Endurance Games: Reassessing the mass strike based on recent experiences in France

Joint worker and student protest against the First Employment Contract in Rennes April 4 2006

Lisbeth Latham

Dwindling rates of industrial action - particularly in advanced capitalist countries- are often cited as evidence of the labour movement’s global decline. Yet the value of industrial action, and particularly mass strikes, are often grossly oversimplified. ‘If we strike, we will win’ may galvanise workers temporarily, but it belies the complex nature of social movements, where a willingness to struggle is only part of the formula necessary for victory. The complexity of this reality can be seen in the experiences of the contemporary French labour movement. In comparison to movements in other advanced capitalist countries, the French movement is often seen as incredibly militant and powerful. Yet, since the global financial crisis in 2008, it has suffered a series of defeats and has found it increasingly difficult to mobilise to the same extent as before. This is not to say that the French movement is any less heroic than it was in the past, but that the balance of class forces and the confidence of the French popular classes has declined. This has exposed limitations in the mass strike as an industrial tactic when it is not paired with a broader perspective of victory; winning requires not only mass involvement but also a determination to maintain struggle at times in the face of defeat.

The Mass Strike
One of the most influential works on strikes is The Mass Strike, the Political Party and the Trade Unions written by Rosa Luxemburg in 1906[1]. She sought to explore the experiences of Russia's failed 1905 revolution and draw lessons for the broader European social democratic movement. Prior to the pamphlet’s publication, social democracy had been highly critical of mass strikes, seeing them as an anarchist fantasy, as Luxemburg put it

“the theory of the general strike as a means of inaugurating the social revolution, in contradistinction to the daily political struggle of the working-class – and exhausts itself in the following simple dilemma: either the proletariat as a whole are not yet in possession of the powerful organisation and financial resources required, in which case they cannot carry through the general strike; or they are already sufficiently well organised, in which case they do not need the general strike”[2]

Contrary to this view Luxemburg argued:

“the mass strike in Russia has been realised not as means of evading the political struggle of the working-class, and especially of parliamentarism, not as a means of jumping suddenly into the social revolution by means of a theatrical coup, but as a means, firstly, of creating for the proletariat the conditions of the daily political struggle and especially of parliamentarism. The revolutionary struggle in Russia, in which mass strikes are the most important weapon, is, by the working people, and above all by the proletariat, conducted for those political rights and conditions whose necessity and importance in the struggle for the emancipation of the working-class”[3].

The subsequent role of mass strike movements in creating legitimation crises for the capitalist class, blunting their offensive, and creating the impetus for revolutions has vindicated Luxemburg’s position[4]. At the same time mass strikes, like other tactics, have their limitations and even large mass strikes, as demonstrated by Russia in 1905, do not guarantee the successful achievement of a movement’s objectives.

The recent movements in France in defence of pensions and against labour market reforms are important experiences in demonstrating both the strengths and weaknesses of the mass strike as a political tactic.

Leading into the global financial crisis the French working class had achieved a series of victories against government attacks. Most notably: 

• the strike wave against attacks on the public sector attacks in 1995 
• the movement leading up to the defeat of the referendum on endorsing the Lisbon treaty in 2005; and
• the mass movement lead by students against the contrat première embauche (First Employment Contact - CPE) legislation in 2006[5]

At the same time the French organised left was in a process of breakdown and realignment. The Parti Communiste Francais (PCF) , once the hegemonic force on the French left saw its vote in presidential elections fall from 15.35% % in 1981 to 3.37% in 2002. As its old red-belt strongholds became locations of strength for the Front Nationale. deindustrialisation under successive Parti Socialiste (PS) -with the PCF as a minority partner- shattered France’s traditional heavy industrial areas[7]. The impact on the working class in these areas was devastating. Consequently, the PCF’s parliamentary representation became increasingly dependent on a non-aggression pact with the PS, who did not run candidates against sitting PCF MPs. This dependent relationship between the PCF and the PS was to become a key point of conflict in discussions regarding joint far-left candidates, with the Ligue Communiste Revolutionnaire (LCR) and subsequently the Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste setting down a priori independence from the PS as a key basis for any discussions about united left electoral tickets[8].

It was not just the PCF who was negatively impacted; the PS suffered the indignity of running third in the 2002 presidential elections behind Jacques Chirac and Front Nationale’s (National Front - FN) Jean-Marie Le Pen[9]. Whilst some blamed this embarrassment on the shock results of the Trotskyist LCR (4.25%) and Lutte Ouvrière (5.72%) candidates, it still posed the question of why people weren’t voting for the PS. It also failed to explain why workers were voting for small far-left parties instead, or even abstaining from voting at all. This put the left in the position of having to respond to a presidential run-off between the right and the far-right - an unenviable position which was repeated in 2017 with the runoff between Macron and Marine Le Pen.

2009 Post GFC Movement
Triggered by the mass defaulting of subprime mortgages in the US economy and exacerbated by the failure of the mortgage backed securities which underwrote the loans, the GFC of 2007-2008 spread like an infection through the global financial sector. Yet as governments scrambled to bailout high finance, they also sought to shift the cost onto working people.[10]

In France this response was met with mass resistance. The intersyndicale (an informal alliance of union confederations at a national level) called for mass mobilisations against the policies of Sarkozy and the Fillon government. Their demands included: Increases in the minimum wage and payments to the unemployed and pensioners; Increased social spending on public housing; Action to reduce job losses including bans on redundancies at profitable companies; Reversal of the tax cuts given to the rich at the start of the crisis; Reversal of job losses and restructuring of the public sector[11]

The intersyndicale achieved a series of mass mobilisations throughout 2009, the largest of which was the general strike of March 19 which drew over 3 million people[12]. Despite these mobilisations the coalition was unable to force any real concessions from the government and, as they progressed, the mobilisations lost impetus.

This development was not a surprise to all the union leaderships. One of France’s most militant union confederations, the openly anti-capitalist Solidaires, consistently argued for a need to go beyond individual days of mobilisation. Solidaires predicted that, however successful, individual days of mobilisation alone would not be enough to steer the government from its well-worn course of protecting capital at the expense of working people. Instead, Solidaires argued for the need to build towards a renewable general strike[13]. As evidence of the effectiveness of this approach they pointed to the successful strikes by workers in the French colonies of Martinique and Guadeloupe from January to March of that year. Although Solidaires leadership did concede under pressure from other unions that capacity for such action did not exist, they argued that the work still needed to be done. Affirming the movement’s need and capacity to mobilise on both a mass and ongoing basis would be more productive than simply acknowledging and accepting its inadequacies, they felt[14].

As 2009 continued the movement declined. By 13 June the once three million-strong movement had plummeted to a mere 150, 000 and was essentially over, having achieved very little in the way of concessions. At the same time, the state was preparing a new wave of attacks on working people, this time in the form of an assault on France’s pension system.

Joint mobilisation against the attack on France's Pension System 2010

2010 Pension Struggle
In early 2010, the Fillon government announced that it was seeking to change France’s pension system. The proposed changes included raising the retirement age and increasing workers’ contributions to the social security scheme - effectively requiring workers to work more hours over a greater duration of their lifetimes.

In the wake of this announcement, the Intersyndicale resumed meeting in earnest. Their concerns were well-founded. Though Fillon’s attack on the pension system threatened to disadvantage all workers, its impacts would be felt most acutely by women, significantly reducing the number of women expected to qualify for a full pension and exacerbating the problem of French women retiring into poverty.

From the outset, the unions were divided in their view of the objectives of the movement. The class-struggle unions (combat syndicales), whose membership includes Solidaires (Solidarity), Force Ouvrière (Workers Force - FO), and large sections of both the Federation Syndicale Unitaire (FSU) and Confédération Générale du Travail (CGT) wanted the proposals to be totally withdrawn. The more conservative unions, most notably the Confédération française démocratique du travail (French Confederation of Democratic Workers - CFDT) and Confédération Française des Travailleurs Chrétiens (French Confederation of Christian Workers - CFTC) were more conciliatory, seeking greater consultation with the government regarding the changes. Yet despite these differences, there was eventually a basis for a common united movement involving France’s eight main union confederations and federations - although the early movement involved just five[15].

Initially, the 2010 movement was far smaller than the previous years with the March protests reaching only 800, 000 nationally. These disappointing numbers inevitably gave rise to commentary that the defeat of 2009 had undermined the mobilising capacity of the movement. However, as the year progressed the movement began to grow and the pace of mobilisations increased. By 24 June mobilisations had reached 1.92 million. Numbers continued to grow as the legislation worked its way through France’s legislative processes in September and October. Ultimately, there were seven mobilisations, all exceeding two million people and peaking at 3.5 million. However, the total number of people involved in the movement is likely to have been far greater[16].

