Defend the sliding scale
As a result of the upsurge of workers struggles in Italy that Italian capitalists more and more centered their attacks on the sliding scale, arguing that it was making their labor costs imposbegan in 1969 - at the time it was called the "Creeping May"
by comparison with the May-June 1968 rebellion in France - sibly high by comparison with other countries, where the capiworkers gained a number of very advanced conces-
The following interview, given to our correspondent in midthe sliding scale of wages became well en- November, describes the latest phase of this crisis and its influtrenched. Thus, despite the onset of economic crisis in Italy, the ence in bringing down the Italian government. It explains the buying power of the workers held up far better relatively than role that Fourth Internationalists have played and are playing in in other European countries. As the crisis has deepened, the this key struggle of the Italian working class.
Question. In June this year the Confin- million workers in the streets of Rome. the comrades sent the petitions signed by
June 25, when there were almost half-a- the confederations. For example, in July, sions from the bosses.
In particular, dustria (Italian Confederation of Industrialists) disavowed the 1975 agreement on the sliding scale of wages, threatening to cease abiding by it from February
The Lega Comunista Rivoluzionario (LCR, Italian section of the Fourth International) launched a petition against this move. Can you tell us what form this campaign has taken, and how it has been
This initiative was taken by union representatives from factories in the north of Italy. In particular from Alfa Romeo and Face Standard in Milan, from Breda in Brescia, and from the Co-ordinating Committee of Fiat Workers in Cassa Integrazione. (1) There are several tens of thousands of them!
The launch of this initiative was based on the conviction that, faced with this attack from the Confindustria, and the employers in general, a broad workers resistance could develop. This conviction stemmed from some concrete facts. For example many, many sections of taken positions in detence of the sliding scale, and the tradecongresses in 1981 came out in favour of maintaining the 1975 agree-
The initiative of the LCR engineering workers has taken the form of collective signatures for an appeal addressed to the unitary trade-union federation CGILCISL-UIL.(2) This appeal called on the leaderships to lead actions to defend the sliding scale and to force the employers to withdraw their decision unconditionally. In particular it called for rejecting the blackmail of the Confindustria, who threatened not to renew the contracts if the workers did not accept the disavowal of the 1975 agreement.
This initiative immediately got an enormous response among the workers.
several days, several thousand signatures had been collected in the facthe three towns where the
There was a first attempt to extend the initiative during the general strike on
The strike was organised by the trade-union leaderships; officially to protest against the decision of the Confindustria but, in fact, to channel the huge protest movement that was developing in the
During the Rome demonstration, the initiators of the petition organised stands to collect signatures, and this had a big effect. Many union representatives and leaders not only signed the appeal but took copies for their own workplaces. It was particularly significant that many representatives from factory councils -the backbone of the Italian working class - showed themselves ready to take the was another example in Milan. After the June 25 strike our comrades were collecting signatures during the regional general the CGIL-CISL-UIL federation. Some 180 representatives from factory councils took the appeal to get it
In July the comrades took the appeal, signed by more than 50,000 workers, to the trade-union leadership in Rome and organised a press conference there. This press conference was widely reported in the newspapers, as were other stages in the campaign.
Q. How have the trade-union leaderships reacted to this campaign?
understand the trade-union leaderships' reaction you have to take account of two elements: first of all that they committed themselves to drawing up a document to be accepted by the three components of the unitary federation, CGIL-CISL-UIL, which anticipated putting into question some elements of the 1975 agreement on the sliding scale. But it is also important to take into account the very strong reactions that have occurred within the trade-union organisations, including in important sections of the apparatus, against the Confindustria deci-
The campaign launched by the LCR comrades therefore intersected with these deep differentiations taking place within to roll back the workers' the Turin factories to the FLM(3) leadership in Piedmont. They announced in a press statement that they considered this initiative 'useful because it aimed to awaken the workers to a decisive question for the whole trade-union movement. In the same statement they undertook to carry through the struggle for 'the renewal of contracts, for rescinding the disavowal of the agreement on the sliding scale, and the creation of more
We've seen similar reactions at other levels of the trades unions. The factory council at Alfa Romeo in Milan offered the use of their headquarters for a press conference. And this is not simply due to the fact that the LCR workers have an important influence in this factory coun cil, but also to the positive reaction of the workers to their initiative.
On the other hand, it is obvious that the union tops have tried to ignore this initiative and have not, for example, given an account of the meeting that took place when the delegation came to give the signatures to them in Rome.
This reaction is in line with their general attitude towards all those who question their policy of concessions to the
These are just small symptoms of the conflict going on in the unions. To understand the full scope, you have to take account of what happened during the consultations among the workers organised by the Secretariat of the CSILCGIL-UIL. It was there that the official representatives laid out the concessions that the leaderships were ready to make. During this meeting our comrades fought for the rejection of the document. They counterposed to it a platform for struggle that could relaunch the workers fight(1). Laid-off workers who continue to draw the major part of their wages. Workers, CP-led union. CISL: Italian Social Confederation of Workers,
Workers, SP-led union. Federation of Metalworkers, composed of:
FIOM linked to the CGIL; FIM linked to
back against the bosses' offensive. In fact, the official document was rejected by the majority of the workers who took part in the assemblies.
