Профсоюзы Руководство и сервисные работники отрасли часто организуются в профсоюзы, которые пытаются по обеспечению справедливой заработной платы, разумные часы работы и безопасные условия труда для своих членов. Британские профсоюзы известны как профсоюзы, потому что, как и в Германии, они в значительной степени организованы в соответствии с профессией или навыками: существует профсоюз инженеров, профсоюз электриков, профсоюз машинистов поездов и так далее. В других странах, включая Францию и Италию, профсоюзы в значительной степени являются политическими: работники различных отраслей вступают в профсоюзы с определенной политической позицией. Производственные отношения, как правило, лучше в странах, отраслях и компаниях, где связь хорошая, т.е. Когда руководство консультируется с работниками по вопросам, которые их касаются, где ни одна из сторон не относится к другой как к противнику, и когда профсоюзы не настаивают на сохранении полностью неэкономичные рабочие места и методы работы. Хотя некоторые работодатели, а менеджеры (и политические партии) выступают против самого существования профсоюзов - хотя, подобно врачам, юристам, бухгалтерам и т. д., они сами могут принадлежать к профессиональной ассоциации с аналогичными основными целями - многие теоретики управления подчеркивают необходимость союзов. В 1970-х годах Питер Друкер писал, что «Управление есть и должно быть властью. Любая власть нуждается в сдержанности и контроле - иначе она станет тиранией. Профсоюз выполняет важную функцию в индустриальном обществе ». Тем не менее, одной из главных целей правых правительств в 1980-х годах (например, в Великобритании и США) было уменьшение влияния профсоюзов и де-регулирование рынков труда в соответствии с идеалом свободных рынков.
В результате де- регулирования Условия труда во многих отраслях промышленности во многих странах ухудшились, что привело к созданию большого количества случайных, с неполной занятостью неквалифицированных рабочих мест, выполняемых не состоящими в профсоюзе работниками. Например, во Франции самое низкое число работников профсоюзов в промышленно развитых странах. Профсоюзы в настоящее время составляют менее 10% французской рабочей силы, и большинство из них работают в государственном секторе. Подавляющее большинство французских рабочих, похоже, отвергли конфронтационную политику основных профсоюзов, в частности, контролируемого коммунистами CGT. Следовательно, когда французские водители грузовых автомобилей, в основном не состоявшие в профсоюзе, заблокировали все автомагистрали летом 1992 года, в результате чего было введено новое водительское удостоверение со штрафом. По точечной системе (и по поводу условий их работы в целом) французское правительство не нашло ни с кем вести переговоры.
Фактически, ряд политиков и лидеров бизнеса начинают сожалеть о слабости профсоюзов. Менеджеры Sonne, включая Антуана Рибу, бывшего главу огромного продовольственного конгломерата Danone, активно поощряют объединение в профсоюзы, поскольку они настаивают на том, что крупной компании нужен кто-то, чтобы представлять и формулировать потребности сотрудников и выступать в качестве социального партнера для работодателя. Но есть определенная проблема, если рабочие считают, что профсоюзы не способны сделать это, и предпочитают не вступать в них.
Профсоюзы в США юридически признаны представителями рабочих во многих отраслях. Самые видные союзы среди работников государственного сектора такие как учителя и полиция. Деятельность профсоюзов в Соединенных Штатах сегодня сосредоточена на коллективных переговорах о заработной плате, льготах и условиях труда для их членов и на представлении их членов, если руководство пытается нарушить условия контракта. Несмотря на то, что американские профсоюзы намного меньше по сравнению с их пиковым членством в 1950-х годах, они также остаются важным политическим фактором, как посредством мобилизации своих собственных членов, так и через коалиции с организациями активистов –единомышленников по таким вопросам, как права иммигрантов, торговая политика, здравоохранение, и кампании прожиточного минимума.
Сегодня большинство профсоюзов выравненые одной из двух более крупных зонтичных организаций: AFL-CIO, созданный в 1955 году, и Федерация «Смени к победе», которая отделена от AFL-CIO в 2005 году. И выступают за политику и законодательство в интересах работников в Соединенных Штатах и Канаде, и принимают активная роль в политике. AFL-CIO особенно обеспокоен проблемами мировой торговли.
Членство американских профсоюзов в частном секторе в последние годы упало ниже 9% - уровня, невиданного с 1932 года. Профсоюзы утверждают что оппозиция, вызванная работодателями, способствовала такому сокращению членства. Exercise IСопоставьте термины с их определениями.
manual workers people who work with their hands
trade union a union for workers with a particular type of job
consult to ask someone's opinion before making a decision
adversary an opponent or enemy
uneconomic too expensive, wasteful, loss-making
tyranny unlimited and unfairly used power
deregulation ending or relaxing restrictive laws
industry areas of the economy run by the local or national government
confrontational hostile, almost aggressive, seeking conflicts
conglomerate a large corporation, made of a group of companies
Exercise IIЗаполните пропуски в предложениях, используя следующие слова:
1. Unions are a necessary voice for the interests of workers.
2. in countries like South Korea, or Poland, or South Africa, trade unions have played an enormous dynamic political and economic role.
