by Jesús M. Pérez & Jordi Escuer in Madrid
Spain
went through an economic boom from 1996 to 2009. Production rose 73.4%.
The labour force grew by about 50%, unprecedented in its history, from
12.9 million workers (including the self-employed) in 1997 to 19.15
million in 2007. There were nearly 15 years of growth which was
uninterrupted even during the international recession of 2000-01.
During this period the Spanish bourgeoisie enriched itself more than
ever :
- Thanks to the privatization of companies in vital sectors such as communications, energy, banking and transport;
- Through intensifying the exploitation of all workers, in particular
by massive use of cheap labour with the arrival of more than 4 million
immigrants, a new phenomenon in a country where previously workers had
had to emigrate to look for work;
- With the use and abuse of European structural funds, these came to represent 1% of annual GDP for some years;
- With the internationalization of their investments, especially in Latin America,
- And finally became rich through property speculation which lead to a fivefold increase in house prices.
We can not understand what is happening today in the Spain if we lose sight of the consequences of that boom.
Under this apparent general increase in prosperity of those years,
there was an enormous increase in social inequality. The enrichment of
the bourgeoisie was occurring at the expense of deteriorating working
conditions and wages of the working class. Real reduction in average
wages, partial social counter reforms, a level of around two million
unemployed (at the best time to Spanish capitalism can offer their
employees) and other cuts in labour rights, have marked all these
years.
However, the increase in inequality was made more palatable due to
various factors including, for example, more members of each family
unit working, the reduction of the prices of many consumer goods,
access to credit at low interest. Despite the obvious inequalities,
economic growth created a social atmosphere of unlimited prosperity and
the idea that sooner or later and it would benefit all classes and
strata of society. This was the material basis on which the policy of
“Dialogue and Social Pact” rested together with the almost permanent
absence of any mobilisation by the trade union leaders.
First effects of the crisis
However the crisis currently afflicting the capitalist system
worldwide, which, if it continues to deepen, could overshadow the
crisis of 29 and the Great Depression that followed, has changed
everything.
The so-called Spanish “welfare state”, despite the achievements of the
struggles after the fall of the dictatorship, has never reached the
average level of the European Union, with a chronic deficit of some
70,000 million Euros ( 7% of GDP). While social spending increased in
absolute terms during the boom, it rose much slower than the rate of
economic growth, meaning a smaller and smaller share of the country’s
wealth, and falling far short of actual needs of the majority of
society. Now with the crisis, all the promises of a better “welfare
state” via the social democratic policy of public spending have no
place and are swept under the carpet.
Despite Rodriguez Zapatero constantly repeating that he would never
ever cut workers rights, on May 12, 2010, he announced a strong plan of
adjustment; a reduction of salaries of public employees by 5% on
average, freezing pensions in 2011, the VAT hike, the reduction of aid
to care workers and other measures to attack precisely those who have
less. The Unions called a strike of public sector workers, which had a
weak following.
In June, taking advantage of the summer, the PSOE government approved a
new labour reform, supposedly intended to promote stable employment
but, in fact, making sacking cheaper and easier. To make matters worse,
they even subsidized dismissals with public money. Arguing that it is
unfair, that there are workers on precarious contracts while others
have permanent contracts, they equalise by reducing to the lowest
denominator. They also introduce private “employment” agencies
converting unemployed workers into a new source of revenue for private
companies.
The general strike 29S
The union response was to call a general strike three months later ,
once the measures were already approved and underway. Despite the
difficulties, job insecurity, the delay in convening, low prestige of
union leaders, poor preparation, etc.-there was a successful turnout on
September 29, especially in the industrial sector where the stoppage
was close to 100% . In other sectors, services, transport, public
sector workers … the support was much smaller and very uneven. Possibly
between 5 and 6 million workers on strike, much less than what the
union leadership claimed (10 million), but a very important figure. The
street demonstrations were massive. In Madrid alone there were around
half a million people .
Union leaders called the strike with the idea of making the government
retreat on its labour reform and force a return to negotiations. From
this point of view, and as expected, it was a resounding failure
because Zapatero not only did not retreat but, under pressure from
European institutions, international rating agencies and, above all,
the Spanish big bourgeoisie presented on December 1, a new Plan of
Adjustment and set the date (January 28, 2011) to approve a plan to
reduce pensions, including raising the retirement age to 67 years. The
unions’ response was some timid protests on Dec. 18, with far less
participation than the general strike.
It is no coincidence that the new Plan Adjustment of public expenditure
was submitted just days after Zapatero met with the presidents of the
37 largest Spanish companies in La Moncloa, and consists of:
- Eliminate the subsidy of 426 Euros for the unemployed who had run
out of unemployment insurance benefit (up to two years). So far
743,000 workers had received this at a cost of 1,400 million Euros. It
is quite clear what the priorities of the Government are, while they
removed 1,400 million Euros from the unemployed, the big construction
companies were treated to the same amount to cover the financial
deficit in highways construction, mainly speculative around Madrid .
- Privatization of Aena, the public company that manages airports and air traffic control towers.
- Privatization of State Lotteries (30%).
