Anarchists and libertarian communists in the CGIL #32 - THE
LEFT OF CLASS IN CGIL: DEVELOPMENT, CURRENT SITUATION, PROSPECTS.
-- Mario Salvadori * (it) [machine translation] (a-infos-en@ainfos.ca)
Since its establishment, the CGIL has been characterized as a moderate and reformist trade
union that has always had within it a sector class - generically identified as trade union
left - that was expressed over the years in various forms and ways. The choice of the CGIL
to structure itself in components, which mainly were referring to the largest parties in
the first republican parliament, provoked the emergence of classist positions with trade
unionists and activists subjected to the logic of belonging and deployment. Only a few
escaped to this minority population as that of anarchists and libertarians who were
organized in "defense committees of trade union", a present experience in the realities of
the north central but too weak in terms of organizational framework and which also
suffered the theoretical uncertainties and strategic in the anarchist movement (1).
Even after the split of 1948, which led to the exit from the CGIL components Democrat,
Social Democrat, Republican, the political and organizational reference to the Communist
Party and the Socialist of most managers, executives, activists, helped to compress and
hinder the emergence of the components of the class that they could find their own space,
with the development of a genuinely independent trade union, thus breaking the "conveyor
belt" which only served to subordinate the interests of workers at the inter-parliamentary
political framework. Pure 60s the situation did not undergo changes even though next to
the Communist and Socialist members - who were responsible for the appointment of union
leaders at rates well defined - it was adding another minority who gathered mainly those
trade unionists who were referring to PSIUP the party that emerged after the split of the
PSI by those socialists who denied the entry into the first center-left government with
the Christian Democrats.
The Union of Councils.
This organizational situation, that seemed immutable, instead began to suffer a strong
shock from the changes in the meantime intervened in society, in the factories, in the
mode of production, changes pieces, and recomposed the class in new forms that often
escaped totally unions. And 'the large and growing wave triggered by two years of
struggles of 1968-69, with the emergence of the mass worker in the large factories in
northern Italy, often immigrants from the south, and with many incidents of
insubordination and rebellion managed directly by the workers and their natural leaders
emerged from the struggles.
Old Boards Internal present in factories, in which among other things had not recognized
the power of bargaining, lost meaning; in their place, starting with the large engineering
companies, it emerged strongly the reality of factory councils which gathered delegates
elected on a white card regardless of whether or not a trade union (all voters, all
eligible). This climate of change and great effervescence did not stay long confined in
large factories but soon passed to many small production companies and large sectors of
public employment, education, transport, facilitated by the introduction of the "Workers'
Statute "which provided for the right of assembly, of posting in the workplace, etc...
The impact on the trade unions of these great changes was swift and, despite much
resistance, the councils were recognized as a basic structure with bargaining power in the
workplace. It 's the season of the "Union of Councils" that, at least in the early 70s, he
saw a great development of these facilities; a choice that was not determined only by the
will of the trade union summit to "ride the tiger" in its ascending phase (idea certainly
present in many executives) but that it was also imposed by the big fights and the
leadership worker. All this, as you can imagine, with constant contradictions between the
delegates expressed by workers and a union bureaucracy always ready to take every
opportunity to regain political space inside and outside the union.
This was true for all categories, but much less in that of Iron where the struggles were
most intense and where they were born the first factory councils. The metalworkers' unions
went too far ahead on the unified plan and while the confederations formed in 1973 the
United Federation CGIL, CISL and UIL, instead of the expected organic unity, formed the
FLM (Federation of Metalworkers) also opening offices and promoting shared a single
membership. This situation of FIOM which was organized externally with other metalworkers
'unions took away a bit' of energy to spread the left trade union CGIL, but at the same
time helped to strengthen it in the other unions (especially in the FIM-CISL, which for
years saw a strong presence, Milan in particular, a trade union left that drew the Councils).