3. As long as employees have needs that need to be represented they'll need trade unions.
4. Sensible employers, that want effective social team-working and want also a peace and dynamic economy, should be encouraging trade unions.
5. In some of the most successful economies, a strong trade union presence is recognized by employers and accepted as a partnet
Check Hint. Exercise IIIСопоставьте термины с их определениями collective bargaining negotiations between unions and employers about their members' wages and working conditions
a strike a stoppage of work, as a protest against working conditions, low pay, and so on
a go-slow \ slowdown a deliberate reduction in the rate of production, as a protest working-to-rule deliberately obeying every regulation in an organization, which severely disrupts normal operations
industrial action a general term for strikes, go-slows, work-to-rules and so on
to picket to protest outside a factory or other workplace, and try to persuade workers and delivery drivers not to enter Exercise IVВосстановите порядок слов в предложении.Trade unions may promote legislation favourable to the interests of their members or workers as a whole
Exercise VВыберите верный вариант ответа.
1. Although their political structure and autonomy varies widely, union leaderships are usually formed through democratic ______ b. Election 2. The most common, but by no means only, purpose of these organizations is "maintaining or improving the conditions of their ________" a. Employment 3. Attempts by an employer, often with the help of outside agencies, to prevent union membership amongst their staff is known as ________ a. Union busting 4. Which of the following may be a cost to the economy of trade union bargaining? c. Inflation 5. Which of the following is not an industrial action? c. Lock-in 6. Which of the following trade union mainly represents the service sector d. White-collar union Exercise VIВосстановите верный порядок слов в предложении.Strikes became important during the industrial revolution, when mass labour became important in factories and mines.
Task VII
Creative Task
I. Answer the questions:
1) What are pros and contras of trade unions in economic context?
2) Describe the state of trade unions in Russia.
3) List the possible reasons of your entering any trade union.
4) Why did trade unions appear?
5) Describe different types of industrial actions.
6) What qualities should trade union leader have?
1. For workers, plus a huge, powerful collective defense. For an entrepreneur, a huge minus: it is difficult to remove a populist, a slacker or just a clumsy And in either case of loss! But for the state, the main thing in trade unions is that they help to fight the unrestrained greed of the owners of the means of production. The economy does not exist by itself: it is created for people. Profsozy (with smart leaders) help to maintain a reasonable balance of interests.
2. If, at the beginning of the development of capitalism, the bulk of the workers were yesterday's peasants, ruined artisans and handicraftsmen, the bourgeois poor, then by the beginning of the 20th century. formed a layer of hereditary workers. The origin of the working class led to the closeness of its interests and the peasantry. This was facilitated by the fact that industrial enterprises in Russia were most often located on the outskirts of the city, and in winter, they were worked by peasants from the surrounding villages (seasonal workers), as well as peasants-migrant workers. All this created an objective basis for establishing a union between these working classes. The most mature, literate were industrial workers, whose number at the beginning of the XX century. amounted to 2.8 million people. In Russia, a multinational country, the proletariat was formed as international, and its concentration in large enterprises (at the beginning of the 20th century more than half of workers in enterprises with more than 500 workers and one third in enterprises with more than 1000 workers) promoted cohesion, organization, shaping the spirit of collectivism.
3. I would like to tell you 10 reasons to join the union Having joined the trade union, the employee - a member of the trade union gets the right to: 1) To participate in the management of the enterprise in which it works, to enter into a collective agreement, to receive all the social and economic benefits provided for by the collective agreement. 2) Receive free legal assistance on labor law issues: admission to work, transfers for work and dismissal, working time and rest, labor protection and safety, guarantees and compensations. 3) Get help from the trade union organization when considering an individual labor dispute of an employee - with the participation of the trade union body. 4) Get the assistance of the trade union and its specialists on wages, salaries and their timely payment, to check the correctness of payroll. 5) Get protection from the union in the case of unreasonable proposals for dismissal from work, other unfair actions by the employer. 6) Get free legal assistance of the trade union in the consideration of its issues in court. 7) Obtain the protection of a union member in the investigation of industrial accidents and occupational diseases. 8) Get financial assistance in case of difficult life circumstances, etc .; 9) To get help in acquiring preferential permits for sanatorium-resort treatment, for health improvement and rest, for assistance in organizing children's health improvement; benefits for educators in payment for kindergartens 50% 10) May address the trade union committee, his leader, to any higher trade union body on any issues, the opportunity to freely express and defend at the trade union meeting, conference his opinion on labor, social and related relations, as well as on the work of the trade union organization, trade union and its leader.
