### Steelworkers' militant fightback against job losses
A POWERFUL struggle was launched by workers at the Krupp Rheinhausen steelworks on November 27 in opposition to management plans to close the factory. Plant shutdowns are a regional problem in West Germany's traditional center of heavy industry, the Ruhr. In most cities, the unemployment rate is over 15 per cent. The fight of the
Rheinhausen workers has offered a striking example of militancy in combating the capitalist offensive.
However, the ink on this agreement was barely dry before a "slip" made the factory council aware that the Krupp management had worked out a wide-ranging cooperation agreement with Thyssen and Mannesmann (whose main production centers are also in Duisburg), which called for a total shutdown of Rheinhausen. The Mannesmann foundry in Duisburg-Huckingen was to take over all basic steel production, and Thyssen all the rolling mill work, before the middle of 1988.
Social democrats offer
"pie in the sky"
This was the last straw. Those who wanted to defend jobs had organized early in Rheinhausen — as far back as 1983, a Citizens' Committee had been formed. In the 1987 factory council elections, a left majority was elected. The present council chair still belongs to the old social-democratic majority. The Social Democratic Party's line was not to maintain jobs but to provide "substitute jobs," preferably in high-tech industry, but also in environmental protection. That fits in with the SPD's structural policy in NordrheinWestfalen, which accepts that the "old industries" have to be trimmed and relies on a rise of the so-called industries of the future. The state government has adopted a "Coal, Iron and Steel Initiative for the Future" backed by 2,000 million DM, two thirds of which is to be provided by the federal government. But no obligations have been placed on private or public companies to create jobs. The Rheinhausen workers' struggle has broad community support and has been marked by many dramatic episodes. Inprekorr, the magazine of the German Fourth Internationalists, commented on the significance of these actions in its January issue.
T HAS BEEN a long time since we have seen such things in West Germany - enraged steelworkers keeping Krupp's
Rheinhausen plant under a de facto occupation; storming the Hügel Villa, the Krupp family palace for a century and the temple of capital and its politicians; occupying streets and bridges in Duisburg. In the last weeks of 1987, a powerful blast of class struggle swept away another bit of the myth of the "twilight of the working class."
For a brief moment, power was in the streets. At least the masters on top were given a clear demonstration of what West Germany could look like if workers no longer limited themselves to polite protests directed from above, but were also determined to win their demands themselves.
Since November 26, no piece of work has gone out of the factory grounds without the approval of the factory council. [These bodies, set up in the framework of "co-management" laws, are elected by the entire workforce.] The when, what and how much is produced are being decided by the personnel and not by the management. The tactic of the fight is to "stop and go" - that is, the workers stay in the factories but there are enormous shortfalls in production (amounting to as much as half of the normal monthly total), and the management is quite unable to make any plans.
In Lorraine, on the French side of the Rhine in 1984, while the bargaining for the 35-hour week was going on here, the steelworkers besieged union and party headquarters. It was the same syndrome. A region had been made into a poorhouse. The union leadership co-administered this
development, and the parties (notably, the left ones) offered only vague promises of "substitute jobs" and "investment programs."
Rheinhausen is writing a new chapter in the class struggle in West Germany. Instead of trade-union protest actions, a spontaneous movement of the entire workforce has developed.
The workers are organizing their struggle independently and in a democratic way. They are forcing their plant councils to account for its actions, especially in negotiations with the management. And decisions about action are being made in in plant assemblies.
The official union apparatus is not leading the struggle. It is more or more or less tagging along, calling big industry-wide days of struggle, such as the one held by IG Metall on December 10. But it is raising quite feeble demands and attempting to shift the buck to Bonn and Brussels.
### Workers won't be fobbed off
The actions by the workforce are radical. They are not letting themselves be fobbed off anymore with symbolic protests. They are fighting to win their demands. A quotation is going around that illustrates this spirit. "If it really blows up here, the Hafenstrasse hellions [Hamburg squatters who have defended their homes against the police] will be like teddy bears compared to us." This has really frightened the bourgeoisie.
Among the population, the workers, with their determination, have received a widespread positive response. Churches, associations, women's groups, cultural groups, shopkeepers, and even sections of the media, all support this struggle because everything depends on steel. On December 3, there was a support demonstration by 10,000 high-school students.
Moreover, the workers have not limited the range of their action to Rheinhausen. They know that the struggle in the steel industry can only be won at an all-industry level. They are trying to draw in the workforces at other steel plants. To achieve this, the resistance of social-partnership oriented plant council majorities has often to be overcome.
If the union leadership wants to keep this struggle under control, then it has to offer a real perspective for the fight and not shift the responsibility onto the politicians. If they do not do that, it is possible that we may see here what has already begun in our West European neighbors. Alternative leaderships may take form in the workplaces.
