Unions and Democracy

Ever since, Colombian trade unions aimed at involving politically and impacting society, especially in the 1980s with increasing actions fighting for human rights and democracy, although “defending democracy” already shaped their actions in the 1930s and 1940s by supporting, among other, preferred politicians and policies (Mora Toscano 2016: 141; Chomsky 2007: 99). However, their societal impact was deliberately impaired by both state institutions and economic elites as they excluded trade unions structurally from negotiating collective agreements – implementing pactos colectivos between management and workers on company basis in the eye of advancing neoliberal policies – as well as landowning oligarchic patrons, partially being part of existing narcostructures, opposing any form of social protest, leading to violence (Chomsky 2007: 92; Dombois/Quintero 2017: 213, 217). Though being offered more freedom by the constitution of 1991, ending compulsory arbitration and the state’s right to forbid strikes, the political and societal impact of trade unions remains limited (Dombois/Quintero 2017: 220).

Desde entonces, los sindicatos colombianos han intentado involucrarse políticamente y tener un impacto en la sociedad, especialmente en la década de los ochenta con un aumento en sus acciones en defensa de los derechos humanos y la democracia (Mora Toscano 2016: 141; Chomsky 2007: 99). Sin embargo, esta “defensa de la democracia” ya marcó sus acciones en las décadas de los treinta y los cuarenta al apoyar, entre otras cosas, a los políticos y normativas preferidos (Mora Toscano 2016: 141). No obstante, su impacto en la sociedad se fue debilitado deliberadamente tanto por parte de las instituciones estatales como de las élites económicas (Dombois/Quintero 2017: 213). Estas excluían estructuralmente a los sindicatos de la negociación de convenios colectivos – implementando pactos colectivos entre empresarios y trabajadores al nivel de empresa al avance de políticas neoliberales – (Dombois/Quintero 2017: 213). Dicho impacto también se vieron perjudicado por parte de patronos oligárquicos terratenientes, que parcialmente formaban parte de narcoestructuras existentes, oponiéndose a cualquier forma de protesta social, llevando a la violencia (Chomsky 2007: 92; Dombois/Quintero 2017: 217). Aunque la constitución de 1991 les ofreció más libertades, poniendo fin al arbitramento obligatorio y al derecho del Estado a prohibir huelgas, el impacto político y social de los sindicatos sigue siendo limitado (Dombois/Quintero 2017: 220).

Contributed by Tim Schicker

Bibliography/Bibliografía:

• Chomsky, A. “Globalization, Labor, and Violence in Colombia’s Banana Zone”. International Labor and Working-Class History, vol. 72 (2007): 90-115.
• Dombois, R., Quintero, L. (2017). “Die Gewerkschaften. Zwischen Gewalt und Informalisierung”. Fischer, T., Klengel, S., Pastrana Buelvas, E. (ed.). Kolumbien heute. Politik, Wirtschaft, Kultur: 211-226.
• Mora Toscano, O. “La reforma laboral implementada durante el segundo gobierno de Alfonso López Pumarejo”. Apuntes del Cenes, vol. 35, no. 61 (2016): 115-146.

Die andere Demokratie (tr. The Other Democracy: Corporate interest representation in Germany, 1848-2008) by Werner Milert and Rudolf Tschirbs 

Work councils, which offer employees advice and protection in everyday working life, are now part of normal working life in large companies. This book traces the development of workplace interest representation over a century and a half and makes it clear that the emergence of the other democracy was by no means a matter of course.

After the democratic impulses in the revolution of 1848-49, a deep gulf opened up in the German Empire between the status of free citizen and enslaved working citizen. Only the alliance of convenience between the military and trade unions during the First World War led to binding company representation structures, which resulted in the Works Councils Act of 1920. The progressive Weimar works constitution was brutally destroyed under National Socialism, but after the Second World War, a new democratic beginning emerged precisely from the workplaces. In the Federal Republic of Germany, company co-determination became an important foundation of industrial relations, whereas in the GDR, works councils were sacrificed to emulate Soviet models. After reunification, the institution of the works council remained a central component of a laboratory of democracy in the world of work.