Solidaires Adverstisment calling for a genderal strike on September 9, 2010

Significantly, in a number of industries the days of mobilisation were linked by strike action. Initially these renewable strikes began in France’s oil refineries - triggered by a struggle around Total’s plans to close its Dunkirk refinery[17]. Yet the movement also spread to other sectors. This spread was facilitated, in part, by a decision within the intersyndicale to allow industrial action in workplaces, and at the municipal level, to be initiated by general assemblies of workers at those levels. This meant that, in those sectors and regions where the more militant unions had greater influence, they were able to link protracted strikes to the mobilisations, which were then called and supported by all unions between the punctuating mass mobilisations. Under France’s Labour Code and constitution, if one union in a workplace issues a strike notice then any worker can participate regardless of their union affiliation. While there were a number of spaces where renewable strikes were in effect, the most important of these was in the oil refineries whose closure massively disrupted fuel supplies across France[18].

Despite the size and escalating character of the movement the government pushed ahead with passing the legislation. In the wake of the passing of the legislation in November, there was one more joint mass mobilisation on November 23. The interior ministry estimated the protests size at 52, 000 and the unions did not announce a size estimate. This small mobilisation indicated that the movement had effectively collapsed. The more conservative unions withdrew from the campaign on the promise that the legislation, whose impact was not immediate but delayed, could be defeated via the election of a PS government in 2012.Those workers who remained on strike - most notably the oil refinery workers - became increasingly isolated as the movement collapsed. In Marseille, a city controlled by the PS, municipal workers were forced back to work using legislation introduced by the de Vilipin government the year before[19]. This legislation, which guaranteed minimum essential services during strikes, was anti-worker by design and undermined a number localised strikes that were holding out against the collapse of the broader movement

 

Mobilisation in Marseille March 18, 2006

Movement against the First Employment Contract
In 2006, the de Villipin government had sought to introduce the CPE, a change in France’s employment laws which would have weakened the rights of workers under the age of 26, including allowing employers to dismiss young workers aged between 18-26 without notice or reason during their first two years of employment[20]. By targeting just younger workers, the de Villepin government hoped that by focusing on one section of the workforce they could divide and limit any potential opposition movement.

Initially this was the case, as there was limited united resistance by the union confederations[21]. However, despite the lack of leadership from workers’ unions, high school and university students, primarily organised via the Union Nationale des Étudiants de France (National Union of Students of France), Fédération indépendante et démocratique lycéenne (Independent and Democratic High School Federation), and the Union Nationale Lycéenne (National Union of Secondary Students) began their own mass mobilisations - shutting down schools and universities and driving mass mobilisations of students. These student mobilisations gave impetus for militants within the union confederations to push to support the student protests[22]. Between the rising peaks of mass mobilisations, student pursued a broader goal of disrupting the economy via their own collective actions and concentrated on building alliances with workers to support and exacerbate the disruption. By March 2006, 68 of France’s 89 universities were either occupied or on strike with many high schools across France barricaded shut by striking students[24]. More spectacular were the student occupations of rail lines or the successful blocking of Airbus airliners being transported from manufacturing plants[25].

As inspiring as the movement was, it was not significantly bigger or more disruptive than the 2010 movement. What really differentiated the 2006 movement against the CPE from the 2010 movement to defend pensions was that when the CPE was passed, the movement continued. In passing the legislation in 2006, the de Villepin government gambled that passing of the legislation would dissipate the movement and remove the threat to French state and capital[26]. When the movement continued despite the legislation passing the threat effectively expanded with no hope that it would decline in the short-term. In response to the movement’s determination, the government retreated and the legislation, despite passing, became a dead letter[27].

The lesson to be drawn from comparing the events of 2006 and 2010 is not that mass movements are no longer capable of winning, or that strikes are no longer crucial to achieving victory in industrial and political struggles. It is instead that these struggles are ultimately battles of will and endurance. What changed between 2006 and 2010 was not the capacity of the movement to mobilise- indeed the 2010 movement was arguably larger in size than the 2006 mobilisations. No, what differed between them was the determination of the ruling class to persist with their attacks on working people and, even more crucially, the ability in 2006 of the more radical sections of the movement, most notably the student unions, to cohere and mobilise after the passing of the legislation. It is not sufficient for our movements to be massive or powerful. In order to be victorious,the will and determination of workers must be strong enough to outlast that of capital and its governments. Escalating and disruptive action is thus most effective when deployed as a means of undermining capital’s confidence and endurance. The continuation of the mass movement of 2006 and consequent disruption of the economy cast the gamble made by the right to push forward with legislation as a grievous error, creating the fear that the movement would not stop. By contrast in 2010, the government’s bet proved correct, the movement did collapse and the state and capital could both be confident not only to maintain that round of attacks but contemplate and implant further attacks on working people.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1 Luxemburg, R. 1906. The mass strike, the political party, and the trade unions. Marxist Internet 
Archive. https://www.marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1906/mass-strike/.
2 ibid.
3 ibid.
4 Haug, F., Wilde, F., and Heidenreich, F. 2018. “Mass strike.” Rosa-Luxemburg-Stiftung. https://www.rosalux.de/publikation/id/43671/mass-strike?cHash=4dc514bc263b77a899f91e9878b10683.
5 Cézard, Yann. 2020. “1995-2003-2010: lessons from three large-scale mobilizations.” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article6347.
   Carasso, L. 2005. “E After the success of the "no from the left."” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article845.
   Carasso, L. 2006. “A major social and solitical crisis.” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1070.
6 Amable, B. and Palombarini, S. 2021. The last neoliberal: Macron and the origins of France's political crisis. London: Verso.
7 Jacobin. 2016. “When the workers were communists.” Jacobin. https://www.jacobinmag.com/2016/10/when-the-workers-were-communists/.
8 Perez, Benito. 2007. “The presidential campaign is rotting French political life.” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1214.
   Ligue Communiste Revolutionaire. 2007. “For the foundation of a new anti-capitalist party.” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1290.
   Ligue Communiste Revolutionaire. 2008. “Address for a new anticapitalist party.” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1422.
9 Henley, J. 2002. “French poll result seen as catastrophe.” DAWN. https://www.dawn.com/news/29700/french-poll-result-seen-as-catastrophe.
10 Mirowski, P. 2014. Never let a serious crisis go to waste: How neoliberalism survived the financial meltdown. London: Verso.
11 Latham, L. 2009a. “French unions ready for a general strike on March 19.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2009/03/french-unions-ready-for-general-strike.html.
12 Latham, L. 2009b. “French unions plan campaign against financial crisis Following 3 Million strong general strike.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2009/03/french-union-plan-campaign-following-3.html.
13 National Burea of the Trade Union Solidaires. 2009. “Together let us make the assessment - To be stronger tomorrow.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2009/09/solidaires-assessment-of-french.html.
14 ibid.
15 Latham, L. 2010a. “Thousands of French workers march to defend pensions.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2010/03/thousands-of-french-workers-march-to.html.
16 ibid
Latham, L. 2010b. “French workers mobilise to defend pensions.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2010/06/french-workers-mobilise-to-defend.html.
Latham, L. 2010c. “Millions of workers march to defend pensions in France.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2010/09/millions-of-workers-march-to-defend.html.
Latham, L. 2010d. “French workers fight back against pension attack.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2010/10/french-workers-fight-back-against.html.
Trade Union Solidaires. 2010. “Solidaires - Pensions: Win by our determination!” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2010/10/solidaires-pensions-win-by-our.html.
17 Latham, L. 2010e. “French Senate votes to raise retirement age as unions prepare for a day of strikes.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2010/10/french-senate-votes-to-raise-retirement.html.
18 Andrews, W. and Vandoorne, S. 2010. “Fuel imports into France surge as protests imperil transportation.” CNN. http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/europe/10/18/france.strikes.shortage/index.html.
19 Latham, L. 2010f. “France: Sarkozy enacts pensions law as mass mobilisations continue.” Revitalising Labour. https://revitalisinglabour.blogspot.com/2010/11/france-sarkozy-enacts-pensions-law-as.html.
    Smith, M. 2010. “France: Not victorious, but not defeated.” Links: International Journal of Socialist Renewal. http://links.org.au/node/2034.
20 Steven. 2006. “The French movement against the CPE, 2006.” libcom. https://libcom.org/blog/short-history-cpe-protests-france.
21 Cézard op cit.
22 Cézard op cit.
     Steven op cit
     Périn, M. 2006. “Inside the occupation movement: ‘Together we are recreating our university.’” Socialist Worker, March 18, 2006. https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/8300/Inside+the+occupation+movement%3A+Together+we+are+recreating+our+university.
23 Smith, M. 2006a. “Student movement puts government on the defensive.” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article996.
Wolfreys, J. 2006. “Daniel Bensaïd: ‘This movement is directly based on a social question.’” Socialist Worker. https://socialistworker.co.uk/art/8364/Daniel+Bensa%C3%AFd%3A+This+movement+is+directly+based+on+a+social+question.
24 Duthu, M. 2006. “French workers and youth unite against the First Employment Contract: No to all precarious contracts.” In Defence of Marxism. https://www.marxist.com/french-workers-youth-unite160306.htm.
Smith, M. 2006b. “Anti-labour law movement enters key stage.” International Viewpoint. https://internationalviewpoint.org/spip.php?article1000.
25 Chrisafis, A. 2006. “Chirac backs down and scraps youth job law.” The Guardian, April 11, 2006. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2006/apr/11/france.angeliquechrisafis.
26 ibid.
     Cézard op cit.
     Steven op cit.
27 Cézard op cit.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This article is posted under copyleft, verbatim copying and distribution of the entire article is permitted in any medium without royalty provided this notice is preserved. If you reprint this article please email me at revitalisinglabour@gmail.com to let me know.

