Macron: The impact on Trade Unions and workers in France?

Macron: The impact on Trade Unions and workers in France? Speaker: Fabrice Guyon, CGT – French TUC

Hello, dear colleagues, and thank you for inviting the FNME-CGT to take part in your discussions. On behalf of the CGT, I would like to wish you a happy New Year and all the best for 2019. I won’t be speaking to you today in English because my English is only just good enough for me to buy a beer in a pub! I’m afraid this will slow down the proceedings a bit. But with the help of my interpreter, John-Pierre Paternoster, we’ll do our best to make this presentation and the debate as interesting as possible. The subject you proposed – “Is Macron a threat to the trade union movement?” – has proved to be very topical and coincides with current discussions in the CGT, especially after the so-called “Yellow Vest” events in France that you have heard about. Today I will be presenting various points for consideration, not absolute truths. It lies with each of us to look at them critically and form our own opinion. I’m going to talk to you about how we see these points at the CGT. My presentation will include: • A brief historical overview; • The general context of the trade union movement in the Western world and Europe, and how Emmanuel Macron’s government has approached it; • The possible consequences of such policies. First, the historical overview: This brief historical recap will help us understand the difference between our societies with regard to trade unionism. We have different histories and it is important to understand that what seems normal for a French person can seem strange for a British person, and vice versa. This is only natural, given our histories. Following the Industrial Revolution, which began here in Great Britain then spread across the continent, there was a global movement to set up workers’ organisations. Here again, the British people led the way. The CGT was created in 1895. At the time, it was the only union in France. The other French trade unions were formed later through successive breakaways. We don’t have any organisation comparable to the TUC. Instead, there are several completely independent confederations, the four main ones being the CFDT, the CGT, the CFE-CGC and FO. France has a low rate of union membership. Returning now to the CGT, the “revolutionary trade union model” was first presented at the congress in Amiens in 1906. This model reflects a lack of confidence in, and desire for independence from, the State, employers and the political parties. The CGT saw its role as twofold: defending employees’ demands, but also crafting ideas for changing society (and ridding it of capitalism). The resulting model was primarily concerned with industrial disputes and direct action (the latter was not delegated to the political parties). In France, the trade union movement was broken up into numerous unions. So-called “revolutionary” trade unionism, though not in the majority, was nevertheless a dominant culture. The unions either drew inspiration from it or broke away from it. In France, generally speaking, the government’s handling of industrial disputes over the last quarter of a century has been designed not to give ground. When two million workers march along a route authorised by government representatives and shepherded by stewards, it no longer worries those in power. But when 300,000 Yellow Vests take to the streets, the government is afraid. It doesn’t know how to manage this crisis and has yielded on several points. The Yellow Vests have successfully overcome three challenges facing protesters: • They have mobilised support (through the social networks); • They have maintained their action over time; • They have forced those in power to give ground. That has made us think, in the CGT, because we don’t manage to do that anymore. After the Yellow Vests’ first protests, the French trade unions reacted in customary fashion. To name just two of the main French trade unions: • The CFDT, which has always claimed to prefer discussion and inclusion in the circle of power, proposed a meeting to hammer out policy decisions. However, the government was completely impervious at the time and flatly turned down the initiative; • The CGT called for a day of protest, which was completely ignored by the government and the media, probably because it didn’t result in any of the destruction or rioting that is so prized by the media! These tactics do not worry the government. They belong to the past and are criticised by part of the population, which also associates trade unions, like political parties, with the circles of power in which they have lost all faith. On the political front, the alternation of conservative right-wing parties and the democratic socialism embodied by the Socialist Party gives the impression of the same policies, which ignore citizens and are content to manage the economy. So, that was a brief history and a very schematic explanation of our differences. I’ll move on now to the CGT’s view of the laws brought in by Emmanuel Macron and their impact on the trade union movement. First of all, Emmanuel Macron is not a mere continuation of what came before: he embodies the dominant order, but is far more self-assured than his predecessors. The Yellow Vests are also a backlash against his pride and his failure to acknowledge the hardships experienced by the working classes. But we will come back to that later. Macron had never been elected before he won the presidential elections. He is a technocrat with a background in merchant banking. He established a government of experts more than politicians. His actions reflect a total disregard for intermediary organisations such as the unions. Macron came to power with no previous experience of a system that is criticised by a majority