Salaries, for workers of a society dominated by the liberal or neoliberal economics, have represented and never will represent nothing more than a fraction of the value of our work once the capital has taken its share of social production(1). The capital reserves this before hand to redistribute the rest to employees as compensation which will vary according to the criteria of the "labor market" that seeks to impose a market value to jobs and self-employment (and thereby to employees and self-employed worker) as if it were a commodity. Although safe capitalism, that works only if it is constantly growing, use this share to grow and enhance the capacity to appropriate an ever greater share of this social production, making it a wealth concentration system that leads to the results that we know : a ridiculous number of individuals sharing a huge chunk of wealth, private means of production and therefore decide the directions that take this production (power). the haves, in this economic doctrine, So get the share of labor not obtained by workers. Since a long time, unionism is presented as a means to remedy this situation. Today, for example in Quebec and Canada, the unions have acquired the means and a number of members that go far beyond what would have wished the workers' organizations of the past. However, it seems more than ever an unlikely transformation of the social organization of scale (revolution) from these entities. Why is that? here , I leave you with a part of a text that offers an answer to this question and come back with my views on the issue.
………………… Capital and labor : class collaboration in the labor movement
by : Victor Levant (doctoral candidate in political science at McGill University), publishing spark, 1977
chapter V11 : the class character of the union "in good faith»
work organization was illegal in its infancy but was finally obliged to grant a "right
association "because of the revolt of the working class. The concept underlying the definition
legal union activity, however, was derived from the vision of the capitalist world and reflect the interests of
the capital class. This "right" was granted reluctantly, conditional and only after
watered down the essence of the labor movement : a political movement to fight for the emancipation of
Working in an economic movement to fight for higher wages and better conditions
working. This "right" was finally granted once the content of this legal activity (the goal,
the principles, the strategy and tactics of syndicalism) reduced to harmless state. It manages to blow
brute force, judicial repression, corruption and ideological mystification.
Our analysis will show that the "right" of association is the right to organize some
way, in the interests of capital, i.e. in order to ensure continuity of the current mode of production,
Consequently, the exploitation of labor.
The legal definition of the activities of bona fide union proved to be nothing more than
class collaboration in the form of "respect for the law and authority". This meant that the work
recognized the legitimacy of the state apparatus. It maintained its domination - domination
in the Criminal Code of Canada, the Civil Code of the Province of Quebec and the labor code
of Quebec, dominance also ensured by the class nature of governments, of bureaucracy, of the
courts, Police and army, alternately, legislate, run, consider and enforce
lois. The essence of this device, is the dominance, political domination of capital over labor.
The Criminal Code of Canada and the Civil Code of Québec ensure the exploitation of labor by
legalization of private appropriation of social production, maintain the current mode of production
by legitimizing the work contract and defend the existing social structure in prescribing any
transformation of the state apparatus that protects this structure.
The Quebec Labor Code ensures the domination of capital over labor by prohibiting the fight
militant mass, en régularisant, "Routinisant" and individualizing the class conflict; he rocks
partial integration of the union in the state apparatus in making the legally responsible
the application of the collective agreement, finally, it ensures the dissemination of liberal mythology
implicit in the capitalist code : equality of the employer and the employee ("Equal rights"), society
classless ("the public") and state above classes ("Equality before the law").
That said, observing the current situation, it is obvious that this description of unionism corresponds to that of the major unions in Quebec that fall into this category and watered toothless version of what we can not even call a labor movement. The filing of a single special act of the Liberal government enough to return to work thousands of workers in the construction voting es for the strike and, in the virtual absence of protest. Current Unions have become so integrated into the state apparatus, that the state no longer needs to call its repressive forces to enforce the rules that the government invents progressively to the detriment of the working class. The union elites have enough power on their members to enforce laws, the more harmful they may, for workers.
Revolutionary syndicalism must resume its place in the landscape trade because trade unionism "in good faith" (in good faith) current is not suited to fight neoliberalism has accepted or been forced to be regulated to acquire legal status as suggested by the author of capital and labor. It was also developed in a political context in which it was popular to want to build, all together and coughs, together, "Social democracy" that will benefit all and all without having to question the social structure and the state apparatus that protects (ideological mystification?). This revolutionary unionism must exert pressure that will intensify son years by issuing a credible critique of the current unionism by texts, actions and mobilization of employees in job areas forgotten by the current unionism (restoration, retail, troubleshooter, self-employed, Community etc.). It must also as with e Mapei and Canada Post employees support the union members of victims union practices in line of class collaboration. Short, he must push the unions to regain its essence : produce movement leading to the emancipation of labor to eliminate the dominance of holders of capital and means of production and also eliminate the domination of the state that defends the legal structures that allow the private appropriation of social production. This, rather than lead a strictly economic struggle to ensure that these proprietors are willing to accept to be more "generous" in the redistribution of social production over wages. That's why I consider syndicalism is more relevant than ever and that his positions, its principles and its actions, can make tracks for the reappropriation of work solution (power) by the world's workers.
(1) I mean social production, all work performed by a company considering that each economic sector, functions and activities are interdependent including e.g. : student work(sharing, acquisition and improvement of knowledge), student internships, Household work, education of children, autonomous work, citizen participation etc..