Read more...

France: Mass protests begin against Macron’s attacks

Lisbeth Latham

France’s militant unions held the first major day of protest on September 12 against the ordinances introduced by the government to undermine the country’s labour laws.

Their protests were seen as the start of the campaign to defend workers’ rights. It served as a major test for the capacity of the movement to mobilise working people while France’s unions are divided as to how to respond to the attacks.

The protests included more than 4000 strikes and protests in 200 cities and towns across France. The General Confederation of Workers (CGT) estimated that 500,000 people took part. The largest protests were in Paris and Marseille, where 60,000 marched.

Amid debate over the size and success of the protests, the CGT said in a statement the day was a “veritable success”.

There were a number of factors that made it harder to mobilise workers on September 12 compared with the demonstrations against anti-worker laws last year. The text of the proposed law was published only two weeks before the protest and the divisions in the labour movement are worse than last year.

More conservative federations refused to take part, with only the CGT, United Union Federation (FSU) and the trade union Solidaires supporting the mobilisations.

The September 12 protests were also supported by France’s main university and high school student unions.

However the Workers’ Force (FO) confederation, which supported last year’s protests, refused to call on its members to mobilise. Instead, it has sought to take part in consultations with the government along with the more right-wing Democratic Confederation of French Workers (CFDT) and the French Confederation of Christian Workers (CFTC). The CFDT and CFTC have previously been open to supporting some “liberalisation” of French labour laws.

All three groups have raised concerns about sections of the text. CFDT deputy secretary general Veronique Descacq justified the union’s refusal to mobilise by arguing that changes in the proposed text could be best made through “outreach work with the employees and conveying the unions’ negative opinions in the consultation bodies”.

There are signs, however, that the movement will be able to broaden out beyond France’s militant unions. Sections of the FO and CFDT did call on their members to join the protests.

For instance, secretary-general of the CFDT Metallurgy in Rhone Khaled Boughanmi told Liberation of his support for the protests: “I was elected to reject social decline.”

An important component in the campaign to broaden the movement has been the Social Front, which brings together a range of unions and social movements. It was established in April and initiated the first mobilisations against Emmanuel Macron after his victory in the presidential election.

The Social Front has been central in building smaller mobilisations against Macron and in linking militant forces within the different union confederations.

The Social Front has sought to tap into the widespread antipathy to mainstream politics reflected in the record low participation in the presidential and parliamentary elections, and the ongoing slide in Macron's popularity.

Macron has seen his polularity fall in his first 100 days in office, something which previously occurred only with president Jaques Chirac. City AM reported on August 27 that Macron’s approval rating had fallen to 40% while his disapproval rating had risen to 57%.

Despite this, Macron is persevering with his planned assault on workers’ rights, which he demagogically claims will lower unemployment.

The key changes are:

• Cutting the number of workplace representatives in small- and medium-sized enterprises by amalgamating existing representative bodies; 
• Cutting and capping the amount of compensation that workers who have been unfairly dismissed can receive; 
• Increasing the range of conditions that can be negotiated at the enterprise level, rather than in national or industry-wide agreements. Such conditions can undercut the higher level conditions. Due to changes in the laws last year, a vote on these matters can be initiated with the support of unions representing just 30% of the workforce, even if unions representing more than 50% of workers oppose the agreement (previously these unions would have been able to veto a vote); 
• Increase the use of fixed-term contracts in preference to permanent employment; 
• Enable companies to initiate changes to workers’ contracts (even if the company is profitable) and dismiss workers who reject a change (previously such changes required workers’ agreement); 
• When assessing whether redundancies should go ahead in multinational companies with sites located in France, only the performance of the parts of the company in France will be considered.

There is widespread anger against these attacks, with polls showing most people support the movement against the changes. But successive governments have been able to push through a series of attacks on working people and their unions by staring down protests and relying on the movement collapsing once laws are passed.

This time, Macron is also relying on using France’s undemocratic constitution to use his executive power to put temporary ordinances in place, seeking to pass the legislation through parliament later. The text of the labour ordinances was published on August 31.

The Council of State is expected to approve the labour ordinances on September 22 and the ordinances will take effect from that time. It is unclear when bills converting the ordinances to laws will be introduced to parliament.

To defeat this push, the movement will have to build an escalating campaign — creating the fear in the government’s mind that they might lose control. The next step will be the strikes and protests called by the CGT for September 21 and protests called by Jean-Luc Melenchon’s left-wing group France Unbowed (FI) at the Bastille on September 23.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This article was originally published in Green Left Weekly #1153

Read more...

France: Sarkozy Enacts Pensions Law as Mass Mobilisations Continue

Lisbeth Latham

President Nicolas Sarkozy, on November 10, enacted new legislation which increases the retirement age of French workers just days after more than a million workers and students mobilised across France against the law. The protests held on November 6, were the eighth, and smallest, national strike since September 7 against increases to the retirement age. The protest highlighted both the continuing depth of popular anger over the changes which were pushed through parliament on October 27. However the decline in the size of the mobilisations reflect growing divisions in the movement over how the movement should have responded to the counter reforms and the direction for the campaign now the legislation has been passed.


Sarkozy enacted the law just hours after it had been approved by the Constitutional Council. There had been hope by sections of the union leaderships and the plural left that the council would reject the legislation.

According to the inter-union coordinating committee the day attracted some 1.2 million people to protests in 243 cities and towns. This was down 40% on the size of the last day of action on October 28 and a decline of 65% on the largest protests of 3.5 million of October 12 and 19. While numbers were down across France the largest declines occurred in cities such as Paris (90, 000 compared with 170, 000 on October 28).

The government and its supporters have sort to convince people that the decline in size, the interior ministry estimated that 375, 000 participated compared to 560, 000 on October 12 a peak of 1.2 million, reflects that the movement in defence of pensions is effectively over. Sarkozy and government ministers have

For a number of reasons this appears to be wishful thinking on the part of the government. President Nicolas Sarkozy’s support in the polls has fallen below 30%, the lowest level ever for a president. Popular sentiment against the reform remains high with 70% of people opposed to the counter reform and 74% of young people. It is unclear whether government will be in a position to push through any further major attacks prior to the next elections in 2012, however it is likely that they will attempt smaller attacks against marginalised sections of the population, aimed at paving the way for broader attacks and to win support of more reactionary sections of society.

While there has undoubtedly been a sharp decline in the size of the movement, as Sandra Demarcq, of the Nouveau parti anticapitaliste (New Anticapitalist Party) argued in Tous est à nous! on November 3 the struggle has brought a large new layer of militants into the struggle – who she argues will not be easily discouraged by the ballot. This is reflected in the fact that the size of the November 6 mobilisation is larger than the three mobilisations that occurred against the reform in March and May.

Moreover there are additional explanations for the decline in the movement beyond public acceptance of the laws. A central factor was the decision by the inter-union to slow the pace of mobilisations and withdraw support from the indefinite strikes that had affected a wide range of industries prior to the Senate passing the legislation on October 22. These decisions clearly helped to sap confidence from the movement. Then in the lead-up to the November 6 strike, the inter-union when it met on November 4, failed to make a clear call for a new mobilisation to come out of November 6, instead stating that there would be more action in the week beginning November 22. While the lack of clear direction has undermined the movement in defence of pensions, it hasn’t undermined the combativeness of French workers, with localised struggles continuing around wages and conditions such as the four day strike, which began November 5, called by pilots and other airline staff over plans to tax allowances and benefits.

