GERMANY The eleven days of the ÖTV THE industrial conflict which seemed to be looming in West Germany a few weeks ago has for the moment been defused, with a series of compromise settlements between unions and employers. However, a vote by public sector workers rejecting the deal agreed by their leaders shows the tensions just below the surface of the patched up edifice of social partnership, as Angela Klein explains. ANGELA KLEIN - June 4. 1992 prises and offices to shut down.
Wulf-Mathies answered the government's demagogic arguments firmly, with counter-arguments that expressed the feelings of the great majority of her members and of the population as a whole.
She clearly understood that a public sector strike might prove highly unpopular with the public. She also put herself forward as the spokesperson for all those in the West who have lost out as a result of unification; while defending unification, she pointed out that the workers were bearing three quarters of the costs, and insisted that the rich should pay more.
This was a highly political strike, both in terms of the strikers' motivation (teaching the government a lesson), the stakes involved for the Kohl government how to resolve the problems posed by unification) and its confrontational character.
This meant that the union side presented its case in terms that went beyond strictly trade union issues in order to gain public sympathy. The public did indeed support the strike, even in its most difficult moments.
Furthermore, the strikers were encouraged by the militancy of the IGMetall and print and construction unions, who were at the time involved in negotiations and threatening strike action. The accumulation of conflicts raised the spectre of a general strike.
### Essential services maintained
The strike was conducted flexibly with the aim of causing the least amount of irritation to users. In hospitals the administration was halted but emergency services were maintained, showing how this kind of problem can be dealt with by the unions themselves without any need for any government imposed strike-breaking "minimum service"
The trains that did not run during the week were back in service at the weekends to allow people to leave for their homes; the waste piling up in the streets was moved in special cases, such as local festivals.
The strike was massive from the start. The ÖTV was well aware that such a movement could not last long, that the determination of the leadership must be clear from the start and that it must hurt.
At the start there were 30 to 50,000 strikers, rising to 450,000 by the end. Every sector was drawn in: city transport, post, railways — especially on
ANGELA KLEIN — June 4, 199 T HE agreement signed by the leadership of the TV public sector workers' union on May 10, 1992 was rejected by the membership in a referendum organized by the union, with 44% voting for and 56% against.
Usually a 75% vote is needed to launch a strike, with only 25% needed to accept a deal made by the leadership with the employers - this is in particular the case with the big engineering union, the IG-Metall. The internal rules of the ÖTV are more democratic, 50% being needed to ratify an agreement.
The public sector workers leader, Monika Wulf-Mathies, has come out of the strike with her position significantly weakened, although during the strike she had seemed untouchable. Discontent and opposition have been showing up inside the ÖTV for some time.
No history of militancy
The union does not have any history of militancy and its leadership tends to the right. While its members have shown themselves very determined in struggle they have also been unsympathetic to the positions of the left. Members and leaders have closed ranks against the "social worker" types influenced by the struggles of 1968 and after.
Generally direct opposition to the leadership has not been tolerated and there have recently been expulsions on grounds of disobedience. However these anti-democratic practises have frequently been criticized.
The strike has changed everything. The leadership did not want it; it was 26 forced into against its will, by the government's determination to impose a new wage policy in the interests of the employers, something that it had already failed to achieve with the steelworkers and bank employees. The government's inability to understand the political climate in the country pushed the ÖTV into action.
Once it had no option but to lead a strike, the union leadership decided to get serious and win an agreement that would be seen as a defeat for the government. Reacting to the government's rejection of a compromise proposed by the "independent" arbitrator and a 90% vote for a strike, WulfMathies said: "Now, we are no longer fighting for a compromise; we are in struggle and we are fighting for the 9.5% we asked for at the start".
The union did indeed then take action, with all the membership following the leadership, including the critics.
On the "left" the only people to criticize the union — using, it must be said, arguments very similar to those of the employers - were the Greens and some associations. They were saying that it was not the time to raise such demands, the union was not showing solidarity with the East and so on.
Union leader takes high profile
The ÖTV leader had a high profile in the strike; she went from city to city visiting the strikers, listening to their problems and acting as their representative to the press. The strike was organized democratically; it was decentralized, and the rank-and-file were entrusted with deciding which enter-
June 22, 1992
International Viewpoint # 231
prestige projects such as
Intercity Express (ICE) — cleaning services, hospitals, schools and further education and, finally, airports.
The culminating point of the strike was without doubt the total closure for 24 hours of Frankfurt Airport, Europe's largest. All it took to shut it down was to bring the firefighters out on strike.
The Lufthansa airline demanded that the personnel from the nearby US airbase replace those in Frankfurt, and when this was refused, took the Hesse government to court, claiming that the authorities forbade the Americans to step in.
All this shows the vitality of the German union movement, with its organizational strength, unity in struggle and awareness of its ability to rapidly bring the country to a halt.
It was no accident that the debate on public sector privatization started again during the strike, this being seen as a means of breaking union power.
In the 1980s some industrial enterprises were privatized and the postal service was partially denationalized. Plans to privatize the railways are underway.
Some state enterprises started using private cleaning firms during the strike; and after the strike there will certainly be a big campaign for wide-ranging privatization.
Despite its victorious struggle, the
ÖTV now has to confront a major challenge to traditional forms of union struggle. The bosses are abandoning, at least partially, their line of seeking conciliation rather than confrontation, at least when they had the money.
Budgets squeezed on all sides
Today budgets are being squeezed on all sides and it will take a hard fight to preserve workers' gains. A big effort will also be needed to combat the privatization plans and unionize workers in the private sector as well as victims of deregulation.
For the moment, the question of union democracy is on the agenda at the ÖTV congress to be held June 19-
25.