of French people, namely the constant alternation between a conservative right wing and social democracy. However, the beginning of his term was marked by the abolition of the wealth tax on stock market assets, which was a favour to thank the merchant banks and those who supported him (also with financial support) for his accession to the position of president of France. He implemented a policy from which the majority of the population feels excluded. The dominant order sees trade unionism as an institution destined to play the role of regulator in the field assigned to it. Trade unions are confined to regulating industrial relations within the bounds of the means, rules or standards defined. Proposals and negotiations must take precedence over force. Incidentally, Margaret Thatcher was something of a forerunner in Europe. In the UK, there is no need to legislate to impose a minimum service, since it has become very difficult to conduct disputes that disrupt work. In Europe, Jacques Delors, French Socialist Party member and president of the European Commission from 1985 to 1995, launched the movement for a turnkey social model to be applied in each of the States, including the Southern States such as France. The move was accomplished more or less quickly, depending on the country. To achieve this, European governments used the same methods: 1. Neutralise class-struggle trade unionism. This meant bringing in restrictive measures on strikes, bringing trade union action or even trade unionists under judicial control, crafting a regulation designed to change power relationships into relationships defined by labour law, and obliging trade unions to work within a defined framework; 2. Eliminate the ideal of a social model (since 1989, there has been no threat of a counter-model); 3. In Europe, “European social dialogue” was imposed on all States as a turnkey model throughout Europe. Among other things, these tools made it possible to attack public services and bring everything possible into the market system, without considering whether the market system is the most appropriate or whether public management is the most efficient. Emmanuel Macron deduced from this that trade unionism had been so effectively incorporated into the capitalist society that it was no longer a threat or obstacle, and that he could now diminish its influence even further. To achieve this, he intends to: • Reduce their scope, their effectiveness (by reducing the number of hours of union representation), the number of mandates, their importance (by limiting their influence and by imposing on trade unionists certain methods and a framework for social dialogue); • Have trade unionists undergo training by the dominant order. The aim here is to turn the main union leaders into individuals who identify with the system, leaving only those who have hours of union delegation; • Have trade unionists’ work evaluated by the dominant order. This will secure their individual loyalty by giving job promotions to the trade unionists most in line with the system. Whatever the type of social dialogue, similar labour market reforms are being implemented throughout Europe: in the United Kingdom since the early 1980s, in the Eastern European countries in the 1990s, in Germany under the Schröder government and since the 2008 financial crisis in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Belgium and France. The result of these liberal reforms has been to bring workers from different countries into competition with each other for the sake of competitiveness. In France, Emmanuel Macron is stepping up the labour market reform begun by his two predecessors and applying the European social model. Last year, the president Emmanuel Macron took an axe to the social dialogue reform by bringing in what is known in France as the “Macron Ordinances”, which are laws passed without prior parliamentary debate. Here are a few examples: • Numerous negotiation topics have been referred back to the level of the individual business; • The employee representative bodies have been merged, effectively reducing the number of elected representatives and the hours allocated for union representation; • The Health, Safety and Working Conditions Committee, which gave employee representatives an effective counter-power, has been abolished; • In businesses with fewer than 50 employees (i.e. 96% of businesses in France), a representative will be able to conclude a collective agreement without having been mandated to do so by a trade union organisation; • It is now possible to hold a referendum in an individual business, effectively bypassing the unions. There is considerable risk of pressure being placed on individuals in an effort to impose the desired results of such a vote; • There is a move afoot to bring employee representatives into the sphere of power through: o Training in industrial dialogue by organisations that serve employers’ interests; o The “appraisal” of unionists’ competencies by managers!  