The CGIL, as regards its internal structure, however, continued to be based on the three
components which referred to the respective parties of the left; even when the PSIUP
decided to disband after the electoral defeat of 1972, which excluded him from the
Parliament, and it joins largely in PCI, there were no substantial changes. Part of the
trade unionists who had referred to the PSIUP, together with other independent, it
continued to "occupy" the political space and organizational previous forming the
so-called "third part", an expression of the trade union left closer to the experience of
the Councils to which they referred. But these union members, present at all levels in the
secretariats confederations and categorical, were well placed in the trade union
bureaucracy and largely came from the crucible of the struggle of the Board; their action
remained so ever in the political dynamics and internal organizational union slipping over
time on more moderate positions that led to a gradual loss of support in their area of
influence, even accepting the union took place in the Conference decided that the EUR
sanctioned that the wage was not an independent variable in a market economic system. The
third component thus continued to scrape a living for the '80s, more and more
self-referential, bureaucratized, opportunist, to take sides in favor of the income policy
and the cancellation of the escalator in the early 90s.
The attack on the escalator and "Autoconvocate".
But back in the political space left uncovered by the Third Component that after the turn
of the EUR he found it hard to be busy. Once again they were externally imposed deadlines
set in motion significant energy; the spark popped following the agreement signed February
14, 1984 by the CISL and the UIL with the government led by the socialist Bettino Craxi,
who with the predetermination of inflation cut four points contingency escalator. Actually
this agreement was preceded, a year earlier, by another which had been signed by the CGIL
well with the government led by Christian Democrat Amintore Fanfani; The agreement, which
intervened on the increases of the escalator, had caused great friction in the
Confederation of Italian course. They 'clear that the mobilization subsequent to the 1984
agreement were interwoven with political motivations to the real needs of the workers
suffered the consequences.
The reaction to the cut point escalator was extended and immediate and a new generation of
directors, along with those who survived the restructuring that had invested many
companies at the turn of the '70s and' 80s, led an intense mobilization: the brief was
season of the so-called "Autoconvocate" because the strikes and demonstrations were
organized largely by the delegates. One consequence of this situation was the end of the
already weakened Unitary Union Federation CGIL, CISL and UIL. The CGIL, with its majority
component communist, then leaned so interested mobilization then decided to "put the hat"
and to end it by calling a national demonstration in Rome on 24 March 1984; the show was
great but, paradoxically, marked the end of the movement because the clash was transferred
to the parliamentary level.
From "Democracy Council Chamber" to "Alternative Auditors".
But the movement, and his sudden conclusion determined by choices that had nothing to do
with the interests of the workers, had convinced some of the delegates "Autoconvocate"
that it was necessary to organize in CGIL overcoming bureaucratic and sclerotic
traditional components, referring instead to those Councils that slowly had been set aside
by the union. So, shortly after the end of the protest, a hundred delegates gathered at
Ariccia and having extended contacts in the territories and in the categories formalized
the creation of a fourth component that took the name of "Democracy Council Chamber." The
component consisted mainly of delegates and workers which referred to proletarian
democracy - the little party that was formed by the union of some formations of the far
left - but he also saw the presence of other comrades totally foreign to this political
experience. In any case, beyond some exaggerations, Democracy Council Chamber never became
a member "party" within the CGIL; the rest could not become so if not contradicting
herself because she was born to overcome partisan components, drawing on the experience of
factory councils and occupying the political space that had been vacated by the Third
Component.
Democracy Council Chamber participated well in the Congress of the CGIL, in 1986,
presenting many amendments to the thesis conference and failing to elect groups of
comrades in various Steering Committees confederations and categorical. But, while
favoring the intervention in companies and appearing in a different way from traditional
components, its weight was limited and was able to attract only a fraction of those
challenging the political line and followed by the CGIL union.