This rejection took a number of forms, because there was not agreement on an alternative. Some rejected the document without counterposing anything to it. Others voted for the text put forward by our comrades. Finally, others proposed amendments to the official document which did not challenge the underlying orientation of the leadership but only its most immediate consequences.
The battle around these amendments - led in particular by the FLM - offered room for all sorts of manoeuvres by the leadership. But, over and above the criticism that we made of this tactic, it is important to understand the deep contradictions that it revealed.
Q. Has this campaign had an impact on members of the Communist Party, and in general how have the CP reacted on this question of the sliding scale?
To answer that question, all that has to be said is that the majority of the signatories of the appeal are comrades of the CP, rank-and-file some cases CP trade-union cadres. In July to improve these proposals. As you can this article polemics between different components of the unitary federation. In a press conference, Chiaromonte explained that the CP in no way intended to defeat the trade-union document, alternative proposal, but the workers would not accept it. This is why, for him, it would be necessary to partly reformulate it in order to make it acceptable.
Q. Can you tell us in detail how the place, and what were the results?
A. I've already told you about the massive rejection of this document by the workers. But we have to be more precise on the most significant elements of the consultations. First of all I should point out that everywhere where alternative motions were presented (almost exclusively where our comrades were present) they won a huge majority of the workers' votes. This was so in the big Turin factories like Aeritalia, Bertone, numerous Fiat plants, and in the big factories in
Brescia, and in Italsider of ER ments was not as simple as those who moved them hoped. For example, the factory council from Alfa Romeo in Arezza, or the FIOM at Brescia, presented much more advanced texts than the FLM.
What is clear from the results is that the traditionally most combative sections rejected the platform of the union leader-
A more detailed analysis of the votes would demonstrate other significant factors. For example, in Milan province, the government employees and teachers en masse have rejected the union proposals.
But the union leaderships have completely ignored this outcome. They have proved this time, as never before to such their complete contempt for the workers' wishes.
Q. At the same time as the consultations drew to a close a new government crisis opened up with Spadolini's resignation. Do you think there's a link between these two developments?
A. The Spadolini government played an essential role in putting the question of labour costs at the centre of the discussions in the workers' movement. Even at l'Unita (CP daily paper) talked several NIRATE UNELA FARESEA times about the signature collection that was going on. In reality the attitude of FOLSILNELLA SELLIN the CP on the sliding scale is symptomatic
SVENEZE of much more general problems which they are facing in the present period. Unlike their position during the previous consultations, when they supported the ceiling of 16 per cent on wage rises, this time they adopted a much more cautious attitude towards the trade-union leaderships' proposals. Thus, they opened up a certain safety valve for some of the discontent that their own workers base was
September and October, l'Unita published numerous protest letters from activists against the policy of the unir: tops. This in no way represented a decision by the CP to take the lead of the protest movement, but it did show its wish not to appear, once more, in opposition to the most militant sections of workers.
At the same time the CP wanted to prevent an open confrontation between these sectors and the union leadership. They tried to propose intermediary solutions acceptable to both sides. Thus, they largely inspired the amendment tactic of the FLM.
These concerns of the CP appeared clearly in an article by Gerardo Chiaromonte in l'Unita on November 3, at the time of the consultations. He stated that the argument about labour costs put forward by the employers and accepted by the unitary federation is a real problem. But he immediately introduced nuances in explaining that this is not the only problem, that there are several ways of responding to it, and that, perhaps, the tack chosen of the CGIL-CISL-UIL federation was not the most adequate. In consequence, he concluded, the consultations should offer the workers the opportunity
ER
ER LINE
A BELCANICI E DRAFT
In the factories the trade-union leaders organised a skilful piece of scenesetting. They had learnt the lessons from the previous consultations. They tried to avoid general assemblies, and to start the consultations in the least militant facttories, etc. Despite that, where the oppositional fight was taken up, it won the support of the majority of workers. This was so even in the presence of much respected trade-union leaders like Bruno Trentin, who came in person to T.B. and Breda in Brescia. There were twenty votes for his proposal and sixty against. At Nuova Pignone in Florence, Del Piano, a leader of the CISL, was so challenged that a real revolt broke out when he wanted to speak again, and he was forced to leave. At Falck in Milan, Pierre Carnitie, leader of the CISL, quite simply refused to come to the assembly after he heard that the factory council intended to present an alternative document.
All these examples give a good idea of the atmosphere existing in the workplaces. Even the fight for the amend-
ПРЕРАК
FME
NE
Italian metalworkers demonstration (DR) the beginning of the consultations Spadolini openly declared that if the workers did not accept the union document, and if, consequently, the employers and unions did not arrive at an agreement on labour costs, he would block the sliding scale by decree.
However the SP and the CP, as much as the trade-union confederations, did nothing to increase the anti-government dynamic which appeared in the course of the consultations. The CP in particular limited itself to emphasising the disagreements between the components of the majority government, without pointing up the obvious role that the situation within the working class played in the governmental crisis. There is no doubt that the capacity for resistance once again shown by Italian workers had an impact on government and its component parts. This is particularly true of the Italian Socialist Party, which is counting on the elections to strengthen political weight. It cannot have failed to notice the workers' reaction.
17