Migration and co-determination in IG-Metall During the "wild strikes" of 1973

Trade unions are committed to co-determination, solidarity and equal rights for employees and endeavour to strengthen their position. They therefore play an important role in the relationship between political, industrial and social democracy in the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG). They use the means of industrial and social democracy to influence political democracy.

However, not all workers were always given the same opportunity to participate in the union. Migrant workers in particular were not treated equally in many places and their interests were barely recognised by IG-Metall (IGM) and the works councils. This can be illustrated particularly well by the migrant-influenced "wild strikes" in the West German car industry. In the summer of 1973, some so-called "guest workers" at the automotive supplier Pierburg in Neuss and shortly afterwards at the car manufacturer Ford in Cologne walked off the job because they saw no other option than to protest against the existing grievances through self-organised strikes. At that time, the role of labour representatives for migrants was extremely ambivalent, as they were dependent on the support of the trade unions to take action against existing grievances, but their interests were not adequately represented by the trade unions in the case of the strike in Cologne.

The "wild strikes" in 1973 can be seen as a turning point in these developments, as they led to a rethink among the trade unions. Previously, it had been assumed that the so-called 'guest workers' would return to their home countries sooner or later. However, in the course of the recruitment stop for migrant workers in November 1973, it became increasingly clear that many of them would remain in the FRG and become fellow citizens. The realisation that this would make them an 'attractive' majority for the trade unions only gradually took hold with the recruitment agreement and the decision on their permanent residence. Migrants could no longer be ignored if the union's ability to act was not to be jeopardised. The wild strikes contributed to the transformation of the union's migration policy and the recognition of migrant workers as equal members of the IGM. The fact that this realisation came so late is a controversial topic: on the one hand, this step by the union can be seen as progressive, especially because the IGM was the first union to take this step. On the other hand, however, it must be critically noted that the decision was taken relatively late and also solely because of the interests of migrants, but partly for reasons of trade union policy.

This has left many actors with a bitter aftertaste. The issues surrounding the significance of migration for the Federal Republic of Germany continue to play a significant role in day-to-day political debates. In the discourse surrounding this topic, it is clear that the marginalisation of migrants' interests is still ongoing. The potential for conflict is also reflected in the disputes between supporters and opponents of migration over different cultures of remembrance, and it is becoming apparent that the controversy continues beyond the context of trade union history and into the present day.

The challenge for contemporary witnesses, trade unionists and historians is to renegotiate the period from the beginning of the labour recruitment agreements to the present day in a public discourse. The aim is to reflect on how the trade unions can help shape the present and future of the FRG as a country of immigration.

This can also be seen in the lecture Migrant struggles and the role of trade unions. A critical interim assessment by Nihat Öztürk, a member of the IGM, which was held to mark the 50th anniversary of the 1973 strikes. Öztürk pleaded for a renegotiation of the "wildcat strike" at Ford in Cologne, which, in contrast to the protests at Pierburg, had gone down in history as a negative example of a migrant-influenced labour dispute. He described the situation of migrant workers, from which the strikes emerged, as a " Schande der deutschen Sozialgeschichte " [...], while critically reflecting on the role of the IGM in the past. Nevertheless, he emphasised that the IGM had become a political home for many post-migrant members in the course of recognition following the strikes. The IGM has also developed into an institution that acts against right-wing tendencies in political democracy as a result of the change in trade union migration policy. In conclusion, Öztürk pointed out that migrants continue to be exposed to racist tendencies. Some of them still work without trade union protection and are excluded from political participation. Öztürk's lecture shows how important it is to critically reflect on the reasons for the strikes in the period up to 1973 and the role of the trade unions from today's perspective. Öztürk not only points out grievances, but also emphasises that the trade unions underwent a positive development after the strikes. In this way, the reappraisal of memories can be incorporated into the public discourse of the present.