Meanwhile loomed large national and international events whose scope could not but have an
impact in the union; the collapse of the state capitalist regimes in Eastern Europe, the
crisis of communism, the end of the PCI, led to the dissolution of the communist component
- determined by the Secretary Bruno Trentin - which was followed by the socialist and the
remnants of the Third Component. Democracy Council Chamber, as we have seen with another
idea was born, he went on his way, but his project took off and remained confined in a
dimension very minority. So it was that the representatives of Democracy Council Chamber,
instead of trapped in their own niche, sought to intercept and confront the varied class
left that now showed openly after the dissolution of the components partisan. From this
comparison, with "Charter '90 for a CGIL struggle and democratic" and with other groups of
leaders and delegates, there was a re-consolidation of the trade union left in "Being
Syndicate" in 1991 he presented to the Congress of the CGIL an alternative document to
that the majority of members of the General Council; and it was the first time that this
happened.
Be 'Union had not constituted as a component linked to a party (it was indeed quite mixed
in the political references of trade unionists and delegates adhering to them), but as a
cross-sectional area to the various categories and on joining a program, taking up so much
of the 'organizational experience of Democracy Council Chamber. Assemblies congressional
base, which determined the percentages of adhesion to the documents and therefore the
outcome of the Congress and the next composition of the National Executive Committee, saw
a good result to be syndicate which obtained 17% of votes at its arguments.
But a few months after the conclusion of the Congress, while the parties that had ruled
for decades were swept away by the story of "Clean Hands", the CGIL was again in the storm
after the signing of the Agreement of July 1992 put an end to the escalator and gave the
go-to that income policy then enshrined in the famous agreement of 23 July 1993 on the
negotiation and consultation. It began in this way, through heavy measures one-way, a
policy that would lead to the displacement of large shares of income from workers - who
were charged the partial fiscal consolidation - in favor of the bourgeoisie.
Faced with this scenario the area of Being Union reacted by distancing themselves from
agreements on the escalator and on incomes policy and questioning the financial mega
launched by the Amato government; but the presence in it of managers which referred to the
"left" of the PDS - the Communist Refoundation party born along with the ashes of the PCI
- and ambiguous positions of the same Communist Refoundation, which then led to the
tensions erupted into a crisis more accentuated the political project.
From this crisis the next class came before the National Congress of 1996, riaggregandosi
in "Alternative Auditors" whose programmatic basis for claiming a CGIL struggle and
democratic and strongly criticized the policy of wage sacrifices imposed on workers
demanding an end to the policy income and consultation. Alternatively Auditors presented
to Congress its own document and, despite the return to majority led by Secretary Sergio
Cofferati of part of the trade unionists of being dissolved union, after a tough battle in
the assemblies of the base obtained more than 11% of the vote that considering the poor
presence in the Pensioners' Union and in the South meant a much higher percentage in major
categories and territories. This despite the presence of a third conference document,
called "Dear CGIL," which addressed the trade union left mildly criticizing the choices of
the majority and who picked up a mere 1% of the vote, further proof that in that space
there was political place for one area unless you want to be relegated to the margins. At
the end of the congress the good results obtained by the alternative document took the
entrance in the National Secretariat of Gian Paolo Patta, coordinator of Alternative Auditors.
But the troubled path of the next class was certainly not finished and, after the
Congress, the political maneuvers of Bertinotti brought exiting Alternative Auditors of
the comrades of the Communist Refoundation which sought to establish an "Area of the
Communists" linked to party; incidentally this aggregation, to recreate a situation
organizational outdated, never took off and survived with difficulty until the next
Congress of the CGIL. Many trade unionists of the PRC remained instead in Alternative
Auditors where, despite the partisan divisions, continued to live together militants of
various political parties.
The years of "Labour Society" and the FIOM.
