was the Sixth Congress of the Comisiones Obreras (CC.OO) useful? Did it help reorient the union towards this strategic goal? Yes, at least partially. We emerge from the Congress with a unionism which is closer to the workers, more adapted to their daily problems, more useful for trying to solve those problems.
Lets not fool ourselves. The majority of people who work in small and medium enterprises, [1] have a precarious contract, or are unemployed, do not at all perceive the trade unions as a practical instrument or essential mediator for solving their workrelated problems. It is a very good thing that the CC.OO. has begun, recently, to adopt an image, a discourse, proposals and activities which attempt to reverse this situation. Though it is unfortunate that it is in this order that we have begun to integrate new elements into our But this effort has not been properly understood by the sections of the social and political left which are most sensitive to ideological questions. Never-theless, it was positive that the congress approved and confirmed this approach. Particularly in the current context of extreme neo-liberalism, and the transfer of power to the conservative Peoples' Party (PP) after 14 years of Socialist Party (PSOE) government.
One aspect of the dominance of neoliberalism is the progression of conservative and anti-egalitarian ideas in society as a The author is Secretary for Environment at CC.OO., and a regular contributor to Viento Sur magazine.
International Viewpoint n° 276 11
* Spain whole. Including, let us hope temporarily, in the working class. This is one factor behind the recent electoral victory of the right.
In this new context, the complete autonomy of the CC.O0, and the UGT trade union confederation from the Communist and Socialist parties (respectively), to which they have had such a close relationship in the past, is essential if we want to maintain and consolidate unity in action. The affirmation of the autonomy and independence of the CC.00 at this congress was very valuable. History will remember this as the single most important step taken. Without complete autonomy [from the Communist party], pluralism is not possible. And without pluralism, unity is impossible.
Unity of action between the CC.00 and the UGT seems well consolidated. And the root cause of their separate development — their different political references, and their different models of trade unionism - have lost their raison d'etre. increasingly autonomous of their political reference points, and both support the unitary representation of their members, as put into practice at the last elections of workplace representatives. Programme development is also developing in harmony. There is no real significance for their separate existence, beyond the historical reasons and the preoccupations of the apparatuses. And while this explains the division, it hardly justifies it.
Not that organisational unity is round the corner. It is still too early even to propose such a process of unification, since such precipitation would fall flat on its face, and have the opposite effect. Better to act than to talk, in such a situation. Without forgetting that there are dynamics other than those towards unity at work in both unions. There is also a political dynamic which would make the UGT into the centre-piece of the reconstruction of the socialist social democratic] opposition. This would obviously bring new tensions to any common action with the CC.OO. Nevertheless, unity of action is so well developed and mature that it seems possible to overcome these contrary internal and political dynamics. But we must avoid any excesses, and exploit every possibility of making a real step forward towards trade union unity. This will create much better conditions for increasing the number of union members, and developing trade unionism in this universe of small and private enterprises, where deregulation, and crude exploitation are at their highest.
The CC.00 leadership came to the conference with two important gains: an increase in membership, and a strong result 12 International Viewpoint April 1996 in the recent workplace representative
Despite unfavourable objective conditions (the highest unemployment in the European Union, particularly among the youth, widespread use of precarious and part time contracts) the number of CC.00 members rose 6.5% between June 1994 and June 1995, reaching 698,814. In fact, after declining in the 1970s and early 80s, union membership has been rising for ten consecutive years now! [2] And, in workplace representative elections, the CC.OO. have regained the first place position (relative to the UGT, the anarchosyndicalist CT, and the 'professional" unions) they lost in 1982. The CC.O0 has 37.8% of representatives, a 1% increase on the 1990 elections [3].
In these circumstances, one might have expected the minority 'Critical Sector' to present itself as a force capable of giving a new impulsion to the CC.OO, capable of making suggestions and stimulating debate in a positive sense, so as to help prepare the union for this new situation. In fact, they chose the opposite approach. They denied the progress made by the CC.OO, which enabled their current to close ranks, but hardly enabled dialogue with the rest of us. And, thanks to the clumsy support which they received from the Communist Party (PCE), the Critical Sector appeared at the congress as an element of resistance to the irreversible process of the CC.00's autonomy from the Party. The minority also oriented the debate at the Congress more towards an evaluation of past practice than a discussion of perspectives. They lacked alternative proposals, so they artificially inflated their differences with the majority. They deformed the history of CC.OO., both in terms of strategy and internal functioning, so that they could accuse the majority of having taken the path of rightist bureaucratic degeneration. Something which it is difficult to prove. After all, since
Benel romes And the care
benefits from unprecedented democratic rights within the union. Which empties their criticisms of any and all credibility.
