The Trade Union Question

The workers, who have suffered their disappointments from the traditional parties begin themselves quite naturally to press for other means of political expression: means which they believe to be their own. The trade unions are the simplest and most elementary form of workers’ organisations. From the moment trade unions came into existence the strike has always been their principal weapon. The “right to strike” has always stood in the forefront of trade union experience and behind all negotiations, bargains, and settlements. Indeed, all trade union power rests trade unionists willingness to “withdraw their labour”. It is a “right” which cannot be taken away. It can be legally fettered and intimidation may make it difficult to exercise  but to cease work is the essence of working class combination.

Despite the fall in membership workers have demonstrated a remarkable tenacity in clinging to their trade unions. Whatever may happen to this or that union or any number of unions, the workers do not wish to abandon the union movement but to broaden it, increase its militancy, etc. So long as capitalism endures, organisation of some kind on the job to deal with the boss is indispensable. The reason for this is has to do with the system of capitalist exploitation, workers are compelled, in the process of self-defence to struggle not only against separate capitalists, but against the entire capitalist system as well. During the course of their struggle with capitalism, the unions came into collision with the whole capitalist system and with the capitalist State itself. It is a movement of wage-workers and all its problems are based upon the fact that the members of the unions are wage-workers who, to live, must sell their labour power to the private owners of the means of production. The fundamental purpose of the trade unions is the pursuit of the interests of the wage-workers.

It should be remembered that the trade unions are organisations of workers at work, bound up with the question of the terms of labour, such as wages, hours of labour, conditions of work, terms upon which the work has to be done in thousands of different occupations. These are essentially property questions, expressing themselves in struggles between opposing classes for the products of industry. The more they multiply and become general, the more it gives rise to the demand for the control and ownership of industry by the workers themselves. Ownership and control cannot be separated from each other. They who own industry control it.“He who owns the means whereby I live, owns me” Shakespeare wrote.  Hence the question of the workers’ control of industry and the coming of the classless society based upon community ownership are inseparable questions also.

 The issue of the role of the trade unions in the control of industry, what it should be now and in the future, has been a burning question for many trades unionists. The ideas, demands and movements of workers’ participation, workers’ control, self-management, direct workers’ rule, workers’ democracy have a long-standing tradition and are deeply rooted. The pioneers of  the unions recognised the slave condition of the workers in capitalism and had faith in the worker’s power and capacity to abolish the slavery and build a new society of free men-controlling industry in a classless society.  Industrial unionists and syndicalists gave very definite answers to the question. The syndicalists and industrialists advanced the idea of the workers in a particular industry owning and controlling it from top to bottom. This conception of the future of the unions was the modern counterpart to the “House of Trades” of the Chartist pioneers. An adaptation of the industrial unionist proposals was made by the guild socialists who advocated the social ownership of the means of production, the administration of certain political affairs by a citizens’ parliament and the administration of industry by industrial unions or guilds, organized in an industrial assembly, subordinate to Parliament in regard to general policy. GDH Cole argued for the democratisation of the capitalist state with the unions taking a greater share of responsibility for the running of industry by means of representation on its governing bodies, protecting  wage rates, hours of labour, factory conditions, etc., acting as a brake on the rate of exploitation of the workers. They would be  the custodians of certain forms of social insurance, such as unemployment pay, sick pay, old age pensions. They would have the function of “consultants” with regard to the general development and organisation of the economic life of the country.  Syndicalists and industrial unionists assumed that the unions would not only control industry but also serve as the basis of the whole social administration. Guild socialists realised the weakness of this theory and maintained that the State should continue to represent the people as citizens or consumers.

Whatever of value there is in the vision of an industrial democracy, there is no evidence of the possibility of the working class achieving power in that way.  Industry may be “socialized” by trade union control but production will remain on a capitalist basis. At first sight, it is appears an  attractive idea: Get rid of the owners, work for ourselves and enjoy the full fruits of our labour. The idea of  taking over managerial functions from the employers till the factories fully belonged to the workers seems impelling.

 But it is a trap.

A company has to buy its raw materials on the market, along with every other company. A company has to sell its finished products on the market, along with every other company.  A  company has to invest in new plant and equipment, along with every other company.  To do this, they must make enough surplus value and like any other business it is done by employing less staff or by increasing intensity of work or taking a wage cut.  It means workers attacking their own living standards. Workers control of industry is largely incompatible with a union’s character as a voluntary association of the workers formed primarily to protect and represent their interests.  It  means the participation of workers in their own exploitation. As long as the capitalism has not been abolished workers will be obliged to submit to its requirements.

Workers have to seek other methods and goals.