The following years, which saw the ruling center-left, brought new contradictions in the
CGIL determined by the effects of income policy, the introduction of forms of insecurity
in working with the so-called "Treu package", by war and NATO bombing in the former
Yugoslavia. So Alternative Auditors, the approach of the XIV Congress of the CGIL, was
once again a convergence with the "area of the Communists" and other companions as Giorgio
Cremaschi; the new area that grouped the trade union left was named "Work Society -
Changing Course" and presented a paper alternative to that of the majority of Sergio
Cofferati.
But while Congress was in full swing he developed a violent attack on workers by the new
Berlusconi government that, by agreeing with CISL and UIL, aimed to isolate and strike the
same CGIL. This changed the nature of the congress under way with a re-consolidation of
the various souls of the union, under the leadership of Sergio Cofferati, replied with a
long and successful struggle to maneuver Berlusconi tended Cancellation art. 18 of the
Statute of Workers. Everything was also favored by the agreement between the majority and
minority, to new internal rules that filled the vacuum left by the dissolution of the
components partisan and that introduced the recognition of the "congress program areas" in
the event of their establishment in the governing bodies. Despite the conclusion of the
Congress unified the area of Work Society, soon after, he saw again the release of a group
of Communist Refoundation near Bertinotti who appeared under the name of "Here" means a
group, this, that obviously had used Work now only as a means to overcome the obstacle
conference, but that did not succeed nor formalized as programmatic area nor to affect the
union, concluding then his political career.
The next Congress
The next Congress was held in 2006 near the end of the legislature who had seen the ruling
center-right Berlusconi, and the CGIL openly supported the candidacy of Romano Prodi and
then his government, while Labour Society was to criticize the choices until the
sensational regional event in Florence on September 29, 2007 made following the agreement
on pensions. The CGIL had presented Congress with a joint document, on which all souls
were merged union, differing only then for some theses alternatives.
Admittedly, not all agreed on this document and Giorgio Cremaschi, secretary of FIOM, he
promoted an initiative for an alternative document but unable to find the number of
signatures needed to present it. Following those still living area of minority called
"Network on April 28", this a bit 'in all categories except FIOM where the various program
areas Congress have always had a hard time.
Already, the legendary FIOM, the category benchmark for the political left and trade union
and Italian focal point for building a strong left class in and out of the CGIL, and that
has always been the spearhead of the struggle especially after the development It had by
the automotive industry in the 60s. His leadership, however, not always had been the head
of the claims most innovative of the working class; An example, without going too far
back, there is hot autumn of '69 when the egalitarian thrust was imposed by the workers'
struggles of the union then led by Bruno Trentin. And even after the FIOM, it is having
been at least until the second half of the 80s a category capable of directing the CGIL,
is a stranger to political choices as that of the EUR from which he received his pursuit
of that interest that developed national then wage moderation, incomes policy and
compression of workers' rights which in later years would have profoundly marked the
orientation of the leading groups of the CGIL weakening the trade union movement against
the advance of capitalist restructuring. In the late 90's was the Secretary Claudio
Sabattini to give that took place then was realized with the participation of the union of
mechanics, in 2001, the Genoa Social Forum; subsequently the Secretaries Gianni Rinaldini,
but especially Maurizio Landini, have increasingly imposed the FIOM general attention not
only as a union of struggle but also as a point of reference outside the factory. And
this, as you know, has generated a series of frictions and clashes with the majority that
rules the CGIL.
See the FIOM as a whole, however, it is a simplification; it is true that Maurizio Landini
is supported by most of his union, FIOM but there are also areas closer to the majority
confederal. As for the relations in the trade union left it is important to note the
difference between the conception of the FIOM, which favors alliances between categories,
and that of Alternative Auditors and then Work Company believes that requires the presence
of an area programmatic cross categories to safeguard the confederal union. Not cheap; so
much so that, despite the common position in the next class, these differences have
prevented - at least until now - to create an area that would have a considerable
political weight within the CGIL.
The next class divides and weakens.