The indecisiveness of the inter-union has lead to growing public disagreements as to the direction of the campaign. Liberation on November 6, reported the views of a range of union leaders. François Chérèque, Secretary Geneeral of the Confédération Française Démocratique du Travail (French Democratic Confederation of Labour -CFDT), argued that it was a “dream” to believe that Sarkozy could be forced to back down, and that the movement would slowly away from a focus on pensions and onto other demands. The leadership of Union nationale des syndicats autonomes (National Union of Autonomous Unions) warned other unions against “forms of action that do not correspond to the situation” and might cause a collapse of investment. Jean-Claude Mailly, Force Ouvrière (Workers Force - FO) General Secretary, said that the decline in the movement was a sign that the conduct of the movement was a mess. Bernard Thibault, Confédération Générale du Travail (Genderal Confederation of Labour - CGT) General Secretary, told the November 6 l’Humanite, “that if it proved impossible to continue the battle over pensions with a unified effort of all unions, the CGT would continue the fight with those who want continue”, including being willing to continue alone. The primary focus for Thibault was positioning the movement to conduct negotiations over the implementation of pension changes when they come into effect on July 1 2011.

The inter-union met on November 8 and called a new day of multi-facetted actions for November 23. This call was not signed by either Confédération française des travailleurs chrétiens (French Confederation of Christian Workers - CFTC) or Confédération française de l'encadrement - Confédération générale des cadres (French Confederation of Management – General Confederation of Executives). FO released a statement on November 8, in which it criticised other unions of not supporting argument at the November 4 meeting, for a 24-hour strike in the public and private sectors aimed at expanding the movement and that it could not engage in a strategy of forgetfulness, distraction and exhaustion and so could not participate in the inter-union meeting, but that it reaffirmed its availability and commitment to build the balances of forces through a process of resistance and reconquest. The CFTC issued a statement on November 9 that with the law being close to being enacted the time for demonstrations is over. Instead the CFTC will look to engage with government over its concerns with the legislation specifically in 2013, which has been specified in the law as a new period for reviewing pensions.

In contrast to these positions the militant union Solidaires in a statement issued on November 10, in which it outlined its view of the dynamic of the movement. Solidaires argued that early days of action in March, May and June were too far apart, yet despite this they had a growing resonance. However it was only in the indefinite strikes, which Solidaires had argued for from the outset, which had the opportunity to knock the employers by blocking the economy. The workers in refineries, rail, road transport, officials from the state and the hospital, local authorities, waste, energy, and many other sectors initiated indefinite strikes, and held several weeks hoping for a generalisation of the movement. However only Solidaires and the Fédération syndicale unitaire (United Union Federation) supported extending these strikes to other sectors and it was necessary for the strikes to be suspended. The Solidaires statement expressed its support for continuing collective action at the local level and for workers to “seize November 23 as a day to make their voices heard again”.

With the moderate unions shifting the terrain of struggle to modifying the impact of the law and hoping that the laws will be repealed if there is a change of government following the 2012 elections, the far-left parties have attempted to warn the movement from a reliance on elections rather than the mobilisation of members. Demarcq argued on November 3, that the movement can rebound in other forms, other struggles”, but warned “Many of us know that the solution to our problems is not the perspective of a plural left government in 2012, headed by the Parti socialiste that votes in the National Assembly lengthening the contribution period or the requisitioning of the municipal employees strike in Marseille, with the "left" who, when they have a majority, implement de facto right-wing policies, such as in Greece or Spain. It is in our struggles to make those have caused the crisis to pay for it, that we can forge the power capable of challenging capitalism”.

While the debate that has emerged robs the movement of the appearance unity, it reveals the real disagreements that made it impossible for the movement to build the momentum \to a sufficient level to allow victory. The hope must be that through an ongoing open discussion real unity in action can be achieved.

Read more...

Joint Communique of the inter-union coordinating committee November 4, 2010

CFDT - CFE-CGC - CFTC - CGT - FSU - Solidaires - UNSA
Original French text is available here

Trade unions welcomed the successful mobilization of private and public sector employees, and young people last October 28 while we were in the middle of school holidays and after the final vote of the Pensions Act in parliament.


The determination of employees is not fading for months, supported by public opinion, demonstrates that there are many social concerns, a rejection of this pension reform and a deep dissatisfaction with a government that has chosen to force the passage.

The Trade Union Organisations reaffirm their determination in face a government reform which continues to be unfair, ineffective, unacceptable and does not respond to actual issues. They confirmed their call for a massive mobilization Saturday, November 6, 2010 over France. Le gouvernement porte seul la responsabilité de la situation actuelle. The government bears sole responsibility for the current situation. It must hear that a real debate on the future of pensions is essential.

The Labour organizations, with the workers, are attached to the work that has been conducted by the Inter-Union through united actions over the past two years. They decide to continue joint work on employment, wages, purchasing power and working conditions by updating their joint statement of January 29, 2009.

Echoing the concerns of employees, the Union Organizations are already calling a new meeting domestic mobilization during the week of November 22 to 26, the terms and content will be determined at the meeting of 8 November.

Read more...

France: Big protests as movement debates way forward

Lisbeth Latham

French workers and students have mobilised in large numbers again to oppose changes in pension laws that will raise the age at which workers are able to retire.

The seventh national strike in as many weeks took place on October 28, as indefinite strikes in many industries against the changes entered their third week.

The protests took place despite the government’s pension bill passing through France’s parliament on October 27.

However, there are clear signs the movement against the changes has begun to weaken. The passing of the pension law, and signs the struggle against it is slowing, have heightened debate over the direction of the campaign.

More than 2 million people took part in 270 protests in cities and towns across France on October 28.


The turnout, while large, was down on preceding national strike days, during which between 2.7 million and 3.5 million people took to the streets.

Bernard Thibault, general secretary of the Genderal Congress of Labour (CGT), told l’Humanite on October 28 that the mobilisations that day were “inferior” to the previous ones, but still “large” and “impressive” given the passage of the law.

He added: “What is impressive is that was probably the first time that after the passage of a law, we have events equally large … with popular support.”

The size of the protests was undoubtedly affected by the parliamentary vote, but the decline was also a consequence of the decision of the inter-union coordinating committee at its October 21 meeting to slow the pace of protests and strikes.

The meeting also reduced support for the indefinite strikes occurring across France.

The statement was not signed by one of the participating national unions, the radical Solidaires union, which argued for an intensification of the strike movement.

The United Union Federation (FSU) supported Solidaires’ call for an indefinite general strike, but put its name to the statement.

The October 21 committee statement set two new national days of protests for October 28 and November 6. This meant there were nine days between national strikes.

In that time, the bill was passed by the Senate on October 22 and went through the final stages of adoption of a common text between the National Assembly and the Senate over October 25, 26 and 27.

Between October 12 and October 19, three national strikes had involved between 3 million and 3.5 million people. Given that the October 28 national strike was supposed to provide a final show of defiance before the bill becomes law, it was a significant loss of momentum.

This is especially the case considering opinion polls continued to show huge opposition to the changes of 65-70%.

The October 21 statement also failed to endorse the daily local actions by workers. This contrasted sharply with the previous repeated calls by inter-union committee statements for unions to hold discussions at the regional and workplace level to determine appropriate forms of action.

After the statement, there was a decline in the indefinite strikes. Participation in the strike by state rail workers, which management had said involved 40-50% of workers when the strike began on October 25, fell to 4% by October 29.

Most significantly, workers at two oil refineries voted to lift their strikes on October 25. The shutdown of France’s refineries had caused a severe fuel shortage.

By October 26, workers at four refineries had voted to lift their indefinite strike.

Despite this dynamic of retreat, other developments showed the movement still has considerable strength. At the six large Total refineries, workers voted to continue their strikes.

At those refineries where workers had voted to return to work, it was difficult for production to restart with strikes continuing at the ports in Le Havre and Fos-Lavera.

This meant the refineries were only able to refine previously stored crude product and allow the transport of oil refined before the start of the strike.

The determination of a significant section of workers to continue striking with no pay, especially in the oil industry where the action resulted in more than a third of petrol stations across France running out of supplies, reflects a willingness to continue the struggle.

However, without the leadership and support of most national union federations, those continuing the struggle risk isolation. This is especially the case as the government has begun issuing “requisitions orders” forcing workers to return to work or face prosecution.

By October 29, other refinery workers and port workers had voted to return to work. MidiLibre.com reported that CGT representatives in the refineries expressed regret their strikes had not been supported by workers in other sectors.