Both of these planned initiatives for union members set out to shift the focus from a commitment to values to a career move handled by management. Emmanuel Macron has announced a reform of the pension system for 2019. But he is also attacking public services with a reform that privatises the SNCF, France’s national state-owned railway company, despite a massive, unified protest movement by railway workers. I myself work for the French energy utility EDF. Emmanuel Macron’s government is said to be preparing to change EDF’s structure and finish privatising the vital electricity sector, against the backdrop of the transition to low-carbon energy. However, Emmanuel Macron has forgotten that there might be one small snag in his plans, namely the people! The principle that sovereignty lies with the people rather than an elected representative has been one of the fundamental principles underpinning democracy in France since the French Revolution and in particular the “social contract” defined by Jean-Jacques Rousseau. In France, this stems from our history: the State is heavily involved in the social and economic field. For example, trade unionism wasn’t accepted in businesses until 1968. The European turnkey model that I described earlier was applied with a view to weakening the trade unions. But, at the same time, the State has not finished transferring and decentralising the social model in businesses. As a result, negotiations on social issues are not completely decentralised. Their liberal principles have not been carried through to their logical conclusion. When a need arises or when things are going badly, the first impulse is still to call on the French government to step in! France’s history is dotted with regular spikes of heated action. From abroad, onlookers get the impression that France is in the grip of chaos and upheaval, and that struggle is in France’s DNA. This is also a result of the media coverage, heightened by the government, which traditionally tries to dramatise the situation to discredit the protests. The European turnkey model is being rolled out nonetheless in France. Around 4,000 agreements are signed every year, a majority of them by the CGT! So, in reply to your question “Is Macron a threat to the trade union movement?”, the CGT’s unequivocal answer is YES. Emmanuel Macron is a threat to the brand of trade unionism defended by the CGT: independent and striving for negotiation and struggle. But what is the outlook for us? The recognised danger is that it will become a brand of trade unionism composed of experts who are evaluated by their employers, whose career development hinges on their conduct being in line with the guidelines laid down by the government and companies’ HR managers. A brand of trade unionism that supports the institutions, from which it will obtain practically nothing more until it stops inspiring the slightest anxiety. A brand of trade unionism whose purpose is to maintain social order on behalf of the political, economic and employer powers. These threats can prompt movements such as the Yellow Vests. This movement is a conglomeration of frustrations. It was sparked by an increase in taxes on diesel fuel, but soon crystallised other subjects of discontent. It reflects the revolt of the people at the bottom of the ladder against the arrogance of those at the top, those in power. It could be described as a movement that distrusts any form of structure and is wary of political parties and trade unions, which it associates with those in power. And yet, the demands of this very disparate movement are largely social: it has set out to combat social and fiscal injustice, as can be seen in its demand to reinstate France’s wealth tax. At the same time, this citizens’ revolt raises a multitude of questions for us, as trade unionists, because the majority of Yellow Vests are impervious to the unions. Discrediting the unions, as Emmanuel Macron does, will only widen the gap between the unions and the reality of workers’ everyday experience. It is setting the stage for movements to emerge in the workplace that are no longer led by the unions but directly by workers such as the Yellow Vests. Fellow unionists, we need a utopia. The depoliticisation of workers’ organisations tends to assimilate us and institutionalise us within a capitalist model whose very essence is unjust. We must not be confined to the role of limiting the impacts of capitalism: the sole recourse would then be populisms! On the whole, the principles at work in Western economies consistently place workers in competition with one another. Our international trade union relations must help us eventually counteract this. The Western world is going through a deep crisis, from the far-right’s accession to power in Brazil to Donald Trump’s USA. Brexit, the Yellow Vests and the rise of populist movements are sending shock waves throughout Europe. These events also signal the construction of a Europe based solely on free trade. But that particular Europe is one that leaves people, citizens and workers by the wayside. The people of Europe will no longer put up with being trodden under foot in the name of competitiveness. And even where populist governments are at work, in Hungary, for example, the country is the scene of widespread protests against overtime laws considered tantamount to slavery. There are huge challenges ahead. Climate change, for example, and its inevitable consequences, such as climate disasters, water shortages, agricultural crises and so on, will spark tensions or even conflicts, as well as climate refugees. This Europe is not enough: we must also think of the people’s Europe. By taking little steps and sharing our experiences, we can make progress. Your invitation to speak to you here today is a fine example of this cooperation. Let’s take action together wherever we can for workers’ interests. Let’s continue to exchange ideas and work with our diversity. One concrete example that I would like to salute is the work under way between the various UK unions and their members on the EDF European Works Council, in partnership with the CGT. We have held a number of meetings in London and Paris to support the common interests of workers in a large multinational in the UK and France. So, let’s resist any temptation to turn in on ourselves. Let’s focus instead on transforming the liberal model, which generates profits for a few at the expense of the many workers who create the wealth: those workers that we trade unionists are standing up for in our countries. On behalf of the CGT, thank you very much for your invitation. Mr Chairman, fellow speakers, I wish you very profitable discussions.