The same differences were the basis of failure to submit a joint document and opposing
choices with which the left of the class went to the Congress of 2010; Work on the one
hand that the Company decided to support the document presented by Epifani, becoming part
of the majority while maintaining their own area, and across the bulk of the FIOM which
also showed a document signed by the Secretaries of Public Administration, the FISAC ( the
Federation of credit), and some leaders from the majority of Epifani. The Congress, and
this decomposition / recomposition, was not positive for the next class because the
divisions deepened without the document alternative arrangements achieved the desired
results, rather suffering a stinging defeat in the Civil Service and Fisac. After the
Congress Working Society was, in fact, politically increasingly flattened on the positions
of the majority, while the companions of the alternative document had to take note of the
need to build up the area to be recognized and access conformity with union; Thus was born
the programmatic area "The CGIL we want", with coordinator Gianni Rinaldini, which
supported primarily by the FIOM was unable to occupy all the space of the next class and
gradually lost more and more bite. Even the "Network on April 28", initially made with
"The CGIL we want," shooting its way into controversy with the choices of Rinaldini and
companions.
In the following years the new secretary Susanna Camusso, happened to Epifani, it has
moved on to a policy totally inadequate to counter the attack that was brought to the
workers by the various governments; regarding internal reflections on the trade union
left, especially with the inter-confederal agreement of 28 June 2011, it has exacerbated
the already strong contradictions. Despite this situation the last Congress, in 2014, was
faced with a joint document which collected the majority "camussiana" FIOM Maurizio
Landini, the programmatic area Jobs Companies represented in the National Secretariat by
Nicola Nicolosi, and what was left of never took off programmatic area "The CGIL we want",
which together accounted for almost all of the organization (excluding the area
represented by Giorgio Cremaschi who had presented a document congressional alternative).
But "this is balanced with difficulty had been broken, in the Congress, both on the
representation agreement signed on January 10 by Susanna Camusso with CISL, UIL,
Confindustria, is evident from the will of the majority to boycott the vote in the
assemblies of the base provided for in Regulation on the amendments to the conference
document. The amendments on security, bargaining, democracy, signed and supported by
Nicolosi Landini Pantaleo Moccia and others, have been a disruptive element not only among
the signatories of the document but also a majority within the diverse "trade union left"
in this confederation. The tension in the CGIL was then already evident during the course
of the meetings of the base, but it's definitely exploded in regional conferences and
national confederations of the categories that preceded the national confederation, which
took place in Rimini. The area "Labour Society", in turn, began to split on the outcome of
amendments, on the assembly of the RSU Autoconvocate against the pension reform of
Fornero, the political assessment of the agreement of 10 January; some in Congress,
although for different reasons, were presented lists alternative sanctioning de facto
division of the area.
Finally, the National Congress of the CGIL were rated three documents, three lists for the
election of the members of the new Executive Committee: a list which he saw as the
petitioner, the Secretary Camusso, which collected and also the majority of the delegates
of "Working Company "at the congress; another with the FIOM of Landini and that collected
even a minority of delegates from Labour Company; a third of the opposition which referred
to Cremaschi. "(2)
These lists of trade union left were later formalized in the National Steering Committee
of the CGIL with the establishment of the area of "Democracy and Work" (with 17
components, including Gianni Rinaldini and Nicola Nicolosi, but Maurizio Landini...), and
that "The union is another thing - CGIL opposition" heir of the former network on April 28
(with 4 components).
Congress team Company came out literally in pieces, though four members of the National
Executive decided to continue the road taken by formalizing the area "Work Company, trade
union left majority congress" with a political position within the majority "camussiana".
Meanwhile Democracy and Labor sluggish perhaps for the persistence of old problems, we do
not know if and how can they be overcome, arising from different political and
organizational setting of the comrades who are part.
