Truck stop
The truck drivers' mobilisation at the end of October was "fastermoving, though much less massive" than in 1996, admits Claude
Debons, Deputy General Secretary of the CFDT transport union (FGTE)
which dominated the dispute.
This year's action was prepared by the unions over a long period. "Unfortunately," says Debons, "the employers' new strategy worked quite well. They avoided sending trucks out on the road, and they switched the shifts of shop stewards so that they were not called to work during the dispute.
"There were fewer trucks at the barricades we set up. And, apart from the core of militants, not so many of the drivers who were blocked by the barricades came and participated in the dispute. We thought that there was a very strong feeling among the drivers, but, when it came to action, the results were less than we had hoped. What were the main demands of this year's strike?
Wages, essentially. Because, although most employers have not implemented the government decrees passed after the 1996 strike, they have been finding ways of reorganising work so as to reduce the total hours worked by each driver. The problem is that our salary structure relies so much on bonuses, overtime, 'on the road' supplements, that this has led to a real fall in take-home pay.
Most drivers do not receive a fixed minimum monthly salary, in exchange for a fixed number of hours. Not all the hours worked are recorded, since many drivers are breaking the legal limits). And not all the hours recorded are paid, since nondriving time is considered as "rest". And it is very difficult to check this from the unclear wage slips most drivers receive.
We succeeded in our three main objectives. A wage increase, and a commitment to future increases; introduction of a "transparent" pay slip, enabling the driver to calculate and compare his income, and a start to the process of re-structuring the various salary and bonus scales so as to lift the basic salaries above the minimum wage zone. Will companies respect the pay increase?
We agreed to negotiate the introduction of the new salary scale company by company. In most of the large and medium companies, there will not be many problems. But, particularly among the smaller companies, some will try to abolish bonuses, so as to increase, on paper, the minimum wage. We will struggle against this, as we did in 1994, when we actually 10 International Viewpoint #295 built up the union through just such a conflict over the application of seniority bonuses. (
The agreement is specific enough to make these kind of tricks difficult. It specifies a minimum wage increase of 4% for depot and passenger drivers, and up to
6% for goods drivers, as from 1 October
1997. By 1 July 2000 we should reach a
15.9% increase for depot personnel working 169 hours/month, and 21.8% for goods drivers. In the negotiations the employers suggested suppressing the bonuses.
but we refused to accept this in the final agreement. The text specifically says that monthly and annual take-home pay must not decline during the transition to the new salary scale.
Transport Minister Gayssot (Communist) and Prime Minister Jospin (Socialist) have agreed in principle that Ministry of Labour inspectors will supervise, and impose, this reform, even in those transport companies where there is no trade union
We demanded, until the last moment, the payment of a one-off bonus of 3,000 FF (US$ 520), but the employers refused. The two smaller unions did not sign the final agreement, and wanted to continue the strike. Together with the use of police against strikers by a left government, this has left a bitter taste in many people's mouths. As if there was a "front" between yourselves, the bosses and the government on the one hand, and the other unions on the other.
This is a false way of looking at things. The government put a lot of pressure on the employers to negotiate. As for the CFDT's "privileged" relations, look, all governments are materialists. They can't ignore the organisation which is overwhelmingly dominant in a given movement. And the police interventions were mainly at border crossings, and a tew strategic points. We advised our militants to avoid violence, which they did.
Although the end of the dispute was certainly confusing, the media have overemphasised the problems. In most of the country, a majority voted to sign the final
The real problem is the lack of unity between the unions. Yes, we had a common list of demands, concentrating on a monthly salary of 10,000 FF ($1,725) for 200 hours worked. But we clearly underestimated the complexity of salary negotiations in this sector. There was not enough discussion between the unions. And, with elections to the prud'homme tripartite labour tribunals in a few months, the FO transport union, which only has 1,500 members, began a rhetorical public bidding game [against the CFDT]. I think the CGT (communist influenced) is closer to our positions. They would perhaps have if it had not been for FO's