The Krupp struggle points toward that. The workers at Rheinhausen are a great hope. They have shown that there is a alternative to yielding to the dictates of capitalism and to the passivity of the union leadership. *
"It's clear that we have got to put on more pressure" THEO STEEGMANN is deputy chair of the factory council at Krupp Rheinhausen and a leading representative of the new left majority on the council. He is a steelworker who has been a factory council member for six years. The interview was conducted by Hermann Dirkes on December 30.
S PRODUCTION going on again at the moment?
Yes. When the struggle began at the end of November, the workers decided on flexible tactics. At the outset, some workers favored an unlimited strike until the closure concept was eliminated. But finally they opted for these flexible tactics, because the technical arrangements in such steelworks are very complicated. The longer the mechanisms are out of action, the more difficult it is to get the furnaces going again and bring them up to the right temperature.
This tactic is called "stop and go". In this way, the management cannot calculate when the workers are going to strike and when they are going to produce. This naturally assumes that the workers are technically able to control such operations. They have shown that they can do that. • What is the relationship between the workforce and the union?
The central point in a big plant in the steel industry is the factory council. The last factory council elections in April 1987 very markedly changed its composition, giving it a left, a more radical majority. For the first time in 26 years, we had a choice of individual candidates rather than
Theo
Steegmann
(DR)
WEST GERMANY the traditional slates. The blue- and whitecollar workers could check 29 candidates. That led to a big increase in confidence. From the outset, we said, the workers and the factory councils are waging this struggle together. The factory councils are making no decisions not first discussed and approved by the workers. This approach has further increased confidence, although the workers are understandably nervous. All important questions are being widely discussed before decisions are made. Compromises or results of negotiations are first put to the workers for a vote before the factory council endorses them. Over the whole period, the factory council has stuck to this. • Are negotiations going on now with the management?
We have always stressed that we are ready to negotiate, as soon as the management abandons its closure plans. On December 12, we reached a temporary compromise, in which the management again pledged to respect the agreement it concluded with us on September 10. We have also managed to get negotiations over various models designed to keep the factory operating. Subsequently, it it has become clear that Krupp wants to maintain its cooperation with Mannesmann and Thyssen, because that is more profitable. Naturally, that has not helped to reassure the workers. They see that the danger of elimination of the steelworks still exists. • It seems that the determination to defend existing jobs and not rely on vague promises of substitute jobs is quite strong.
Yes. But there are two levels, and that is also true in the policy of the union. We are demanding that the factory be kept open, because we cannot let ourselves be reas sured by such phrases as "We will create 8,000 substitute jobs by and by." No one today can answer the question of where these jobs are supposed to come from. From the outset, people consider all that a political maneuver or deception. And they are right, in view of all the past experience.
On the other hand, we are not fighting necessarily for maintaining a particular workplace. None of us is especially anxious to work in the furnaces - the work there is not particularly pleasant, no one likes working seven-day swing shifts. But as long as there is no guarantee of new jobs in
WEST GERMANY• BELGIUM sight, we will fight for the livelihood we have today.
Naturally, we also want to see new industries come in and new jobs with them. We have already developed programs for this. Training programs for our fellow workers that would enable them to learn other trades so as to bring about a certain structural change in the region. But all of this was wiped out by the factory closure plan. • It is said that too much steel is being produced in the world, that there are enormous surplus capacities.
That is a very interesting question, which we have also discussed. As regards, "surplus capacities," my thinking is as follows: We make a product here that we are proud of, rails for trains and also for trams. We think that there is a great social need for this product, not only in the countries of the third world, but also in neighboring East Germany.
The problem does not lie in any lack of demand, but in the lack of ability to pay. It would be much more reasonable if the federal or state governments offered these countries interest-free credit so that they could build up a rail network and a public local transport system. In this way, among other things, an outlet for our products could be assured within the framework of a sensible international division of labor. • In any case, in steel the "free market" is a myth. What is your attitude to the need for nationalization?
This demand has long been in the basic program of the DGB [the German Confederation of Unions] and in the statutes of IG Metall. Since 1983, it has been brought up to date by the shop stewards in the whole industry. Since 1985, IG Metall has had a program for steel that calls for nationalizing the whole industry, including the profitable concerns.
The struggle has to be waged, in the last analysis, with this perspective. The precondition for success is, of course, a decisive change in the political relationship of forces in West Germany as a whole. • What do you plan for the near future?
We have taken advantage of the holiday period to discuss and prepare the actions for January and February. It is quite clear that we have to put on more pressure. Our strategy is aimed at bringing the workforces of other steelworks more into the movement, especially our fellow workers in Mannesmann-Huckingen, who are already involved in the cooperation plan [see preceding article]. We want to bring in our fellow workers at Thyssen and at Krupp Steel in Bochum.
We want also to try to get IG Metall to take advantage of ongoing wage negotiations in steel to put on more pressure industry-wide. We want to put forward demands that can offer all the workforces in all the steel complexes a common perspective. * International Viewpoint • February 8, 1988