However, since the inter-union committee’s statement, university students have increased the size and extent of their mobilisations against the pension bill.

On October 25, Young New Anti-capitalist Party (JNPA) reported that 37 universities were on strike and a further 10 universities had been closed by their administrations.

A coordinating committee representing 40 universities has called a national strike for November 4.

The differences expressed at the October 21 meeting of the inter-union committee were not new. But the meeting reflected a clearer expression of the differences that had existed since the start of the campaign.

The more conservative union federations had previously expressed support for an increase in the age for receiving the pension. This wing includes the French Democratic Confederation of Labour (CFDT), National Union of Autonomous Unions (UNSA), the French Confederation of Christian Workers (CFTC) and the French Confederation of Management-General Confederation of Executives (CFE-CGC).

The CFDT leadership had publicly supported the pension changes attempted by the Jean-Paul Raffarin government in 2003.

These unions were drawn into the campaign and the inter-union committee largely due to the refusal of the government to negotiate seriously with unions.

The focus of the leadership of these unions, along with the leadership of the more militant CGT, has been on forcing the government to reenter talks with unions.

However, among CGT ranks and some regional leaderships, there has been a lot of support for an indefinite general strike aimed at the total defeat of the pension bill.

Popular support for the strikes has been high. In the aftermath of the 3.5 million-strong national strike on October 19, Sandra Demarcq wrote in International Viewpoint that 61% of those polled supported prolonged strikes.

This dynamic has allowed alliances to be formed between militants across unions for indefinite strikes in the face of opposition from the more conservative national leaderships.

Despite popular support for further strikes, CFDT secretary general Francois Cheroquem was reported by Bloomberg on October 29 as saying the CFDT would not support further strikes once the legislation becomes law.

The bill has now been referred to the Constitutional Council to determine whether it complies with France’s constitution. Given the pressure from right-wing parties, it is unlikely to be blocked by the council without an escalating mass movement.

At best, the council discussions will delay President Nicolas Sarkozy from enacting the law.

With the changes likely to become law, there will be an increased pressure within the social movements to support the opposition Socialist Party (PS), which has promised to repeal the law if it wins the 2012 elections.

The militant Solidaires federation and the far-left parties continue to focus on pushing for further mobilisations to defeat the changes.

In an October 28 statement, Solidaires noted the movement still had strong public support. It said the bill’s passing made no difference “as democracy cannot be reduced to the parliamentary vote”.

Solidaires called for “a continuation of the engagement process, through national and local actions determined on a daily basis within individual units: support for strikes, blockades, rallies, initiatives of solidarity … It is responsibility of organisations to give this process a new impetus.”

The passage of the pension bill has significance beyond the negative impact it will have in lengthening the working life of French workers.

Solidaires pointed out in its daily strike bulletin on October 11: “Defeat on this issue will open the door for further challenges.”

The huge French strike movement has given hope in the ability of the working class to hold back the wave of austerity programs being implemented by capitalist governments across Europe.

In the latest of these attempts to make working people pay for capitalism’s economic crisis, the British government announced severe cuts to public spending on October 19.

This austerity drive has been bitterly opposed, with and big protests in Greece, but such resistance has so far failed to stop any of the anti-worker measures.

The militancy of the French strike movement, and the depth of public support for it, has held the possibility of galvanising resistance across Europe.

This hope was reflected in the actions of Belgian workers on October 26. They organised blockades to stop oil being transported from Belgium to France to ease the shortage caused by the French oil workers’ strike.

The Sarkozy government recognises the importance of this struggle and is determined not to back down in its plans to raise the retirement age.

How the movement will play out remains unclear. The growth of the student movement could give the broader movement renewed energy.

However, its strength remains untested until high school students return from school holidays on November 4 — coinciding with the national student strike.

A strong turnout for the student strike will strengthen the hand of the militant unions when the inter-union committee meets again that day. Its decisions will have a big impact on the size of the national strike that has been called for November 6.

Whatever the outcome, the revolt of French workers has already reverberated across Europe. Even if defeated, it could prove a sign of deeper resistance still to come.

[This article was originally published in Green Left Weekly #859]

Read more...

French workers fight back against pension attack

Lisbeth Latham

Since October 12, France has been gripped by intensifying mass opposition by workers and students to proposed counter reforms to the country’s pensions system by the right-wing government of President Nicolas Sarkozy.

Public opposition to the attack has been highlighted by three national strikes each involving millions of people, two national student strikes and a growing wave of indefinite strikes in a range of industries — most notably the crippling shutdown of the oil industry.

Despite the size and intensity of the mobilisations, the Sarkozy government remains defiant, insisting the changes to the pension system are essential to France’s future. The government has threatened to repress attempts to disrupt France’s economic life.

The three national strikes occurred in the lead-up to the October 20 Senate debate on the pension scheme proposals. Unions estimated the October 12, 16 and 19 national strikes were attended by 3.5 million, 3 million and 3.5 million people respectively.

After the slightly smaller mobilisation on October 16, labour minister Eric Woerth told France 24: “The turnout is clearly down … I think the French people have understood that pension reform is essential.”

However, this proved wishful thinking.

In the space of 29 days, there were five national strikes, each mobilising between 2.7 and 3 million people. The General Confederation of Labour (CGT) estimated that more than 5 million people (8% of France’s metropolitan population) have taken part in the movement on the streets.

Since October 12, indefinite strikes have broken out in the state rail system, among local authority workers, in several education academies, industrial factories (such as in metallurgy and chemicals), the finance ministry, postal services, urban transport networks and hospitals.

An indefinite strike has hit France’s ports since September 27.

High school students have begun large protests that have closed down hundreds of schools across France.

Polls have indicated up to 70% of people support the strikes.

After October 16, the movement rapidly strengthened in response to union calls for its intensification.

The General Federation of Transport and Equipment-French Democratic Confederation of Labour (FGTE-CFDT), which is the strongest union in France’s road transport industry, called an indefinite strike starting on October 17. Lyceen Student Unions called a national mobilisation for October 18.

On October 17, Ardennes departmental unions from the CGT, CFDT, Workers Force (FO), National Union of Autonomous Unions (UNSA), United Union Federation (FSU) and Solidaires called for an indefinite strike in the private and public sectors to start the next day.

On October 19, the question was posed: was the slight decline in numbers on October 16 just a pause as the movement gathered its strength?

Or was it, as the government and its national and international supporters hoped, a sign of the movement’s demoralisation and reconciliation with the “inevitability of counter reforms”?

Government hopes were disappointed when 3.5 million people joined more than 277 protests organised in cities and towns. Not only did the numbers match the size of the October 12 protests, but in many cities, including Bourgoin, Marseilles and Rennes, the turnouts reached new highs.

The movement among high school and university students also peaked. The National Union of Students of France (UNEF) said 10 universities had been totally or partially blockaded and a further three administratively closed.

The Federation of Independent and Democratic High School Students (FIDL), France’s second largest high school union, said 1200 of France’s 4300 lycees (the second level of secondary education in France for students aged 15-18) were involved and 850 were blockaded.

In the face of the growing movement, the government has become increasingly shrill in its denunciations. In response to student protests, government ministers accused unions and left-wing parties of manipulating young people.

Responding to clashes between police and high school students, Sarkozy said: “Troublemakers will not have the last word in a democracy. It is not acceptable.

“They will be stopped, tracked down and punished, in Lyon and anywhere else, with no weakness.

“Because in our democracy, there are many ways to express yourself. But violence is the most cowardly, the most gratuitous and that is not acceptable.”

Woerth told France2 television on October 22 that, once the law is passed, “The law is the law, so the protests, the discontent, the concern ... should end the moment the law is voted up”.

The government has moved beyond harsh words to attempts to repress the movement. High levels of violence have been used by police, especially against high school protests. Tear gas and flash ball rounds (a form of rubber bullet) have been fired at students.

On October 20, police used tear gas against a student blockade of the bus depot in Rennes. The students had assembled at 4am to establish a blockade and ensure no buses could move.

About four hours later, riot police began firing tear gas at students. The CGT said students retreated into the depot, where they were treated by the depot’s nurse.

The bus drivers then escorted the students out to avoid their arrest. Drivers, many of whom were also affected by gas, held a meeting and voted to strike for 24 hours.

By October 20, the British Guardian reported that about 1400 people aged between 14 and 20 had been arrested across France and the repression was intensifying. On October 21, riot police hemmed in more than 1000 protesters at Place Bellecour in Lyon, repeatedly firing tear gas into a crowd that was unable to escape.

Strikes have gripped France’s oil industry since September 27, when workers in the oil port of Fos Lavera near Marseilles began indefinite strike action.