- Tax benefits are granted to SMEs (Small and Medium Enterprises),
because, according to Economy Minister Salgado, ” the private sector
must lead the economic recovery.” The Workers Commissions union (CCOO)
states that these benefits will not be only for SMEs, but will be
widely applied in the interests of big business.
- Increased tobacco taxes.
The “social pact” is not an alternative
All this shows is that nothing can be expected from the policy of the
Social Pact. The path of “social dialogue” is dead, no matter how much
the union leaders might wish it to be otherwise. The reality that
prevails is a chronic unemployment of 4.5 million unemployed, 20% of
the workforce, the one million three hundred thousand households in
which all members are unemployed, the 40% of youth between 16 and 25
who are unemployed, the poverty that affects 20% of the population.
The labour reform of June last year is already having harmful effects
on workers. Its application in many enterprises is increasing
dismissals. But also, according to the National Statistics Institute
(INE), in the third quarter labour costs fell for the first time in 10
years, due to lower costs of dismissal. At the same time the daily
hours worked has increased by 1.1%. This is what the employers wanted
and what they are getting.
The immediate outlook is a worsening of the economic situation.
According to the bosses of the ETTs (Temporary Employment Agencies) the
peak of unemployment will be reached in the first quarter of 2011.
Whenever it is, what this means is that for the bourgeoisie, the worst
is not over, but yet to come.
The pressure on the Government of Zapatero not only comes from the
Spanish bourgeoisie. The European bourgeois presses as much or more,
for fear of what might happen to Spanish banks. The Euro zone banks,
especially German and French, have lent 470,000 million Euros to the
Spanish banks. This has created conditions for a dangerous and
unpredictable bubble with debt speculation.
That is why the Government is determined to carry out the cuts in
benefits, by whatever means possible, and to reform collective
bargaining. So far, collective agreements marked minimum working
conditions for all workers. They were mandatory for employers and could
not be changed without the signing of a new agreement. The June labour
reform has laid the groundwork, to be finalised with the introduction
of the normative, so that companies can practically freely break away
from the agreements and/or wait till they have run their term and then
the agreement becomes null and void in the absence of a new signed
agreement. In short, measures that strengthen the employers against the
workers, giving each company the ability to impose more severe working
conditions. Most companies have paralysed the collective negotiations
while they wait for this reform to be implemented.
The unions threatened another general strike but it is also clear that
they did not want it, because they are afraid to enter the path of
struggle and the consequences for them of a total confrontation with
the government. Toxo, Secretary General of CCOO in an Assembly of
Delegates on December 14 said “I do not know if we have to strike. We
prefer not to. ” At the time of writing, the union leaders are
negotiating with the Government and hoping to achieve a great social
pact, jointly with the employers and even the right-wing party (Partido
Popular), on pensions and other issues. If it is signed, it would be a
grave error by the leaderships of UGT and CCOO as it would inevitably
mean a drastic cutback in social rights. This attempt by the leaders of
the UGT and CCOO to return to the politics of social pacts with the
Government in other words, returning defeated to the negotiating
table and accepting the measures imposed, is due to their lack of a
political alternative. Doing this would convert the general strike of
September 29 into a defeat and transmit to the working class the
message that their effort had been for nothing, besides further
decreasing the prestige of union leaders and hindering the necessary
recovery of the workers’ movement.
Electoral prospects
Due to its policy of cutting social spending and attacking workers
rights, the PSOE will pay a high price. It is causing deep and
widespread unrest, especially among its own electorate. In May this
year there will be local and regional elections, and in 2012 General
elections. All the opinion polls point to a underlying process of
weakening support for the PSOE . The main symptom is the loss of
support from their own base. Some polls say the PSOE maintains only 40%
of its voters. The problem for the left and the workers is that most of
the votes lost by the PSOE will go to abstentions, which would present
municipalities, autonomous regions and the state government to the
rightwing PP on a plate.
What has become clear is that struggle is the only alternative. Not
just the union struggle, but also a political alternative is
required. Union struggle is essential but not sufficient. If we are not
able to defeat these policies at the polls we can not win, as evidenced
by the experience of France and Greece. Toxo, in the same Assembly of
Delegates cited, lamented on several occasions “that workers had been
without representation in Congress, with the rare exception of IU.”
That means, we must finish with Zapatero’s government but without this
inevitably giving way to a right-wing government of the PP. There is
only one way to do it: IU alone can not represent the 5-6 million
workers who went on strike, it now has about a million votes and two
deputies, and it would be necessary for IU to form a left electoral
front with the unions (UGT and CCOO, CGT …) and all the forces they
bring together , including those socialist activists unhappy with the
pro-bourgeois policy of the government. This would be able to pick up
votes that otherwise were condemned to abstain, and could even
mobilize new voters.
A good result for this front would cause confusion and division in the
ranks of the PSOE, and basing itself on a policy of mobilization it
could form core support in every factory, neighbourhood and school,
channelling energies that otherwise would be wasted it could develop a
strong political current. This in turn could generate a new
environment, giving confidence to the workers in their strength and
fighting ability to face the tough battles ahead to defend our
interests. The counter reforms have only just begun. If the working
class has a proper political expression will emerge as a sweeping force
opening the door to a new political era in the struggle for social
transformation.
Jesús M. Pérez y Jordi Escuer. Madrid
14.1.2011.