In the 1960s and 1970s, Britain was often referred to by Establishment politicians and commentators as the “sick man of Europe.” Its economy was wracked by rising inflation, the “stop-go” cycle of economic growth and then contraction and a devaluing currency. But at the top of the list of so-called woes for the capitalists was the complaint that British workers were far too strike-prone. The bete noire was the unofficial strike, the wildcat strike epitomised in the 1959 Peter Sellars film I’m Alright, Jack.
The Labour government under Harold Wilson set up the Donovan commission in 1965 to investigate industrial relations. Its report three years later asserted that wildcat strikes were the main cause of poor worker productivity. It claimed that this was the main reason for Britain’s poor economic performance.
Strike activity has declined in all Western economies since the 1980s. But it has declined in Britain far more so than in many others. As New Labour ministers often trumpet, Britain can now be described as the “healthy man” of Europe in this regard. Had last year’s planned public-sector-wide strike over the government’s attack on pensions taken place, however, this picture of labour quiescence might have begun to change.
The same issue could again provoke a strike this year by the 2.6 million public-sector workers.If it goes ahead, it could start to shift Britain’s workers towards European practices. There, labour movements have used mass strikes frequently to defend workers’ interests in the last 20 years. For this to start to happen in Britain, it would need not just a successful result to a mass strike over pensions but for the strike to be a non-passive one which gave workers a sense of their collective power and helped them to regain their industrial confidence. If this was to happen, it would be likely to result in pressure for more strikes of this kind.
So, what lessons can we learn from our European brothers and sisters who often use the tool of the mass strike? Their strikes are of a short duration, lasting between half-a-day and two days, and involving several million workers shutting down either the whole economy or large sections of it. They have concerned fighting against labour market reforms, labour law, spending cuts, redundancies and changes to pensions.
Compared to Britain, union density in Belgium, France, Greece, Italy and Spain varies widely, with some much lower and some a little higher. The level of membership is not the crucial factor in explaining the ability of these union movements to mobilise en masse. Neither is whether there are one or more peak union federations like the TUC. The most important aspect is that unions have been able to tap into keenly felt grievances, providing leadership and developing union attachment.
In a number of continental European countries, unions have created power bases by successfully contesting works council or workplace committee elections. Workers can respect and follow the lead of unions on the continent without being union members. Inter-union organising networks exist at the grass-roots level in France, Greece, Italy and Spain. These get more workers out on strike, ensure greater strike effectiveness and help to reduce sectionalism.
However, there are some important differences. Legislation regulating strikes in these other European countries is often less restrictive than in Britain, although this isn’t always the case. In Italy and Spain, for example, legislation has been introduced in recent years to restrict strikes in strategic sectors like transport. It is also worth pointing out that there is more of a tradition of extraparliamentary protests and actions in many continental countries, sometimes as a result of the previous exclusion of communist parties from the political process.
But it would be wrong to give the impression that all the mass strikes undertaken are successful either in their immediate objectives or in the implicit goal of helping to remove the incumbent governments. In fact, the aim of a strike is often merely to reopen negotiations or secure concessions rather than reversing the plans. And “going to the well” too many times can reduce the potency of the mass strike, as governments learn the ability to withstand such pressure. But none of this detracts from recognition that governments’ neoliberal attacks have often been stopped or stalled, with various governments falling not long afterwards.
The key factor in explaining the relative success of the mass strikes appears to be the political weakness of governments, whether right or centre-left, in continental Europe. The processes of political polarisation and fragmentation have meant that these short, sharp mass strikes are able to exert more leverage than might otherwise be expected.
This brings us back to Britain. Both Blair and Blairism are now holed below the waterline. In this situation, mass strikes over pensions and the like could force settlements on union terms and add to the pressure to end the “new” Labour project. A clear union victory on pensions could embolden workers and pressurise Labour to shift well to the left of Brownism. Time will tell whether we or not take the “European” road.