4. In Russia, trade unions appeared much later. This was due to the fact that for a long time Russia remained an agrarian country where industry was not developed, small-scale production existed. Until 1861 there was serfdom in Russia. Only with the development of large-scale factory production and the formation of the working class were the prerequisites for the emergence of organizations defending the interests of the workers. The excitement in society grew. On January 3, 1905, strikes began with the demands of an 8-hour working day and a pay rise. The process of political and professional self-determination has begun. One of the first in Moscow are the trade unions of teachers, in the form of small circles. At teachers' meetings decisions were made to participate in strikes and rallies.
5. There are three main forms of industrial action: strike - where workers refuse to work for the employer. action short of a strike - where workers take action such as working to rule, go slows, overtime bans or callout bans. lock-out - a work stoppage where the employer stops workers from working.
6. The leader must represent and articulate the needs of employees and act as a social partner for the employer.
II. Describe any famous strike and its consequences for workers. The ups and downs and consequences of the Asbestos Strike, 1949 During the Second World War, which caused an unprecedented industrial growth in Canada, Catholic unions further strengthened their positions in many rapidly growing industries: aluminum, chemical, asbestos. KKPK significantly increased its number from 46.3 thousand people. (united in 239 trade unions) in 1940 to 93.4 thousand people. (consisted of 428 trade unions) in 1948. As the CPCC increased in number, trade union activists with a higher education, more independent of the Catholic clergy, began to play an increasingly important role. Thus, in 1946, J. Picard was elected president of the KKPK, a man of liberal views who replaced the conservative-minded A. Charpentier in this post, helping the Catholic Church for many years to keep this organization under its control. With the advent of the new leadership in the CPCC, real prerequisites arose for changing the previous course and its internal democratization and giving it a more worldly character. This, of course, was largely due to the accelerated post-war industrialization and urbanization of Quebec, thanks to which the long-established isolation of French-speaking Catholic workers from other working people, and the position of the Catholic Church in many spheres of public life, including in Catholic unions, gradually disappeared were significantly weakened. A situation was created when any more or less serious social conflict could have made this still emerging process of democratization and secularization of the CPCC irreversible. This critical turning point in the history of Catholic syndicalism in Canada, which marked a completely new stage in its development, was the “asbestos strike” of 1949. The main centers for the extraction and primary processing of asbestos in Canada were located in the south of Quebec, near the cities of Asbestos and Thetford Mines. In the first of these, 2,000 people were employed at the enterprises of the Canadian Jones Menville (KDM) American company; in the second, 3,000 miners worked at the smaller firms Asbestos, Flintcot and Johnson. During 1948, negotiations on the conclusion of a new collective agreement were conducted between representatives of these companies and the leadership of trade unions that are members of the KKPK. Local unions sought wage increases of 15 cents per hour; taking measures to protect against asbestos dust, causing amiantosis - one of the most serious occupational diseases of workers in the industry; annual two-week paid vacation; the company’s contribution of 3% of workers ’wages to the social assistance fund and a number of other social measures. In January 1949, negotiations were frustrated by the leadership of the CYA. Instead of considering the fair demands of the trade unions, fully justified by the rising cost of living and the harsh working conditions in the asbestos industry, company representatives began to discuss minor details, trying to delay the negotiations, and then completely refused on all points, agreeing only to increase wages by 5 cents. at one o'clock. This large American company, established in Asbestos since 1910, was the main force opposing the miners; it was here that subsequent events occurred. On the evening of February 13, 1949, Asbestos workers held an emergency trade union meeting, which, in addition to local trade union leaders, was also attended by the President of the Confederation of Catholic Trade Unions of Canada (CPCC) J. Picard and CPCC General Secretary J. Marchand. The assembled workers needed to solve essentially one question: whether to resort to arbitration, which is obligatory in such cases, or to start an illegal, from the point of view of the authorities, strike. According to the provincial labor law, in the event of disagreement of the two contracting parties, a long conciliation arbitration procedure was envisaged, which could last 12-15 months. Understanding perfectly well that they have no chance of getting support in the arbitration court and, in principle, condemning such a measure, the workers of Asbestos unanimously decided to go on strike. On the night of February 13-14, a group of picketers blocked all entrances to the territory of the KDM company. The miners of the city of Thetford Mines unanimously supported the workers of Asbestos and by the end of the next day also went on strike. By this time, almost the entire asbestos industry of the country was paralyzed. On February 15, the Quebec provincial government officially declared the strike illegal and refused to conduct any negotiations until the miners came to work. In addition, it warned that trade union registration certificates would be revoked if the latter did not end the strike. At a trade union meeting held in Asbestos on the day after, J. Marchand explained to the miners that the threat of the government to deprive the trade union of a registration certificate is a purely discriminatory measure and is absolutely illegal. On February 18, Asbestos workers occupied the building of the KDM