Even if the agreement represented a
GERMANY
„Säg nicht am Ast, auf dem wir alle sitzen!"
All Kankatur Reiner Schwolme
"Don't saw off the branch we're all sitting on"
defeat for the government, at least on the political level, public sector employees are not satisfied with the deal either and want to resume the strike. Issues of open negotiations and the possibility for the rank-and-file to influence them have been raised.
Despite the results of the struggle, in which all the militants supported the leadership, opposition inside the ÖTV has grown. It remains heterogeneous, poorly structured and politically weak and it is highly unlikely that there will be a challenge to Wulf-Mathies' leadership, but it may become a more organized force around the issue of union democracy.
Furthermore, the current debates express the new confidence of hundreds of thousands of unionists, many of whom have just had their first experience of strike action.
In the engineering sector, the bosses realized that, contrary to what they had been hoping, the mood on the shop floor was much more radical than among the union leaders and decided to be flexible. The IG-Metall leadership, meanwhile, was fearful of launching a struggle in such a tense political atmosphere.
This is why they signed an agreement which the membership considers very bad - even though at the same time the bosses' side has been denouncing it as irresponsible. In fact the employers view it as a first step towards the wage policy shift they want.
After the two big unions, the ÖTV and IG-Metall, had settled, agreements were also reached in printing and construction. Now wage negotiations have started in East Germany to adapt wage levels to the new conditions.
Combativity of movement remains intact
This strike wave testifies to the changing balance of social and political forces in reunited Germany. The union movement's combativity remains intact — it has not suffered the erosion and the defeats seen in some other European countries. But, at the same time, it is confronted by new problems for which its leaders are ill prepared. Their response at the moment is to defend established positions, but this will not be enough. The challenge therefore is to build a union left able to 27 develop an adequate response. *
June 22, 1992
FUN D DRIVE
International Viewpoint needs YOU THIS AUTUMN financial constraints will oblige us to review the price and frequency of our publications.
In the ten years since International Viewpoint was launched the price of a subscription has increased by only 70%, while our postal costs, for example, have increased by 150% over that period.
Last June, we were obliged to make a substantial increase in our rates. Despite this and a steady rate of subscriptions and sales, IV built up a heavy deficit. The same pattern of rising costs while we try to hold prices down also weighs heavily on our sister theoretical magazine International Marxist Review. A continuation of this situation will place the future of our magazines in jeopardy.
Revolutionary socialist magazines such as ours cannot rely on advertisers or wealthy backers to bail us out. Our survival is dependent on the help of our readers and friends. Our future is thus in your hands.
And you can help us. • Firstly, by taking an active part in our drive to increase circulation - if each current subscriber could find another, our objective of financial stability could easily be met. The prospect of having to pay more in future is a powerful incentive to winning new subscriptions in the coming three months. Also, for those who are new to International Viewpoint, we are offering a special three month subscription for only $11/£6/60FF.
• Secondly, by supporting the fund drive that we are setting up to safeguard the future of our press. Send cheques to International Viewpoint, 2 Rue Richard Lenoir, 93108 Montreuil, France. As usual, payments should be made out to PEC, but please indicate that your contribution is intended to go towards the fund drive. For postal and bank transfers see details on page 2.* 28
THE civil war in Yugoslavia, the rise of ernationa fascism in Europe, the congress of the
VIEWPOINT
Workers' Party in Brazil, the twists and turns of South African politics, the world recession, the upheavals in Russia, the privatizations in Czechoslovakia, the agrarian counter-revolution in
Special
Mexico, the market reforms in China...
These are just some of the subjects offer !
covered in recent editions of/nternational Viewpoint. For ten years now, IV has offered news and in-depth analyses of all the major upheavals in world politics, written by active participants in the events or by specialist journalists.
But more than this, International Viewpoint is a magazine which approaches the world from the point of view of the oppressed and those in struggle.
If you are new to /V, we are making a special offer so that you can find out more about the magazine - THREE MONTHS (six issues) FOR E6/$11/60FF!
I would like to take advantage of IV's three month special introductory offer
Last name.
First name..
Address.
Code.
City..
Country.
I enclose $11/£6/60FF (delete as appropriate)
Send to: IV Special Offer, PEC, 2, Rue Richard Lenoir, Montreuil,
93108, FRANCE
Make cheques payable to PEC; for further payment details see subs.
box on page 2.
İNTERNATICNAL
MARXIST REVIEW
TODAY, when Marxist theory is under strong attack in the English- speaking world and beyond, International Marxist Review continues to fight in the
"battle of ideas" to arm and renew revolutionary socialism. What happened in Eastern Europe, is socialism a viable perspective worldwide, the importance of the feminist struggle; all these questions of importance to socialists are taken up in our
But rising costs make it increasingly difficult for us to maintain a 144-page journal at its current modest rates. Before we are forced to increase charges, SUBSCRIBE
NOW and receive a back issue of your choice in addition:
• No 13 Spring 1992 The post-capitalist countries today
• No 11/12 Documents of Fourth International World Congress
• No 9 (Vo 4/2) National question in the USSR
• No 8 (Vol 4/1) European unification - 1992
• No 7 (Vol 3/2) 50 years of the Fourth International
• No 6 (Vol 2/4) Gorbachev; Feminism; The Philippines
Subscription rates: Britain and Europe £10/120FF/$17;
USA & elsewhere (airmail) $20; all countries (surface) £10/120FF/$17.
Please make cheques payable to PEC. Bank transfers to PEC, BNP
Robespierre Acct 120179/90. Postal transfers to PEC CCP no 2 322 42 T Paris.
Please mark clearly "IMR".
For subscriptions and single copies please write to:
IMR, 2 rue Richard Lenoir, 93108 Montreuil, France.