Not only. In Tuscany, where Jobs Company has always had a major settlement and
articulated, the other boys and girls that you were referring were broadly their
compactness and synthesized their political positions in the "Surf the seas" which has
since been signed also by leaders of the CGIL Toscana that were not part of the
programmatic. (3)
Finally let's not forget the presence and importance of "social coalition" proposal by
Maurizio Landini, which is obviously programmatic area of the CGIL, but he does discuss -
and - also within the confederation. Coalition social, attracting dozens of associations
and movements, look more or less affected all our program areas of the CGIL that we saw so
divided...
The outlook and the need to reunify the next class in the CGIL.
We can say, still recovering our previous article, that the coexistence of these program
areas "presents strong challenges because, although the CGIL inside a" trade union left
"that we can put around 20% (but with a higher percentage among occupied), the largest
branch network and categorical confederation only strong area can be truly representative
in this political space. If this is true the possibility of a re-composition of the next
class in the CGIL might be at present even more difficult, because of the real risk of a
competition that would only favor the neo-corporative involution of the confederation and
of a union focused mainly on service.
We anarchist and libertarian communist CGIL present in the safeguarding of organizational
strength, mobilization, fighting union is fundamental, but for this you need to take a
clear path in the autonomy and the policy of the confederation. The current one is one of
the darkest periods of recent decades, both for the economic crisis that is marking in the
deep life of many workers, both because it failed confidence in the future for the new
generations that have a perspective of minor protection and guarantees than earlier. We
believe it is necessary to be aware of the severe defeat suffered in recent years, a
defeat prepared by a long period of internalization of values of the capital ". (2)
A defeat which materialized, after the Reformation social security of Fornero, with the
serious measures taken by the Government through the Jobs Act Renzi that erases
fundamental articles of the Workers' Statute, and that it tries to carry through with the
attack on the National Contracts Labor and the same right to strike.
"In this scenario, the CGIL, nevertheless, maintains its organizational strength and -
albeit with considerable contradictions - a position in society that assigns a profile and
a role that no longer have other large organizations that refer to the history of the
movement workers; but this positioning, together with the difficulties resulting from the
crisis and the subordination of the parliamentary political framework, promotes a line
uncertain and defeatist clearly felt by workers.
We believe, then, that the gravity of the situation, there is the need and conditions for
a concrete action of the next class within the CGIL. The reconstruction of an area class
within the CGIL today appears even more urgent since the consolidation of a strong pole
moderate making center in the Democratic Party. (...) We are aware of the difficulties in
which you put the daily action of the CGIL, but we are equally aware that the strength of
our organization will still defend the workers if there is no adherence to new projects
and unfortunate "salvation and responsibility National ". Today, because we have many
years of continuous regression of the condition of the work, we need greater protection
and higher wages.
We anarchist communists, and libertarians have always been a cornerstone of class unity
essential to our action, and we struggle against fictitious divisions or dictated by
ambitions policies or personal. For this we are useful to any initiative that may
contribute to the reorganization of the components of the class within the CGIL, now even
more necessary and urgent, going beyond the camps and divisions already present in the
past but which spiraled in the last Congress.
We realize that, now, all of this is even more difficult, but we believe this is the only
way. Our contribution at this stage want to look at the contents of the choices union to
do than to drive organizational positioning, aware that the union could become a
battleground of the political, and that the components of the class to play a positive
role should Starting with intransigence by the needs of workers and try to reconstruct a
new unit and class identity in CGIL ". (2)
* Executive CGIL Lucca
Notes
1 "Defense Auditors - The anarchist component in genrale Italian Confederation of
Labour (1944-1960)". Thesis Roberto Manfredini. University of Bologna. Academic year 1986/87.
2 "When the Congress is necessary to reorganize the next class in the CGIL" Defense of
Auditors No. June 25, 2014.
3 "Surfing offshore..... no compass is dangerous" Carmine Valente. No defense Auditors.
February 29, 2015.
Also we enclose the following documents:
1 Document "Democracy and Work".
2 Paper presented at the end of the XVII Congress CGIL from "The Union is another thing."
3 Document "Labour Society, Left union congressional majority."