The example shows that a trade union's interest in a cohesive ability to act, membership growth and the intention of a socially critical agenda can coexist, especially if they are intended to serve the preservation of democratic structures. It is important to identify the problem areas. In this respect, the conflicts surrounding the "wildcat strikes" of 1973 can be used as a negative example of the exclusion of marginalised groups, while the transformation and learning processes in the IGM's migration policy can also be read as positive examples of increasingly successful inclusion. Controversial perspectives can be illuminated from a critical historical distance. However, there is a danger of rekindling resentments that were thought to have been overcome if the positions are taken up again without contextualising them accordingly. The previously marginalised movements can thus once again become an abstract bargaining chip within the trade unions and society. In democratically organised majority systems, the general problem is that minorities are given too little consideration. This challenge continues in both industrial and political democracy. In this context, the discourse on the history of remembrance has a special responsibility, as it reflects different perspectives on the history of remembrance within social negotiation processes. In this way, historical reappraisal can not only contribute to a deeper understanding of past events, but also enable the transfer to current challenges of current developments, even if this only provides answers to future questions to a limited extent.

As the philosopher Jürgen Habermas has said, strikes are an essential component of collective action in a democracy, which can only succeed in terms of industrial relations if all interest groups are included. Strikes can also be seen as an element in the communication system between different forms of democracy. In particular, ("wild") strikes offer the opportunity to make minorities heard and draw attention to grievances in living and working environments that lie outside of public perception.

This seems urgently necessary not only in the context of the deportations following the "wild strikes" of 1973, but also with regard to later political discourse in the FRG, such as the CDU government's repatriation plans for post-migrants in the 1980s. It is noticeable that this topic is primarily discussed when the economic situation is poor. The demand for "remigration" is also being raised again in current debates, particularly by far-right movements. The term is primarily used by the so-called 'Alternative für Deutschland' as a political battle cry, suggesting that migration is an undesirable development that can be reversed. The arguments are aimed less at a factual debate than at fears and marginalisation. On the other hand, an examination over longer periods of time shows that the recognition of (post-) migrant actors in the IGM after 1973 can be understood as part of an ongoing process of integration that should be pursued in the interests of an open and not only economically prosperous society. From this perspective, the learning processes of the IGM after 1973 can enrich not only industrial democracy but also public discourse.

Contributed by Jens Schroeter (Ruhr-Universität Bochum)

COTU-Kenya was among the first pressure groups to push for a new constitution. It was one of the organizations that constituted the Constitutional Review Committee that Kibaki appointed under the chairmanship of Professor Yash Pal Ghai to draft a new constitution. After months of meeting at the Bomas of Kenya Centre in Nairobi, Ghai’s team came up with a draft that was to be put to a national referendum. But to COTU’s and many Kenyans’ dismay, Kibaki had the document altered before it went to the referendum. The consolation for COTU and other supporters of the Bomas draft was that the public ended up voting against Kibaki’s draft when it was put before a referendum in 2005.

Despite the 2005 Bomas draft debacle, COTU remained steadfast in its fight for a new constitutional dispensation in Kenya. It was the first national organization in 2007 to warn the government that there would be skirmishes and violence if Kenyans went to that year’s general election under the existing laws. COTU’s fears would turn out to be well-founded when more than 1,000 people lost their lives and half a million were rendered homeless by the violence that followed the declaration of Kibaki as the winner of the 2007 presidential election against the protests of supporters of his main opponent, Raila Odinga. The 2007/2008 post-election violence ended in much soul-searching on the part of Kenyan leaders. Through the mediation of former United Nations secretary general Kofi Anna, they were able to agree on a peace formula that led to the setting up of a grand coalition government in which Kibaki retained the presidency and Odinga became Prime Minister. The leaders also agreed on a four-point agenda aimed at eliminating the conditions that gave rise to the post-election violence. By far the most important goal of the agenda was a new constitution.

Again, COTU would be among the earliest campaigners for the draft constitution once it had been drawn up by a committee of experts (headed by Nzamba Kitonga) that Kibaki, in consultation with Prime Minister Odinga, had appointed. The draft would not go to a national referendum until 2010, but by October 2009, Atwoli was leading a COTU campaign in different parts of the country, drumming up support amongst workers for the new constitution. COTU had very good reason for supporting the new constitution: it decreed the creation of a specialised court with the status of a high court to deal with employment and labour relations, which would guarantee the rights of employers, employees and regulators. The first 12 judges of the court were sworn in by President Kibaki in 2011, barely a year after the constitution had been approved by an overwhelming majority in a national referendum.

Remembering the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory Fire -- and what Changed After