In the 1960s and 1970s, Britain was often referred to by Establishment politicians and commentators as the “sick man of Europe.” Its economy was wracked by rising inflation, the “stop-go” cycle of economic growth and then contraction and a devaluing currency. But at the top of the list of so-called woes for the capitalists was the complaint that British workers were far too strike-prone. The bete noire was the unofficial strike, the wildcat strike epitomised in the 1959 Peter Sellars film I’m Alright, Jack.
The Labour government under Harold Wilson set up the Donovan commission in 1965 to investigate industrial relations. Its report three years later asserted that wildcat strikes were the main cause of poor worker productivity. It claimed that this was the main reason for Britain’s poor economic performance.
Strike activity has declined in all Western economies since the 1980s. But it has declined in Britain far more so than in many others. As New Labour ministers often trumpet, Britain can now be described as the “healthy man” of Europe in this regard. Had last year’s planned public-sector-wide strike over the government’s attack on pensions taken place, however, this picture of labour quiescence might have begun to change.
The same issue could again provoke a strike this year by the 2.6 million public-sector workers.If it goes ahead, it could start to shift Britain’s workers towards European practices. There, labour movements have used mass strikes frequently to defend workers’ interests in the last 20 years. For this to start to happen in Britain, it would need not just a successful result to a mass strike over pensions but for the strike to be a non-passive one which gave workers a sense of their collective power and helped them to regain their industrial confidence. If this was to happen, it would be likely to result in pressure for more strikes of this kind.
So, what lessons can we learn from our European brothers and sisters who often use the tool of the mass strike? Their strikes are of a short duration, lasting between half-a-day and two days, and involving several million workers shutting down either the whole economy or large sections of it. They have concerned fighting against labour market reforms, labour law, spending cuts, redundancies and changes to pensions.
Compared to Britain, union density in Belgium, France, Greece, Italy and Spain varies widely, with some much lower and some a little higher. The level of membership is not the crucial factor in explaining the ability of these union movements to mobilise en masse. Neither is whether there are one or more peak union federations like the TUC. The most important aspect is that unions have been able to tap into keenly felt grievances, providing leadership and developing union attachment.
In a number of continental European countries, unions have created power bases by successfully contesting works council or workplace committee elections. Workers can respect and follow the lead of unions on the continent without being union members. Inter-union organising networks exist at the grass-roots level in France, Greece, Italy and Spain. These get more workers out on strike, ensure greater strike effectiveness and help to reduce sectionalism.
However, there are some important differences. Legislation regulating strikes in these other European countries is often less restrictive than in Britain, although this isn’t always the case. In Italy and Spain, for example, legislation has been introduced in recent years to restrict strikes in strategic sectors like transport. It is also worth pointing out that there is more of a tradition of extraparliamentary protests and actions in many continental countries, sometimes as a result of the previous exclusion of communist parties from the political process.
But it would be wrong to give the impression that all the mass strikes undertaken are successful either in their immediate objectives or in the implicit goal of helping to remove the incumbent governments. In fact, the aim of a strike is often merely to reopen negotiations or secure concessions rather than reversing the plans. And “going to the well” too many times can reduce the potency of the mass strike, as governments learn the ability to withstand such pressure. But none of this detracts from recognition that governments’ neoliberal attacks have often been stopped or stalled, with various governments falling not long afterwards.
The key factor in explaining the relative success of the mass strikes appears to be the political weakness of governments, whether right or centre-left, in continental Europe. The processes of political polarisation and fragmentation have meant that these short, sharp mass strikes are able to exert more leverage than might otherwise be expected.
This brings us back to Britain. Both Blair and Blairism are now holed below the waterline. In this situation, mass strikes over pensions and the like could force settlements on union terms and add to the pressure to end the “new” Labour project. A clear union victory on pensions could embolden workers and pressurise Labour to shift well to the left of Brownism. Time will tell whether we or not take the “European” road.
Professor Gregor Gall is director of the Centre for Research in Employment Studies at the University of Hertfordshire.
See also
http://www.spectrezine.org/europe/Denny3.htm