Since October 12, oil refining has been almost completely disrupted. Indefinite strikes in all 12 refineries have forced France to rely on strategic reserves of fuel. Blockades by workers and students of fuel depots have added to pressure on reserves.

More than a third of France’s service stations reported they were either low on petrol, or had run out since October 11. On October 20, Sarkozy ordered police to begin breaking blockades on fuel depots and refineries.

Refinery workers were “requisitioned” to return to work and those who fail to do so face prosecution.

On October 22, police successfully reopened some depots, as well as the Granduits refinery that supplies Paris. However, picket lines have been organised as small-scale “flying pickets” able to be redeployed quickly at the same or different locations.

It is also unclear how many oil workers will respond to the requisition orders.

International media coverage has tried to downplay this mass movement’s significance by attributing it to a French propensity to strike. The significance of the attack on pensions has been downplayed by insistence on the “economic necessity” of reducing access to pensions for the future of the French economy.

However, the reforms are extremely significant and the movement against them even more so — for workers in France and internationally.

Under the current system, French workers are entitled to retire from work at 60. However, they are not entitled to the full pension until 65. To qualify for the full pension, workers must first have worked for 40 years.

Under the proposed changes, the retirement age will be raised to 62 and the age at which the full pension can be accessed to 67. The period of work needed to qualify for the full pension will be raised to 41.5 years.

These increases have been justified on concerns that the pensions system, which operates on a pay as you go basis (i.e. the contribution of active workers pays for pension payments to retirees), will become increasingly underfunded as France’s population continues to age.

The ratio of active workers to retirees is expected to fall from 2:1 to 1.25:1 by 2040. As a result, the government predicts the level of underfunding will reach 100 billion euros by 2050.

The movement is opposing the changes on the basis of the impact they will have on workers’ lives. The movement also rejects the government’s economic justifications.

The government argues people need to work longer because they are living longer. However, this ignores the fact that the current minimum age of retirement is already higher than the average age at which French people can expect to live to in good health, which is 59.87 years.

On average, 60% of the years that French people live over 60 are affected by reduced physical or sensory functions.

Raising the minimum retirement age increases the number of those working despite poor health. This will be worsened by the increase in the qualifying period for the full pension, as those unable to work due to illness may risk not qualifying for a full pension.

This will also increase the proportion of workers whose retirement will be marred by poor health.

The changes are seen as particularly unfair to those who enter the work force early and thus already reach the qualifying period for a full pension before the minimum retirement age.

The government has exempted people who start full employment at 17 from the changes, allowing them to still retire at 60. However, those who start work at 18 will have to wait until they are 62 — an extra 2.5 years above the qualifying period.

Extending the period of qualification for a full pension is expected to adversely affect those with interrupted working lives, which will particularly affect women.

The government’s arguments regarding the financial need for the changes are also problematic. They assume the level of productivity in France will remain static, but it is estimated that labour productivity will double by 2040.

The problem is not that there won’t be enough productivity to support the ageing population, it is that capitalists want an ever-increasing share of what is produced.

The European Commission on Economic and Financial Affairs said the wages share of GDP in France has declined from 73.3% in 1985 to 65.4% in 2010. This decline has stripped billions of euros from both workers’ pockets and the pensions system.

Unions have also asked why workers should be made to pay for maintaining the pension system in the first place.

Ultimately, the struggle is about more than France’s pension system.

A defeat in this struggle would open the door for a wider scale attacks on the rights of French working people. However, a victory for the movement could potentially build the confidence of French workers and students to extend their fight to other anti-people policies of the Sarkozy government.

Similar austerity measures are being imposed by governments across Europe in a bid to make working people pay for capitalism’s economic crisis. The outcome of the struggle in France could affect workers’ confidence to resist in other countries.

Despite the protests, the pension bill was passed by the Senate on October 22. It will now be referred to a joint committee of the Senate and the National Assembly to draw up a unified text from the versions of the bill passed in the two bodies.

This text is expected to be presented to the National Assembly for a final vote. Jean-Francois Cope, the head of the Sarkozy’s UMP in the National Assembly, said this is likely to occur on October 26 or 27.

After it is passed by the National Assembly, the bill still needs to be enacted by the president to become law.

The ongoing process of passing the bill into law provides a target for more protests. But it is increasingly clear the government intends to defy the pressure and pass the law.

This makes the question of how to defeat the bill increasingly pressing.

Up until now, the unions and left parties have not had a united concept on the outcome being fought for. Most leaders of the union confederations have aimed to force the government and employers into negotiations.

The more conservative unions, such as the French Confederation of Christian Workers (CFTC), UNSA and the French Confederation of Management-General Confederation of Executives (CFE-CGC) had previously expressed some support for changes to the pension system. They have been pushed into hardening their opposition by the government’s refusal to compromise.

Among the left parties, the opposition Socialist Party (PS), as well as the Communist Party of France (PCF) and the Left Party (PG), have pushed for a national referendum on the reforms.

The United Left (GU), a split from the radical New Anti-Capitalist Party (NPA), has argued that the movement could force new elections.

The far-left NPA and Workers’ Struggle (LO), along with the militant trade union Solidaires, have consistently argued for the need to extend and intensify the strike movement to defeat the government.

NPA spokesperson Olivier Besancenot told l’Humanite on October 18 that the movement’s aim should not be to “rewrite or amend the reform. We need to bury it altogether. We must not give in on the content.”

Besancenot said there needed to be “more effective strike action” for the movement to win. “For my part, I see no other [way], and certainly not a referendum.”

LO’s Nathalie Arthaud said: “What the parliament does, the street can undo if the mobilisation is growing.

“I do not agree with the proposal advanced by the left for a referendum, because retirement at age 60 at full rate is an inalienable right.”

On October 21, the inter-union coordinating committee met to determine the course of the struggle. In the lead up to the meeting, Solidaires called for an expansion and intensification of the strike movement and for the next national mobilisation to occur quickly.

There were also predictions some of the more conservative unions would withdraw from the committee once the Senate passed the pensions bill.

In a joint statement, signed by CFDT, CFE / CGC, CFTC, CGT, FSU and UNSA, the committee called for new mobilisations on October 28 and November 6 to correspond with the vote in the National Assembly and when Sarkozy is expected to promulgate the law, respectively.

Solidaires issued its own statement supporting the days of action. But Solidaires raised concerns that no earlier mobilisation had been called and that the committee’s statement did not clearly endorse the actions initiated by workers at the local level.

Solidaires said the committee was not in step with the developments within the movement, and on this basis, did not sign the statement. Solidaires called for the movement’s intensification, with expanded strikes and walkouts.

The division within the movement is now more open. It is not just activists in Solidaires and the far left parties that have pushed for a more militant position. The movement has been pushed to its current heights in part by the ranks and local leaderships of the other union federations.

The question is now whether these forces are able to maintain the movement’s momentum. At stake is more than just changes to pensions, it is also the issue of just how much of the burden for the economic crisis working people in France and across Europe can be made to carry.

[originally published in Green Left Weekly Issue #858 http://www.greenleft.org.au/node/45821]

Read more...

France: Millions march on October 16 to Defend Pensions

Lisbeth Latham

Millions of people attended protests across France, on October 16, as part the fifth national day of protests against the government’s attacks on pension rights. The protests and strikes demonstrate the widespread opposition within French society to changes to the Pension System that extend people’s working lives. With a final vote on the Bill scheduled for October 20, the government looks set to test the determination workers and students.


Unions are claiming that between 2.5 and 3 million people participated in more than 250 actions on Saturday. While the numbers are down at least 500, 000 people on the estimate for the October 12 protests, it is close to the size of the protests on September 7 and 23 and October 2. The Interior Ministry is claiming that the protests attracted 825, 000 people down from the Ministry’s estimate of 1.2 million for October 12.

Beyond the national strike significant sections of the French economy continue to be disrupted by ongoing strike action which began on October 12, and in the case of French Ports, September 27. Ongoing strikes continue in the SNCF (state rail), in Local Authorities, several academies of Education, industrial factories (such as for metallurgy and chemicals), the Finance Ministry, Postal Services, networks of urban transport and hospitals. All twelve of France’s fuel refineries have been affected by strikes, with eight closed completely. The closure of the refineries, along with a 21 day strike at Fos-Lavara Oil Port and blockades of fuel depots are causing major disruption to France’s Fuel supplies.

Coming out of October 16, indefinite strikes are set to spread. The Fédération Générale des Transports et de l'Equipement - Confédération française démocratique du travail’s (General Federation of Transport and Equipment - French Democratic Confederation of Labour - FGTE-CFDT) announced on October 16 that it would begin an indefinite strike action in France’s trucking industry beginning in the evening on October 17. Maxime Dumont, head of the FGTE-CFDT, told AFP on October 16, “Truckers are happy to join the action. Next week is going to be decisive, everybody knows that”. The Trade Union Solidaire’s (Solidarity) strike bulletin from October 17 also announced that the Departmental Unions of the Confédération générale du travail (General Confederation of Labour – CGT), CFDT, Force Ouvrière (Workers Force – FO), Union nationale des syndicats autonomes (National Union of Autonomous Unions UNSA), Fédération syndicale unitaire (United Union Federation –FSU) and Solidaires (Solidarity), in the Ardennes Region, have called for an indefinite strike in both the private and public sectors beginning October 18.

Students, who have only began mobilising in large numbers since October 12, are set to play an important role in the movement. More than 300, of France’s 4500 Lycées (the second stage of secondary school in the French Education system involving students from the ages of 15-18) have been blockaded since October 12. Police have attacked a number of student protests across France with dozens of students arrested. In response to student mobilisations – the government has raised concerns that students were being manipulated by the unions. The Syndicat Général des Lycéens (General Union of High School Students -SGL) has rejected the government’s criticism arguing “if students are not manipulated when they are commit crimes at 16 years-of-age why would they be manipulated by parties or teachers? No offense to the government, young people who demonstrate are responsible!” The SGL has called on all Lycéen students to take action on October 18 against the pension bill.

Despite the size of the movement, it is clear that the government and its supporters are hoping that passing the Pension Bill will demoralise and demobilise the movement. Labour Minister Eric Woerth told France24, on October 17 that “The turnout is clearly down, but there are still a lot of people in the street. I think the French people have understood that pension reform is essential”. The movement is building towards national strike on October 19 as the last opportunity to place pressure on the government to withdraw the Bill. The leaderships of both the CFDT and CGT have called for the Senate to suspend its debate and for a new dialogue to be initiated between unions, the government and the Mouvement des Entreprises de France (Movement of the French Enterprises – MEDEF). It is however unclear how the inter-union will react if the Bill is passed.

The two largest unions in France are the CFDT and the CGT. The CFDT nationally has resisted the call for intensifying the movement by initiating an indefinite general strike and it is unclear what the leadership would support once the legislation is passed. Bernard Thibault, CGT Secretary General, told Reuters on October 16 "The action is not going to stop because senators have voted. Today we have an even bigger encouragement to continue".

The current policy of the inter-union, which is to call on unions in the enterprise to allow a discussion of the memberships to determine what actions they deem appropriate, does allow space for more militant sections of the movement to push for more militant action – which has already been successful with the indefinite strikes spreading as they have. It will be how these two forces, the national leaderships within the inter-union and the membership in the enterprises, respond to the vote in the Senate that will play an important role in determining the future of France’s pension system.

Read more...

France: Massive Protests Oppose French Pensions Bill

Lisbeth Latham

Workers and students mobilised in their millions on October 12 in the fourth and largest mobilisation in the last month against laws that will reduce the pension entitlements of French workers. The protests and strikes come as the French Senate has begun passing aspects of the pension bill that will see an increase in the retirement age from 60 to 62 years of age and increase the qualifying period that workers must work to receive a full pension. The mobilisation demonstrates an increasing polarisation over who should pay the price of the economic crisis in France as the country heads towards another national strike on October 16.



As with previous protests the size of the protests has been heavily contested, with the government attempting to downplay the level of public support and unions emphasising the extent they reflect broader public anger. Unions estimate that 3.5 million people participated in 244 protests in cities and towns across France, a significant increase on the 3 million people estimated to have joined each of the previous two mobilisations on October 2 and September 23. According to AFP France’s Interior Ministry announced that with the Paris protests yet to come, half a million people had participated, substantially down from its estimates of 883, 000 and 997, 000 for October 2 and September 23 respectively. However the Interior Ministry’s final estimate was 1.23 million people.

According to unions the growth in numbers primarily came from two sources: workers in the private sector and students.

According to the Confédération générale du travail (General Confederation of Workers – CGT) substantially larger numbers of private sector workers participated in the strike, including non-union members. In some companies the rate of participation was as high as 80% of staff. One of the most significant developments was in the oil industry with strikes occurring at 11 of the country’s 12 oil refineries.

There was a substantial increase in the number of university and high school students participating in the mobilisations, with tens of thousands joining protests, and at least 400 schools closed as a consequence of staff and student action. The government has attempted to paint students as the ones with the most gain from the reduction in pension rights, arguing that it will reduce the size of the pension system that they will have to support. However students, entering the workforce will face a longer working life than their parents, and the fear that the delay in the retirement of older workers will further exacerbate France’s youth unemployment rate of 24 percent.

The media has made much of the entry of students into movement, raising the spectre of the movement of May-June ’68, however of more concern will be the more recent movement against the First Employment Contract in 2005-2006. This legislation would have dramatically reduced the rights of young people entering the work force for the first time. During this campaign students shut down their campuses for months, with almost permanent street demonstrations that were punctuated by large union protests. These mobilisations were successful in defeating the legislation.

Adding to the threat of student mobilisation, has been the decision of union members in a number of industries including oil, rail, ports and a number of government services to begin indefinite strike action. The strike by oil workers poses a real possibility of substantial fuel shortages across in the coming days.

While unions such as the CGT and Solidaires are calling for the strike movement to be spread, other unions have raised concerns that an intensification of the movement risks alienating the broader public and providing President Sarkozy with an opportunity to rebuild his flagging electoral fortunes through a shattering defeat of the unions. Confédération française des travailleurs chrétiens (French Confederation of Christain Workers) has opposed indefinite strikes, and stated that the union's members in the rail system will not participate in the indefinite strikes. The BBC reported on October 12, that Francois Chereque, Secretary General of the Confédération française démocratique du travail (French Democratic Confederation of Labour - CFDT) as saying "The large majority of employees cannot afford to pay for repeated days of strikes.

However, as was been pointed out by the Trade Union Solidaires in the leadup to October 12"A few days of strikes to not lose years of free time, it's worth it, right? The strike will cost money, that's undeniable. But the implementation of this bill will cost more! Directly, through reduced pensions and indirectly through further significant reductions in the social system due to the door that would be opened by defeat on this issue".

With the government already pushing the legislation through the Senate and with the Senate approving the increase in minimum retirement age from 60 to 62 on October 8. Failure by the movement to lift the intensity of the movement is likely to find the government growing in confidence in its ability to ride out the movement. Faced with government intransigence and more than 67% public support for an intensified industrial campaign, and the momentum build up in the struggle since April, the unions are in a strong position to push the movement forward. As a statement issued by the Solidaires on October 12 says, “There is no time to lose: now is the time to harden and expand the movement to win”.

While the immediate focus of the media is on the outcome of the government’s attempt to wind back France’s welfare state, there is far more at stake. The determination of the government to cut pensions so soon after it provided massive bailouts to the banks and business to help them recover from the Global Financial Crisis, risks a far deeper radicalisation with the possibility of the unions and social movements going on the offensive if they are successful in defeating the Pension Bill.

The inter-union coordinating commitee, which has lead campaign, is scheduled to meet on October 14 to plan actions coming out of the next national strike on October 16. The response on October 16, in the wake of October 12 and the localised indefinite strike, and the actions initiated on October 14 will be important tests of the capacity of the movement to win.

Read more...

French Senate Votes to Raise Retirement Age as Unions Prepare for a Day of Strikes

Lisbeth Latham

France’s Senate passed, on October 8, the first part of the Pension Bill aimed at dramatically reducing workers retirement and pension rights. The vote came days before the fourth major mobilisation by unions, in just over a month, aimed at defeating the Bill and securing the French pension system. The Senate’s vote signals a decisive test both for the movement and France’s right wing government.

The government won the first Senate vote on the Pension Bill 186 to 153, increasing the minimum retirement age from 60 to 62. The Senate has yet to vote on the proposal to increase the age at which workers can access the full pension from 65 to 67, however amendments that will allow parents of children with disabilities, and parents of more than three children, to continue to retire at 65 have been passed. The bill had not been expected to fully passed by the until at least October 15, however as there have been some 1000 amendments made to the bill, it is expected to be held up in the Senate until later in October.

The passage of part of the Pension Bill through the Senate poses a significant test for the movement. It is possible that the vote spur the mobilisiations due to anger over the government’s continued refusal to heed public anger at attacks on pensions. However it demoralise the movement resulting in the movement dwindling. The vote could also see workers look to the June 2012 elections and the Socialist Party’s promise to overturn the Bill if it wins Government. However initial indications are that the movement will escalate in the immediate wake of the vote in the Senate. The Confédération générale du travail (General Confederation of Workers – CGT) reported on October 11, that a poll conducted over October 8 to 10 indicated that 66% of French people supported an intensification of the movement. Eighty-four percent of “left” voters supported an intensification compared to 33% of right supporters.