The Critical Sector has refused to establish itself as a stable trade union current, with all the rights and duties which this implies. [4] And yet, they present themselves as an alternative in practically every field. What alternative? For months now, they have dominated debate with their accusations that the leadership of CC.OO. supported the Socialist Party (PSOE) government of Filipe Gonzalez. Even that we had an explicit alliance with the government. This debate was effectively closed at the very beginning of this
Congress, when delegates approved a general report which made a hard criticism of government policies and the electoral promises of the PSOE. Many delegates noticed the Minister of Labour storming out of the Palace of Congress. They also heard Julio Anguita, the main leader of Izquierda Unida (United Left, a PC-dominated coalition) comment favourably on the reporter's comments on the PSOE, the conservative People's Party (PP, now in government) and the Maastricht Treaty.
All that was left for the Critical Sector was an exercise in gesticulation, mainly concerning the operation of the Congress Presidium, and the issue of Marcelino Camacho. 5]
We have to admit that, given the present situation of the working class, our enormous ideological retreats, the neoliberal offensive, the enormous changes in the world economy and the global organisation of production and the work process, it is difficult to put forward propositions which incorporate our concerns with ecology and North-South solidarity. It is certainly difficult to formulate proposals for an alternative unionism worthy of that name.
Nevertheless, what makes the Critical Sector such a big alternative, given that, in practice, their method of trade unionism is indistinguishable from that of the rest of us? What practical differences exist between the trade union work which is done in regions where the CC.OO. majority has a local majority, and the work done in the Balearic Islands, Barcelona, Seville and Grenada, and in the Energy, Madrid Mass Transit (EMT) and Railway (RENFE) sectors, where the Critical Sector has a majority? In these regions and sectors, is the Critical Sector really more democratic? More militant? More efficient? Or more
The "great debate" never materialised But tens of thousands of union members, and hundreds of local organisations prepared and proposed amendments and propositions. Less spectacular, but not less substantive. Here is "another pluralism," more diffuse, more micro-organic, based on sectoral and territorial experiences and interests. This too deserves to be understood and expressed. [6] The majority is not homogenous. It is differentiated and pluralist. Much more so than it might seem to be. Partly because of ideological diversity, some people only timidly challenge the existing order, while others adopt a more radical form, partly because of their particular preoccupations and accents, but also partly because such a pluralism corresponds to the subjects which, today,
are fermenting inside CC.OO. The union today is wider than we used to think it was.
Looking forward, it seems that Congress left some of the fundamental questions unsolved. How should we present the essential demands of the workers to the new government? How to open a relationship of dialogue and negotiation, without being paralysed, without stopping our denunciation of of the antisocial nature of the government's programme, and without abandoning the strategy of public demonstrations as a riposte to the antiworker measures which we already anticipate?
How can we reformulate our demands concerning the growing inequality of working conditions, without contributing to the consolidation of differential 'castes' of workers within a single enterprise or sector? What to do about companies which only offer part-time and precarious contacts? What to do with the unemployed? How to develop a practical trade unionism, closer to the world of small and medium sized companies? How to put forward general and concrete alternative suggestions for economic and industrial policies which are compatible with the economic imperatives since the confrontation in the CC.OO. is largely of political origin, we can expect that, after the March 3rd general elections, there will be a political realignment within the union. * 1.54% of workers work in an enterprise with less than 50 employees; 81% of these workers have no workplace trade union representative. 2. In the period 1991-95 the average number of members paying a union contribution was higher than during the period 1988-91, even though the total number of those in work declined by 8%. CC.00. currently has some 700,000 members, which guarantees our financial independence. 3. The UGT's share has declined from 42.04% to 34.71%. This gives the two major confederations a large majority (though, in Euskadi, the Basque nationalist ELA-STV union has a majority of 4. The right to form a current implies a democratic life even during the preparatory phases of the congress. If the Critical Sector had organised themselves as a current, they would have received sufficient resources to be able to conduct a loyal and constructive debate. This would, however, also have required them to be more clear about their orientations and the sources of their support. 5. Let's not forget that, in a democratic organisation, there should be no posts which are not regularly renewed. Collective bodies should be chosen through a mechanism of proportional representation, guaranteeing the rights of minorities. Individual posts should be filled by the individua who obtains, democratically, the support of the majority. As
Spain * far as Marcelino Camacho is concerned, he had the right to criticise the leadership of CC.OO., and to express his ideas publicly. He also had the right, obviously, to support the Critical Sector, as he did. But if Camacho is no longer a member of the collective leadership after the congress, this is only because the Critica Sector did not include him on their list. 6. More than 1,600 amendments were presented by majorities or qualified minorities from a range of organisations: 300 amendments concerned the minority, 1,300 concerned the "other pluralism" mentioned above. 300 amendments were adopted, 200 negotiated and
800 withdrawn. 300 were discussed in open plenary. 7. The election of women to 30% of positions in the Federal Executive Commission exceeds the minimum percentage fixed by the earlier "CC.OO., A Union for Men and Women" conference. But, unfortunately, only 15% of delegates to this congress were women.