administration. In response, the company asked for help from the police. The next day, 100 police officers arrived in the city, who immediately occupied the premises of the BMD. In an effort to avoid clashes with the police, the local union decided to stop picketing, especially since the head of the arrived police, N. Labbe, said that they had been sent only to protect the company's property and would not interfere in the strike, although in reality everything happened completely differently. On February 21, the Asbestos City Council adopted a resolution to protest a large number of policemen in the city. It said that from the very beginning of the strike everything was peaceful, however, the police officers who arrived were intoxicated, and it was they, and not the miners, who caused the unrest in public places of the city, moreover, certain acts of violence were committed by the police with the obvious aim to provoke unrest. The provincial government of Quebec fully supported the company KDM in an attempt to eliminate the leadership of the KKPK from the negotiations; moreover, it sought to separate strikers from their union leaders. Thus, the Prime Minister of Quebec, Maurice Duplessi, demagogically called the strike leaders as saboteurs who were concerned not about the workers, but about their own personal interests, and flatly refused to meet with the leadership of the Catholic trade unions. The obvious coordination of the actions of the provincial authorities with the KDM, the cancellation of registration certificates from local unions and the presence of a significant police contingent in Asestos - all this further complicated the situation and excluded the possibility of a quick resolution of the labor conflict. In the first half of March 1949, KDM persistently tried by all means to force the miners to resume work. On March 14, the first serious incident occurred - an explosion of a railroad track belonging to the BMR; The company blamed the strikers, although the results of the investigation did not prove this. The management of KDM sent a letter to each striker with the threat of dismissal if he does not immediately go to work. Intimidating the miners, the American company made an unreasonable statement that it had suffered losses in the amount of $ 500,000 from the beginning of the strike, which it will have to compensate for the striking miners. At the same time, the company began to hire scabs, which already posed a direct threat to the miners. The Asbestos workers quite naturally became hardened, separate clashes took place between them and the strikebreakers, but they did not take place at the behest of the trade union, as claimed by the BMD, but completely spontaneously. In general, the few acts of violence committed during this strike were not in any way sanctioned by the leadership of the local trade union, much less the CPCC, since this strike itself began spontaneously from below. Therefore, any accusations of the leadership of the KKPK that it had planned and organized this strike in advance were clearly untenable. In addition, many incidents that occurred during the “asbestos strike” were, according to local residents, deliberately rigged by the police. In the meantime, the KKPK fought for public opinion, which was increasingly inclined in favor of the striking miners. On March 16, a joint declaration of solidarity with the striking miners was sharply endorsed at the provincial inter-union conference of the Professional and Workers' Congress of Canada (PRKK), the Canadian Labor Congress (KKT) and KKPK, which sharply condemned police abuse and stressed the need for early material assistance to the families of the strikers. Speaking to the Asbestos workers in the evening of the same day, the President of the CPCC, J. Picard, said that they now have the support of 250 thousand organized workers in Quebec. Strikers clashes with scabs continued in the second half of March. The police began to carry out illegal arrests, searches in the homes of workers, prolonged interrogations, use other illegal measures of violence, obviously trying to intimidate the local population, harden the strikers and thereby provoke unrest. Soon the families of the strikers began to receive material assistance with money and food. The first truck with foodstuffs (weighing 3.6 tons, worth $ 1.5 thousand), bought with KKPK funds, arrived in Thetford Mines March 18, and then such assistance began to come regularly from everywhere. From March 18 to May 18, only one Quebec region allocated 9 thousand dollars for this. At the KKPK plenum, which, for the first time in the history of the Catholic trade union center, urgently gathered on April 9 in Montreal, it was unanimously decided to provide immediate assistance to strikers 25 thousand dollars and, in addition, create a strike fund in the amount of 100 thousand dollars. Local unions have allocated benefits at the rate of 3 dollars. per week to each striker, family - 4 dollars. plus another 1 dol. for each child. Bread and milk were delivered by unions for free. In August 1949 it was calculated. that KKPK spent 300 thousand dollars to help the striking miners. Other Canadian trade union centers also helped with food and money, in particular, the KKT trade unions collected 7.7 thousand dollars, the trade unions PRKK - 6.5 thousand dollars. The total amount of assistance received during the strike period from various sources was subsequently estimated at 509.4 thousand dollars. Regarding the "illegality" of the continued strike - the main argument that was used by both the Duplessi government and KDM, a completely different point of view emerged in Canadian public opinion. Thus, the editorial of the progressive left-liberal newspaper Devouar stated that since both conflicting parties - workers and entrepreneurs - are not equal, it is impossible to speak about the illegality of this strike, which has become the ultimate means of achieving justice. The Catholic Church took a cautious, restrained position on this conflict, not officially supporting, but not condemning the striking workers. Nevertheless, in public statements by trade union chaplains and other members of the Catholic Church, the moral aspects of this strike were frankly emphasized, imperfection of labor legislation in Quebec was