|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : Europe
: France
France: Union reforms highlight Sarkozy-CGT alliance
By Alex Lantier
25 April 2008
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
A remarkable exchange took place last week between French President
Nicolas Sarkozy and the CGT (General Confederation of Labour)
union. In April 18 articles in Le Monde and the Financial
Times, Sarkozy and top CGT official Jean-Christophe Le Duigou
praised each other for helping push through what they presented
as necessary social cuts. The exchange, shortly after Sarkozy
and the CGT agreed on a major reform of trade union law, gives
an insight into how they are collaborating to police the working
class into accepting Sarkozys regressive social policies.
Sarkozys lengthy Le Monde column, titled For
strong unions, praised the trade union reforms and spelled
out the logic of his collaboration with the unions: I am
absolutely convinced that, to present and carry out the reforms
that our country needs, we must partner with those who represent
the interests of workers and of employers.
To understand this comment, one must recall the most politically
significant reform Sarkozy has carried outlast falls
cuts to state transport and energy workers special
regime pensions, in the face of large-scale rail strikes.
In October, the CGT, the dominant trade union in the rail sector,
called a series of one-day strikes and prevented their extension
to an indefinite strike, in the face of mass hostility of rail
workers. After 10 days of strikes in November, the unions used
the argument that strikes were not affecting the governments
determination to carry out the reforms to politically bludgeon
workers into returning to work.
Sarkozy clearly understands that the trade unions alone provide
the manpower and political credibility to force workers into accepting
his social cuts. In a veiled reference to planned cuts partially
turned back by massive strike waves in 1995, 2003 and 2006, he
wrote: Our social history is filled with enough plans made
hastily and without coordination, and which ended in resounding
failures, to finish once and for all the idea that the State can
decide alone what is good for our country.
To this method, he contrasted his own close collaboration with
the trade unions: Right after the presidential elections
[of May 2007] and even before going to the Elysée [presidential
palace], I met with trade unions and business groups to listen
to them and ask for their positions on the first actions I was
planning on taking. Since then, I have continued to very regularly
meet with each of their representatives. I know them well, we
sometimes have divergences, but our dialogue is always frank.
He wrote that the reform of the special regime pensions
[was] successfully carried out last fall, thanks to an intense
period of coordinati on at a national level, and negotiations
in each enterprise affected by the reform.
In short, the entire top layer of the trade union bureaucracy
was quietly meeting with Sarkozy and collaborating with his pension-cutting
plansat the same time as it presented itself to workers
in affected enterprises, and to the broader public, as resolute
organisers of strikes against Sarkozys plans. One must add
that the unions silence, in the week after this major editorial
appeared in Frances newspaper of record, is a tacit admission
that what Sarkozy says is true.
In fact, the CGT expressed its approval of Sarkozy the same
day in an interview Le Duigou gave to the UK-based Financial
Times, titled Union praise for presidents stance.
Le Duigou, the CGTs number-two official and head of its
pensions portfolio, said of Sarkozy: He understands that
we must give a place to social dialogue. We are at a turning point
in the social situation of our country. Everyone believes that
things must change.
To refute Le Duigous cynical comment, one must ask the
question: If the CGT is satisfied with Sarkozys social
dialogue and thinks everyone agrees with Sarkozys
reforms, why did it organise strikes and protest marches against
Sarkozys policies last year, gathering millions of people?
The answer is that as massive opposition and anger built up
in the working class against pension cuts, the CGT leadership
decided to set a political trap for the workers: calling strikes
designed to let off steam, while posing no serious political challenge
to the government. Since no revolutionary party exists in France
to give a political orientation to the strikes, the CGT ultimately
succeeded in wearing down the workers, convincing them that their
opposition was hopeless and that they had to return to work.
Despite the workers defeat in the special regimes struggle,
it has had many importa nt consequences. It began Sarkozys
rapid fall in the opinion polls, where Sarkozy now receives 40
percent support or less, and led to large-scale resignations of
workers from several CGT locals in the transport industry. It
also convinced the currently dominant factions of the French bourgeoisie
that the CGT is a reliable guarantor of its class interests.
It is this last event that underlies the common position
on reform of trade union representativity recently agreed to by
the Medef (the main French employers organisation), the
CGT, and the right-wing CFDT (Democratic French Labour Confederation)
union. The reform of representativitythe legal quantity
determining which trade unions can negotiate binding contracts
in enterprises and industrieswould increase the weight of
the larger CGT and CFDT federations inside the French trade union
landscape, providing the state with a more centralised and efficient
bureaucracy for policing the working class.
Currently, representativity is governed by a February 11, 1950,
law setting five criteria a trade union was required to meet:
independence from employers and political parties, size, funding
received through member dues, experience, and a patriotic attitude
during the Nazi Occupation of France. With French trade unions
in crisisonly 8 percent of the workforce is unionised, including
5 percent of private sector workers, and unions face massive financial
difficultiesand most trade unionists born after the Occupation,
these criteria are widely viewed as obsolete.
Four trade unions were designated as representative
in 1948the CGT, FO (Workers Force, a split-off from the
CGT created with US government funds after the Liberation), the
CFTC (French Confederation of Christian Workers) and CGC (the
General Confederation of Cadres, for managerial staff). The CFDT
was added to the list in 1966, shortly after it split off from
the CFTC. These trade union fede rations were granted automatic
representativity, allowing them to present candidates to union
local elections and negotiate accords with bosses, regardless
of whether the federation in fact had any members in the company.
Commenting on these laws, Michel Noblecourt writes in the April
19 Le Monde: The goal was to get around the dominance
of the CGT, which was then controlled by the [Stalinist French]
Communist Party (PCF). Despite the PCFs submission
to capitalism at the Liberationit disbanded workers
committees in factories, ordered its Resistance militias to disband
or join the French army, and adopted a no-strike policy under
the slogan Strikes are the weapon of the truststhe
French bourgeoisie were highly mistrustful of the CGT, throughout
the post-war period.
With the political and electoral collapse of the PCF in the
1980s and 1990s, and now the CGTs eager collaboration with
Sarkozy, these calculations have changed.
The current agreement between the Medef, CGT and CFDT deliberately
favour the larger unions. It would require a union to get at least
10 percent of the vote in union local elections to be considered
representative, require the coalition of trade unions negotiating
an accord with bosses to represent at least 30 percent of the
workers at the company, and modernise the conditions for representativity.
The government is expected to take the common position
and work on turning it into a bill for consideration at the National
Assembly.
Le Monde commented that it is a system that consolidates
strong unions and challenges the weak ones, which doesnt
eliminate anyone immediately but in the longer term prevents the
breaking up of unions. This judgment was confirmed when
smaller unions, such as the CGC and UNSA (National Union of Autonomous
Trade Unions), began negotiations for a merger as the measures
were announced. CFTC chief Jacques Voisin denounced the agreement
as union-killing.
See Also:
French government slashes public spending
[14 April 2008]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |