Nidhi)

MOSCOW—Under the impact of social
crisis, the old “official” Soviet trade unions
are finally changing. The All-Union Central
Council of Trade Uunions (AUCCTU),
which grew fat and lazy during long years
as the complacent handmaiden of manage-
ment and the Communist Party, is now
scrambling to re-define its role and hang on
to its constituency in the face of an onrush-
ing age of political pluralism and worker
militancy.

The crisis of Soviet society has hit the
trade unions especially hard. Their long and
cozy relationship with the state is definitely

_ over. At the same time, thanks to exactly that

history, standing among rank-and-file work-
ers is at low ebb.

As the Soviet government gropes toward
some operational definition of a new “mar-
ket” economy — a debate which has blown
wide open this summer— other social strata
such as the professional intelligentsia and
new private-sector entrepreneurs have been
quick to organize their own political parties
and pressure groups, in order to articulate
their ambitions and project them into the
political arena. On the other hand, aside
from isolated outbursts of anger and frustra-
tion such as the recent'one-day partial strike
by coal miners, the working class has been
left largely on the sidelines, without direct
voice or organizational coherence.

In recent months, the AUCCTU has
begun to awaken from its torpor. Under its
former secretary, Gennady Yanaev (who
gave up his trade union position in July after
being elected to the Communist Party’s
Politbureau), the movement broke its formal
bonds with the government and the CPSU,
and vowed to become an independent advo-
cate of workers’ rights. At its upcoming con-
vention in October, the AUCCTU says it
will transform itself into a loose “confedera-
tion of free trade unions.”

“We have decided to reject all functions
which are alien to trade unions,” Yanaev told

journalists at a meeting last June. “In the past
we found ourselves in the position of hand-
ing out social benefits, administering pen-
sion plans and what not, while failing in the
most vital area: defence of workers’ rights
and basic interests.

“We have also decided to separate com-
pletely from the state structure. We reject
any sort of party interference. We are pre-
pared to co-operate with the CPSU — and
other parties too —as long as their programs
recognize the needs of workers. But we in-
tend to be partners, not convenient lackeys.
We may also be constructive opponents.”

The biggest problem the unions face
today is putting together both a program and
a practical campaign to fight for workers’
interests during the much-talked-about tran-
sition to a market economy.

“In the past people only saw the trade
unions as dispensers of social benefits,” says
Albert Yakovlev, the current first secretary
of the AUCCTU. “Now they are demanding

that we take the field, and show some action |

in defending their rights ... The problem
here is very complicated, since there are a
lot of different plans for transition to the
market.

“At the central level alone there are two
separate commissions drawing up blue-
prints for this. There is Leonid Abalkin’s
group under the Supreme Soviet, and there
is the Gorbachev- Yeltsin group working on
the basis of the presidential council. They
seem to be able to agree on absolutely noth-
ing. Then all the republics are putting for-
ward their own programs. It’s very confus-
TAE-<535
“One thing we are sure of is that working
people are going to be asked to bear sac-
rifices in this transition. We’re very con-
cerned about that. We know that some dis-
location is inevitable, but real pain is not
necessary. We are absolutely opposed to the

12 « Pacific Tribune, September 10, 1990

*cold turkey’ method of introducing the
market.”

Spartak Arzhavkin is an economist with
the AUCCTU who is active in drawing up
the trade union movement’s response to
government economic initiatives.

“We realize that we need to adopt market
mechanisms,” he says. “Our command
economy is not functioning up to market
demands. Of 1,600 vital daily products, for
instance, almost 1,500 are in chronic short
supply. However, our country is not ready
for a full-blooded market. We know the
problems with this, we have studied world
experience. What we need is a civilized,
regulated market.”

What this means, at least from the trade

The All-Union Central
Council of Trade
Unions, which grew fat —
and lazy during long
years as the complacent
handmaiden of
management and the
party, is now scrambling
to redefine its role and
hang on to its
constituency.

union point of view, was spelled-out in a
transitional program issued by the AUC-
CTU last June which highlighted several
key points:

No shock therapy: “We need no great
leaps’ such as we have experienced in the
past in this country,” said Yanaev in intro-
ducing the program to journalists. “Some
70-million Soviet working people presently
live at or near the poverty line. Any Polish-
style adventurism will spell catastrophe for
them. It will be just shock without therapy.”

In an interview with the Tribune last
week, AUCCTU secretary Albert Yakovlev
added: “I f we go down that road, we
suspect the shock will be permanent. We’ ve
been studying the Polish situation carefully,
and we see industries being closed down
with nothing on the horizon to replace them.
Unemployment over there is headed for the
one-million mark. That’s a disaster we’d like
to avoid.

“Soviet industries can be brought up to
world levels, gradually, integrating with the
world economy and introducing market re-
lations as it proves effective and beneficial.
Why must we destroy in order to build, as
some radicals say?”

Democratic decision-making: “A shift of
this magnitude requires a high degree of
social consensus if itis to work at all,” argues
Arzhavkin. “Nothing should be done with-
out submitting it to a popular referendum.
But this is not simply a matter of voting:

Fred Weir

'FROM MOSCOW

people have to know what they are voting
for or against. There must be full public
glasnost, open and general discussion, with
all the facts on the table. People should be
aware of both the long-term advantages and
the short-term sacrifices they will be ex-
pected to make ... The market is not an end
in itself, but a means for improving peoples’
lives.

Transitional measures: “As trade union
leaders, we refuse to idealize the market,”
says Yanaev. “A market can be a very cruel
form of organization. We estimate that in the
first stages there could be up to 12-million
unemployed. Prices could triple.”

Therefore, the trade unions have de-
manded:

That the government guarantee a job,
through public works or other intervention-
ist means if necessary,~to anyone who is
capable of working. “Just now the govern-
ment seems to be leaning in the direction of
throwing most of this burden onto the backs
of enterprises and local Soviets,” says
Yakovlev. “That won’t do. Only the govern-
ment can provide universal, substantial gua-
rantees.”

That an effective system of labour ex-
changes be set up to provide re-training with
appropriate material compensation, re-loca-
tion of workers with all costs paid, and ade-
quate unemployment benefits for all.

That all incomes — not just minimum
wages — be indexed to compensate people

- fully forprice rises, with special attention for

people on fixed incomes.

That the poverty line (presently 70
roubles per month for a single person) must
be adjusted to reflect reality, and minimum
wages, pensions, stipends, not be lower than
this.

The AUCCTU, through its large — 100
members — parliamentary caucus, has in-
troduced a package of 14 draft laws based
upon this program for debate in this fall’s
session of the Supreme Soviet. However, if
last June’s fiasco over price increases is
anything to go by, they are likely to face an
uphill battle.

“We were shocked by the government’s
price reform program,” says Arzhavkin. “It
looked like just an attempt to revise prices
upward, that’s all. The whole scheme was
justifiably voted down.”

Over the summer the AUCCTU has been
lobbying hard for its transitional program,
and has consulted intensively with the Gor-
bachev- Yeltsin commission that is plotting
the market changes.

“We will be fighting every step of the
way in parliament,” says Yakovlev. “And if
that doesn’t make the necessary impression,
we have a huge organization, and our mem-
bers are increasingly behind us on this. The

government feels our strength ina variety of —
ways. Perhaps you recall the may day parade ~
last spring? That demonstration had two
parts, you know. The first part was our trade
union organizations — a huge turnout —
putting forward our economic demands. The
second part was a bit of a circus, really, a few
thousand people of all sorts shouting various
different things. But we happen to know that
it was our 600,000 marchers that really
shook the leaders up and made them pay
attention ....

It is too early to say whether these efforts
will reverse the declining fortunes of the
AUCCTU. The Soviet trade union central
still has a huge membership, vast resources
at its disposal, and also commands large
blocs in the central as well as several repub-
lican parliaments. Yet it also suffers from
low credibility among workers — an in-
evitable legacy — and now faces tough
competition from an array of new “inde-
pendent” working class formations.

When asked about this, Yanaev put the
best face on it: “These alternative trade
unions and other organizations are a natural
development,” he says. “We think that many
working collectives will try to set up their
own political groups and even split unions.
We want to develop a dialogue with all. We
hope they will all find their way into a new
confederation of free trade unions, which
our 19th congress in October will probably
endorse. Any union will be able to join the
confederation and leave at any time. What
we should aim for is maximum consolida-
tion of working people around the fight for
their interests.”

Adds Yakovlev: “The experience over
this summer has shown that alternative
unions are not really taking off. They remain
small and parochial. Their members — even
the coal miners — tend to retain their mem-

- bership in the trade unions and continue

working within them even though they have
also joined dissident groups. This suggests
that we are going to be able to transform our
unions into an open, democratic and creative
instrument of working peoples’ interests
over the next period. Watch our upcoming
congress in October.

There is a growing consensus among
trade unionists that the only way out of the
Soviet crisis, to re-build on the ruins of the
command-administrative system without
creating a catastrophe for working people, is
through a radical and profound expansion of
social democracy. A cohesive trade union
movement, tumed into a tool of grass-roots
expression, they say, is the best guarantee
that this will happen.

As Yanaev has noted: “Many Soviet
members of parliament are bright intellec- —
tuals, very literate people, they can under-
stand things. But if we limit ourselves to
discussions among them, it will all come to
nothing. We need social discussion. We need
to settle critical economic issues by referen-
dums.

“Tf that doesn’t happen, it could lead to
an explosion that would put the gains of
perestroika at risk. The population of this
country is almost 300 million, and we cannot
afford to carry out experiments with them
from above any longer.”

a

zg

3

|

&

a4 Published weekly at 2681 East Hastings Street

nd Vancouver, B.C. V5K 1Z5. Phone: 251-1186

= Name: EPR a Se Ree aN

© AMOS oa sacen cesta. 0a tata Wha IGE aT DaL
a s . . . . . . . 2 . . : 5 Postal Code: . . 8 . . . . . . .
= — lamenclosing: 1 year: $20 L) 2 years: $35 C13 years $50 LlForeign 1 year $32 Q)
a Donation: $

i PeREREEEOTOOEOLELOEE REEL OC ECTR ORC ET OE EPP E EET YT