emphasized, which made it very clear that "social justice is higher than the rule of law." Thus, the chaplain of the trade union in Asbestos, L. Kamiraran, directly stated in an interview with the newspaper La Presse: "If I were a miner, I would also be a striker." As if summarizing the numerous statements of various social groups and public organizations in support of the strikers, the newspaper Devouar concluded: "there is no doubt that this strike is legal from a moral point of view." As rightly noted in the central organ of the Catholic trade union center J.Picard, setting forth the true causes of the “asbestos strike”, its only real culprits were antisocial laws and the political-financial coalition of the ruling forces of Québec and big business. On April 18, Quebec Labor Minister A. Barret made a new attack on the miners on the radio, accusing them of “sabotaging the legitimate authority”. In a lengthy speech, he falsified the facts to such an extent that the workers sent a telegram to the government demanding his immediate resignation, quite rightly calling the latter not the Minister of Labor, but the "Minister of Capital." In turn, KDM began to threaten to evict 250 workers 'families from its houses to place scabs there, which further increased the workers' dislike towards this American company. The situation is so tense. that even A. Barrett in a telegram addressed to the Managing Director of CYM J. Foster advised to reconsider this decision, since "according to the government, such measures are illegal." On April 22, 1949, for the organization and participation in a protest demonstration against the continued employment of scabs in Asbestos, the correspondent of the newspaper Devouard J. Peletje, as well as representatives of the intelligentsia J. Charpentier and PE Trudeau were arrested by the police; after questioning, they were forced to leave the city immediately. On the same day, the newspapers published a statement by the President of Johns Manville, L. Brown, about an “asbestos strike”, in which he sharply condemned the CPCC, since, in his opinion, instead of fighting radicalism, it itself became radical and now propagates the doctrine opposite to capitalism. he position of the strikers and their families, meanwhile, became increasingly difficult. At the end of April, the church social affairs committee found the current situation so serious. that she appeared in print with a special statement “Let's help the workers of Asbestos”, in which she called for organizing a collection of donations in favor of the families of the strikers. During the Sunday sermon on May 1, 1949, the Archbishop of Montreal, J. Charbonneau, directly urged the faithful to help the miners of Asbestos. In particular, he said, “The working class is a victim of conspiracy to suppress it,” in such conditions “the duty of the church is to intervene. We are for social peace, but we don’t want the death of the working class.” Such a statement by one of the highest dignitaries of the Catholic Church of Canada, despite all reservations about social harmony, was essentially unprecedented and therefore very significant. From that moment on every Sunday in all the churches of Quebec, donations were collected for the striking miners, the total amount of which was 167.6 thousand dollars for the entire period until the end of the strike. In the meantime, KDM, seeking to intimidate the miners of Asbestos, announced a massive set of scabs from the surrounding countryside; The strikers for their part decided not to allow this. The climax of the "asbestos strike" came on May 5-14, when events took on a truly dramatic character. On the night of May 4-5, a group of picketers blocked all roads leading to Asbestos, and approaches to the enterprises of the CY, to prevent strikebreakers; the police, in turn, put posts at all gates to the company. In the morning, the picketers on duty on the roads detained cars with scabs and sent them back, preventing them from entering the city, some of which were set on fire. During the morning demonstration in front of the KDM board of directors, the police used tear gas grenades against the workers, although the latter were not at all on the company's territory. During the day, workers' pickets also detained several passenger cars with policemen disguised in civilian clothes who attempted to enter the city in this way. These people were disarmed, taken to the headquarters of the strike committee and handed over to the local police chief, Bella, along with their weapons, and not imprisoned in the basement of the church of Saint-Eme, as some media outlets asserted. The strikers decided to be on duty on the roads all night in order to prevent scabs. However, at 11 o'clock in the evening, the head of the provincial police, H. Beoregard, warned the trade union leadership and chaplain L. Kamiran that if the workers did not go home, then the most severe sanctions would be applied against them. Despite these threats, the strikers took down the pickets only at 2 am. Thus, within 24 hours, Asbestos was in the hands of workers who did not allow the strikebreakers to enter the city. Early in the morning of May 6, large units of the provincial police arrived in Asbestos on 25 passenger cars and one truck. Seeking to isolate the strikers, the armed police officers first of all blocked all exits from the city, then arrested 15 workers from Thetford Meins, who spent the night in the basement of the parish church. and brutally beat seven of them, which to the depths of the soul angered the journalists who were present at this. “In our eyes,” one correspondent stated, “the policeman used a baton to beat one of the strikers until he fell to the floor and then continued to beat him with his feet.” Subsequently, at a special trial, it was noted that acted extremely cruel and ruthless, leaving without the help of people bleeding. “I was ashamed to look at all of this,” said M. Rouget, photojournalist for the American magazines Time and Life. At 6.45 a.m., at the entrance to the local church, a decree on public disorder was read out, according to which any gatherings of people more than three people were equated with a riot. After that, the police arrested all people who did not go home. Then the arrests began to occur on the streets of the city, in cafes, shops