The inter-union coordinating committee of seven of France’s Union Confederations has called national strikes and mobilisations for October 12 and 16. The inter-union will meet again on October 14 to prepare further steps in the movement. In the statement announcing the October 16 mobilisation, the inter-union described the Government’s action in pushing through the legisalation as an attempt to diffuse the mobilisations. The statement called for the mobilisations to be broadened and expanded and for united meetings of workers in their workplaces to allow them to define the rhythm and forms of action to follow.

At the centre of the fight-back have been the workers at the Fos-Lavera Port near Marseille who have been on strike since September 27. According to the CGT the strike is focused on both defending the existing pension system and opposition to the transfer of port activities to private operators under the 2008 port reform laws. Fos-Lavera is the third largest oil port in Europe and accounts for 7% of the continent’s oil movements. As a consequence the refineries that are supplied by Fos-Lavera are operating at reduced capacity and are expected to shutdown in the next few days unless the strike ends. The CGT has called rolling strikes at all French ports starting October 12.

Other sectors are also looking to take rolling industrial action. Workers at the Donges refinery, France’s second largest oil refinery, voted on October 11 for a renewable strike starting October 12. The strike will be reviewed every two days. Once the strike is called off the plant will take two further days to become operational again.

On October 6, unions in both the state rail company SFNC and the Paris underground announced open-ended strikes beginning October 12. These will be rolling 24-hour stoppages, with the next strike being renotified prior to the expiry of the existing strike.

While the movement is expanding not all the members of the inter-inion are consistent in supporting the extension. Reuters, on October 8, reported that Jacques Voisin, President of the Confédération Française des Travailleurs Chrétiens (French Confederation of Christian Workers – CFTC) which is part of the inter-union coalition, has publicly distance the CFDT from calls for rolling strikes. This reflects that at least some of the union leaderships have been forced to make public statements of supporting more militant action based both on concerns of their members, but also the pressure of radical unions such as the Solidaires confederation, which as been advocating the preparation for an escalating general strike since the Government announced the current round of attacks on pensions.

Solidaires in a statement issued on October 11, noted that the current movement which has sustained mobilisations of more than 3 million people for a month is currently larger in size than the movement that defeated the 1995 attack on pensions. What is lacking at the moment is the intensity of action of the 1995 movement, which saw ongoing strike action for three weeks in November and December of that year. Whether the current movement is able to generate a similar level mobilisation to defeat the right’s attacks are yet to be seen but the signs are positive.

Read more...

French workers mobilise to defend pensions

Lisbeth Latham

Thousands of workers across France protested on May 27 against the President Nicholas Sarkozy’s planned attacked on the French pension system. The protests were called by a inter-union coalition including the General Confederation of Labour (CGT); French Democratic Confederation of Labour (CFDT); United Union Federation (FSU); National Union of Autonomous Unions and Solidaires. They follow the failure of the government to withdraw or modify the planned changes to the pension system following mobilisations on March 23 and May 1.




The Sarkozy government is pushing for the age that workers can receive their pensions, currently set at 60, by two or three years. The plan will also require that the period that a person must work to qualify for a full pension from 40 to 41 years. These increases are being motivated based on the aging French population, however unions believe that the changes will have significant impact on working people. This push has been given additional impetus with the ongoing budgetry crisis in Europe. With the government and business claiming that workers should accept the changes in the pension system as they are not as severe as the reduction in social spending that has occurred in Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal and Spain. The government has also sort to undermine public anger by indicating that the draft legislation that will made available on June 20 would exclude workers in both the energy and transport industries.

Unions have rejected government and employer arguments in support of changes to the pension system. Agence France on May 27, reported Bernard Thibault, CGT Secretary, as saying “only a show of force on the streets can defend the 60-year retirement age and the social achievements that Nicolas Sarkozy is methodically attacking”. A statement issued by Solidaires, Unitaire et Democratic Rail (Solidarity, Unity and Democracy Rail – Solidaires affiliate in France’s rail system) on May 27 said that like the governments of Greece, Spain, Italy and Britain, the French government is trying to make the people and employees pay for the crisis of capitalism but “it is not our crisis to pay”.

According to the CGT, the unions’ call for mobilisation drew more than a million workers into the streets in 176 protests, an increase a significant increase from the 600-800, 000 estimated for the March protests. Both the police and conservative media have attempted to down play the size of the mobilisations, with the police estimating the numbers at 395, 000. The impact of strikes was varied across different sectors of the economy. All trains to Spain were cancelled, along with about half of high speed trains between provincial cities. A May 28 joint statement from unions estimated that 30% of workers in France Telecom participated in the protests.

Despite the growth in the movement in defence of pensions, the Sarkozy government is moving forward with its attacks. In response the Inter-Union coalition on met on May 31 to discuss the campaign in defence of pensions, and issued a joint statement. This statement argued that the government had failed to take any action to secure the economic situation, beyond targeting workers, ignoring the demands that had been made by unions, the government had treated unions with contempt ignoring the protests and refusing a genuine debate of its policies – which was “unacceptable!” The statement called for another day of action for June 24, which will coincide with debate on legislation in parliament.

Read more...

Thousands of French workers march to defend pensions

Lisbeth Latham

Thousands of public sector workers mobilised against the Sarkozy governments push to reduce workers’ access to pensions. On March 23, more than 180 protests across France as part of the unions’ campaign against the assault on pensions. The protest has been seen as a reawakening of the movement against the Sarkozy government’s neo-liberal austerity drive, a movement that had collapsed over the latter half of 2009.





The Sarkozy government has proposed to lift the retirement age above its present level of 60 and to increase the minimum number of years which workers work in order to receive a full pension from 40 to 41 years. The full pension is 50% of salary over the best 25 years, this figure is capped by the social security ceiling. Below this pension there is a guaranteed minimum old age pension, which is 678 Euros a month. The government argues that the changes are necessary in order to offset the impact of France’s aging population. The push to increase the pension years was first made in 1985. The attempts to attack France’s pensions have been slowed through successive waves of worker mobilisations, the most spectacular being the massive public sector strikes in 1995. In 1993 the minimum number of years of work required to qualify was increased from 25 to 40. In order to add impetus to the attack, Sarkozy has moved Eric Woerth from the Budget Ministry to the Labour Ministry, as Budget Minister Woerth pushed through the sacking 100, 000 public servants between 2007 and 2010.


In a statement issued on March 23, the New Anti-Capitalist Party highlighted the impact that the proposed changes on those sections of the workforce who already struggle to achieve full pensions. Women in particular are expected to find it difficult to achieve a full pension due to the socially assigned role of women as carers. At present three quarters of retired women receive the minimum pension which is 40% of the average male pension. Opponents have also argued that in the context of rising unemployment, with 5 million unemployed, an increase in the pension age is criminal.

The mobilisations were supported by a coalition of five union confederations the General Confederation of Labour (CGT); French Democratic Confederation of Labour; United Union Federation; National Union of Autonomous Unions and the Trade Union Solidaires. The 2009 movement drew together eight confederations. The mobilisation size, unions estimate between 600-800 thousand, was also substantially down on the height of last year’s movement, which at its height drew more than 3 million people into the streets. However the protest is substantially larger than the last inter-union mobilisation of last year. The decline of last year’s movement has been seen as reflecting a contradiction between the widespread anger at Sarkozy’s response to the financial crisis, even as the movement decline opinion polls showed a large majority of French people supported the movement, there was also growing disillusionment with polls also indicating that people did not believe the movement would be successful. The renewal of the movement is seen as reflecting anger at the Sarkozy government’s determination to push on with their austerity measure despite being rejected at the regional elections. Bernard Thibault, CGT general secretary, told Reuter on March 23 “Ever since Sunday we have heard (the centre-right) say 'we are going to maintain course'. They aren't listening and that poses a real problem”.

In response to the attack, the union confederations will meet March 30 plan further actions. The CGT is calling for further coordinated mobilisations in April and on May 1. The radical trade union Solidaires in a statement issued on March 23, called for an amplification of the mobilisations. The statement argued that for the movement to win will require dynamic mobilisations and that the mobilisations of 2009 (during which no national strikes were called in support of the mobilisations) imposes a responsibility on the unions to propose a united plan of worker mobilisations aimed at achieving an inter union general strike. This perspective would guide Solidaires’ proposals at the inter-union meeting.

Read more...