and private houses, and many did not even know what they were arrested for, as they were not present during the reading of the special decree. The total number of those arrested on this day reached 200 people. During interrogation, many of them were severely beaten. The police intimidated the strikers, threatening to arrest them again if they did not come to work. Journalists were in every way prevented from performing their professional functions, threatened, detained, expelled from the city. According to eyewitnesses, the police were pursuing the strikers even in the church itself, moreover, food collected and stored there for the families of the workers was eaten by the police themselves. Later, in March 1950, Duplessi admitted at a meeting of the Québec Legislative Assembly that the maintenance of 250 police officers in Asbestos cost the taxpayers 115 thousand dollars. In addition, Inspector Labbé, who supervised the police, accidentally let out before the members of the municipal council that during the strike period regularly, once a week, each of his people received money from KDM for their expenses. It is characteristic that the Canadian large circulation press for a long time deliberately kept silent about the “asbestos strike”. The first comment about it representing the interests of large capital, appeared only on May 6. In this issue, misleading the readers, the newspaper condemned the strikers for the fact that they allegedly had no clearly formulated requirements. It is not by chance that the strikers did not trust the correspondents of such newspapers. So, on May 5, the picketers did not let into Asbestos a correspondent for another major Canadian newspaper, Fainenshel Post, R. Williams, who, he said, was glad that he had got off so easily and was able to leave unharmed. A reporter from Gazeta F. Kaufman, who, according to Peletier, did not even know French, was also expelled from the city along with another journalist. "Do not speak English and do not come back here again," the workers who detained them advised. Later, the head of the Federation of Mining Industry Workers (FRGP), R. Amel, refused to give an interview to a Gazette correspondent, saying directly to the latter: "We do not like your presence here. Everyone knows that you represent big business." The decree on violation of public order was canceled on May 8 and the workers received the right to hold union meetings. The resistance of the strikers, despite the three days of police repression, remained steadfast, but the situation was serious. Many workers were arrested and imprisoned, lawyers were not allowed to them, they did not appear before the court within 48 hours, as required by law. But all this did not break the workers of Asbestos: at their trade union meeting on the evening of May 9, they unanimously decided to continue the struggle. The Duplessis government continued to stick to the hard line. On May 10, five strikers accused of scaring scabs were sentenced to 1-2 months in prison. On May 14, the police arrested R. Amel, the chairman of the Asbestos trade union, A. Larive, the FRGP secretary, D. Lessard, an employee of the CPCC office in Montreal, R. Roc, and 16 other strikers. They were all given standard charges of conspiracy and incitement of workers to revolt. In response, the FRGP asked the federal government to conduct a special investigation into the atrocities committed by the provincial police. On May 24, four strikers demanded payment of 25 thousand dollars from KDM. in compensation for the injuries inflicted on them by the police in the company building. On May 21-22, Asbestos was visited by the leaders of the American trade union of one of the most significant enterprises of Johns Manville (Manville, New Jersey, USA). After reviewing the working conditions of the local miners and the causes of the conflict, they assured the strikers of the justice of their actions and called for fighting to victory, stressing that the American workers were in solidarity with them and ready to share all the strikes. A new round of talks between the BMD and Asbestos unions, held in the second half of May, ended in vain. The Canadian press expressed regret about the failure of the negotiations led by A. Barrett, and all the blame was placed on the local union, while in reality it was not the “obstinate” union that was to blame, but the Duplessi government, which fully supported the American company. In this regard, it is interesting to note that its legal adviser, I. Sabouraine, who represented KDM in the negotiations, was at the same time the leader of the Progressive Conservative Party in Quebec and in that capacity could exert direct political pressure on the course of the negotiations. Meanwhile, the strike lasted for about four months. All financial opportunities of KKPK were exhausted. On June 12, 1949, the CPCC Bureau took the final decision: within a week to transfer the monthly contributions of all members of Catholic unions to strikers of Asbestos. In essence, it was not a question of a separate trade union, but the fate of the KKPK itself. This time, in view of the seriousness of the situation, the Catholic Church decided to actively intervene. On June 13, the Archbishop of Quebec, M. Rua, conducted intensive negotiations, first with L. Brown and I. Saburen, then with M. Duplessis and A. Barrett, then with J. Picard, putting pressure on each of the parties to resolve this conflict as soon as possible. According to the Canadian researcher F. Izbester, the necessity of ending the strike was already objectively overdue, as the workers' discontent might have turned against the trade union leaders themselves, just as it had previously been directed against strikebreakers and policemen. Therefore, de J. Picard and J. Marchand were now thinking only about how to save their position. Such a completely unsubstantiated and clearly one-sided explanation only distorts the essence of the issue. In fact, a long strike in the asbestos industry brought huge losses to KDM and other companies that were ready to make any concessions, so that it would rather end. The provincial government was also aware of the need to quickly end the “asbestos strike”, given the powerful influence it had on Québec’s public opinion, drawing attention to the problems of workers.
It was thanks to the stubbornness of the strikers in their just struggle for their rights that Asbestos, Flintcoat and Johnson companies agreed on June 24, 1949 to fulfill the terms of the union and the strike in Thetford Mines ended. Only KDM continued to persist. The last act of perfidy was the statement of L. Brown, in which he threatened the miners of Asbestos to transfer the company's enterprises from Quebec to Ontario. The comments of the mass media stressed the serious consequences for Quebec, if such a decision was made. However, later another major newspaper noted that it was just a joke, a hoax, which no one took seriously. Indeed, on July 1, 1949, the CYA was forced to agree to an increase in the wages of its workers by 10 cents an hour and guaranteed work for all strikers without any discrimination. Thus ended this one of the longest strikes in the history of the Canadian labor movement, but the conflict between trade unions and entrepreneurs was not finally resolved. It took a long and stubborn struggle before collective agreements in the asbestos industry were finally signed in early 1950. Summing up, the central body of the KKPK newspaper Le Travai rightly noted that this largest and unprecedented strike in Quebec ended in a convincing victory for the miners mainly because of their resilience, unity and decisiveness in their just struggle. According to the same newspaper, the “asbestos strike” was undoubtedly one of the most significant events in the social history of French Canada, and its true meaning was clearly manifested in the exceptionally high solidarity and conscientiousness of workers organized in trade unions. he influential newspaper Devouar, representing the interests of left-wing Catholics and the French-Canadian intelligentsia, which, according to KKPK, most fully and objectively of all the media, reflected the course of events of the “asbestos strike”, also drew attention to the serious consequences of this event, in particular the growth of mass social consciousness. The “asbestos strike” received a wide response in the English-speaking part of Canada. For example, the Kenedian Forum, a popular socio-political liberal magazine in Toronto, noted that this strike, unprecedented for Québec, was at the same time one of the most dramatic episodes in the history of the Canadian labor movement, and its social, economic and political implications were of national importance. An indicator of the influence of the “asbestos strike” on the public opinion of a country can be the collective work of the same name, repeatedly prepared by eyewitnesses edited by P. Trudeau, and the novel by J.-J. Richard Fire in Asbestos, some excerpts from which were published in early 1955 in the newspaper of the Workers Progressive Party of Canada Combe. This keenly social romance deservedly received high marks as Canadian. and our domestic experts. The strike in Asbestos attracted the attention of modern researchers. Thus, in the opinion of the progressive Canadian scientist G. Tipla, the “asbestos strike” of 1949 from the point of view of national significance is in many respects equivalent to the general strike of 1919 in Winnipeg. Another specialist on this issue, F.Izbester, although reducing the result of this strike only to the “psychological victory” of the workers, nevertheless acknowledged that it was a challenge not only for large capital, but also for all the then economic, social and political order Finally, certain aspects of the “asbestos strike” were examined in detail in the dissertations of American and Canadian scientists, which also testifies to its significance. The “asbestos strike” caused a rift between them. Most of the clergy, who understood the need for change to maintain their influence, somehow supported the strikers, while the conservative minority sided with the “law and order”. After making sure that they did not meet with any support in Canada, representatives of the right wing of the Catholic Church decided to turn for help directly to the Vatican. To this end, a special report was prepared under the anonymous signature in Latin of the “bush” (guardian, warden), which very clearly describes the goals of its compilers. This specific document of its time was a collection of various tendentiously selected or frankly falsified materials about the “asbestos strike” with sharp attacks and accusations against individual members of the clergy and leadership of the KKPK. As a result of the collusion of Duplessis with individual members of the Quebec episcopate, he was sent to the Vatican as a semi-official document, but did not find the expected support there, and the entire incident did not have any visible consequences. True, the resignation following the state of health of Archbishop Moreal J. Charbonneau in February 1950 was directly linked in some media circles with the position taken by him during the “asbestos strike”, although the official representative of the Vatican in Canada, I. Antoniutti, categorically denied it. If this is so, then the official authorities of Quebec and individual representatives of the Catholic Church, no doubt, tried to influence the Vatican in this matter. It is authentically known that Durlessi personally put pressure on the higher echelons of the church hierarchy. Thus, in a letter to the papal legate I. Antoniutti of February 13, 1950, he justified the actions of the government during the well-known events in Asbestos by the fact that it was not just a strike, but an “anarchist revolution against the legitimate authority”. All this should be taken into account when characterizing the position of the Catholic Church, which, although it intervened in the course of events that took place in Asbestos, but acted, as J. Dion acknowledged, “with great prudence and caution”, as a result of which its influence among the masses of Catholic workers significantly shaken, and in an attempt to preserve the remnants of former power, she was forced to make big concessions. In this sense, the special pastoral message of the Quebec episcopate published in 1950. The working problem in the light of the social doctrine of the church was a direct result of the “asbestos strike” that drew public attention to this important issue and forced the clergy to officially abandon the leadership of Catholic unions. Another serious consequence of the strike in Asbestos was the undoubted increase in the solidarity of Canadian workers, which strengthened the position of organized workers and inter-union relations. Prior to this strike, the three groups of trade unions united in the PRKK, KKT and KKPK were deeply divided and competed more with each other than they helped each other. In fact, until that moment, no inter-union cooperation was out of the question. Among other things, the workers, united in two other trade union centers, had not previously considered Catholic unions to be able to wage such a fierce and long struggle and bring it to the bitter end. In this sense, the “asbestos strike” marked the pinnacle of inter-union cooperation. Never before has the entire aggregate of the labor movement in Canada helped any single trade union so actively. That is why the strike in Asbestos became one of the key strikes of Canadian workers in the first half of the 20th century. Moreover, after the Second World War, the Communist Party of the Communist Party of Europe strictly speaking was not a purely confessional center, uniting only Catholics; in her practical activities, she clearly focused on the production principle of the organization, although she had previously grouped trade unions mainly on the guild principle, and began to actively strengthen her position in heavy industry. However, this entire internal evolution of the KKPK was hardly noticeable until 1949. In addition, in the general context of the fight against the anti-labor policy of the Dupless government, the “asbestos strike” became a symbol of the unity of the entire Canadian trade union movement. She revealed the changes that occurred within the CPCC, proved the ability of Catholic unions to wage a stubborn struggle in defense of their interests and significantly increased the credibility of the CPCC among the workers of the two other Canadian trade union centers. As a result of this strike, new relations developed within the trade union movement, saturated with mutual trust and a conscious desire for more effective and mutually beneficial cooperation. Among other things, the strike in Asbestos was a clear proof of the reality, viability and prospects of national unionism, its internal dynamism and the growing influence and popularity in the Canadian labor movement. Apparently this event in a certain sense prompted one of the leaders of the Workers Progressive Party of Canada, U. Kashtan, to express an incredible for many assumption that the moment would come "when the trade unions in Canada will no longer be an application to the trade unions in the United States." Thus, the “asbestos strike” of 1949 as a manifestation of profound social changes within the French-Canadian community largely contributed to the rise of the labor movement in Québec, the growth of the social consciousness of Catholic workers, their solidarity with other Canadian trade centers. The stubborn struggle of the Asbestos miners showed the real strength and capabilities of the trade unions in protecting the interests of the workers and forced the Duplessis government and big business to be considered off. Catholic syndicalism was recognized as an important social and social force, however, as this strike showed, it was significantly modified compared to the plans of its creators. All Canadian trade union center supported the struggle of the miners of the Catholic trade union affiliated to the CPCC, thanks to which the CPCC acquired official recognition and support of public opinion throughout the country. It is precisely because of this circumstance that the problems of the relations of labor and capital, which have remained in the shadow for a long time, have become important in the public life of French Canada. This was the genuine, hidden behind the surface of events, the deep meaning of the “asbestos strike” of 1949, which really became a turning point in the development of Catholic syndicalism in Canada and in the history of the entire French Canadian people. One of the most important consequences of the “asbestos strike” was the fall of the influence of the Catholic Church on the labor movement. As G. Tipl noted, the strike in Asbestos literally shook the Catholic Church and led to the elimination of the priests from the leadership in the CPCC. The begun secularization of the CPCC led to an increase in the activity and militancy of this trade union in the following years. In addition, the “asbestos strike” significantly weakened the position of the Catholic Church and largely contributed to the decline of its role within Quebec in the 50-60s. Although many representatives of the Catholic Church, both among the lower and among the higher clergy, publicly supported the miners of Asbestos. Some authors, however, clearly exaggerated the role of the church, believing that without its support the “asbestos strike” would have ended in failure. It should not be forgotten that the clergy cared primarily about their own interests, fearing to lose influence among the masses of Catholic workers. On the other hand, there is no reason to regard the Canadian Catholic Church as a single conservative institution at that time; as in any other organization, there were both left - moderately liberal and right - ultraconservative wings.
|
