Why trade unions aren’t welcome in any political system
A common thread is the desire to limit their power
A FEW years ago, a prominent trade union leader asked why trade unions seem universally unwelcome, essentially persona non grata, across different political systems.
While the evidence does show varying approaches to unions by different governments, a common thread is the desire to limit their power.
Governments across various political systems often view trade unions as threatening the established order, whether in capitalist democracies concerned with economic disruption, authoritarian regimes fearing dissent or developing countries seeking to attract investment.
Despite the potential benefits of collective bargaining and worker empowerment, the desire to limit union power remains a common thread across different political landscapes due to the perceived conflict between worker interests and those of capital. Generally, some social democracies and selected countries, like South Africa, have strong labour movements and institutionalised collective bargaining processes. The systems recognise the value of unions in protecting workers’ rights and promoting social justice.
The varying degrees of acceptance and repression of trade unions reflect the complex interplay of economic, political and social factors within different societies. The universal desire to limit union power, however, highlights the tension between the interests of workers and those of capital, which continues to be a defining feature of the global political economy. The tension is also evident in the International Labour Organization, where the right to strike remains contentious.
With support from various governments, including South Africa, the workers’ group requested that the International Court of Justice provide an advisory opinion on the long-standing dispute regarding the interpretation of Convention No 87 concerning the right to strike, which acts as a crucial counterbalance in the power dynamics between employers and employees. Governments across the political spectrum and with varying economic orientations, along with employers, vehemently opposed the legal effort to solidify the right to strike within the international system.
Nonetheless, trade unions have been historically associated with Left-leaning ideology. One main reason is that the “political Right” is antithetical to the concept of workers’ rights. The relevance of worker rights and the right to strike are particularly salient in contexts like South Africa, where the extraction of minerals for the green energy transition has raised concerns about labour rights and exploitation. The killing of workers in Marikana dealt a devastating blow to the progress of labour rights.
Capital’s power often overshadows labour’s ability to organise and exert influence and its existence. Consequently, labour’s efforts to organise, mobilise and assert its influence are significantly hampered, challenging the feasibility of a political advancement strategy for the working class.
In the Soviet Union, trade unions were not independent entities but integrated into the structures of the ruling Communist Party, serving to advance the party’s interests rather than functioning as autonomous advocates for workers’ rights. The International Labour Organization’s formation in 1919 was a victory for the international labour movement, aiming to establish and uphold the standards of global worker rights.
However, the Bolsheviks’ consolidation of power under Lenin’s leadership, marked by the suppression of dissenting voices and the centralisation of authority, ultimately led to a regime that exercised authoritarian control over the very people they claimed to represent. While the initial promise of worker empowerment and socialist ideals resonated with many, the Bolsheviks’ approach to labour struggles and their relationship with trade unions created a deep rift. This, ultimately, resulted in a betrayal of the revolutionary principles, leading to a regime characterised by repression and a lack of democratic participation.
In modern times, China has similarly replicated the model: trade unions exist in name only. They cannot exercise the full scope of rights enshrined in international labour and human rights instruments. Although labour unions exist in China, they operate differently than in many Western countries. There is only one legally recognised trade union, the All-China Federation of Trade Unions. The ACFTU is a national organisation closely affiliated with the Chinese Communist Party and is mandated to represent the interests of workers in China.
Margaret Thatcher significantly reduced the influence and power of trade unions in Great Britain. Her government implemented policies and legislative measures to curb the power of unions, which it believed were too strong and hindering economic progress. Thatcher’s actions were part of a broader neo-liberal agenda to reduce state intervention in the economy, privatise state-owned industries and promote free-market principles. The result was a significant decline in union membership and workers’ bargaining power.
The decimation of the US industrial relations system, once a bulwark of Cold War liberalism, has significantly weakened trade union power. Union busting, often motivated by the desire to keep labour costs low, maintain managerial control and avoid disruptions associated with strikes and industrial action, has been a critical factor in the decline. The impact of the anti-union tactics is evident in the substantial decrease in union membership and influence in the US over recent decades, contributing to broader societal issues such as income inequality and reduced worker protections.
Governments prefer that trade unions’ powers typically be confined to issues related to the workplace. However, trade unions tend to overextend their influence by entering mainstream politics. For example, significant opposition movements have emerged from within the trade union movement in Zimbabwe and Zambia.
Frederick Chiluba, a former union member, unseated Kenneth Kaunda in Zambia in 1991, while Morgan Tsvangirai was not as successful in Zimbabwe.
In South Africa, the alliance between the ANC and Cosatu aimed to “manage” the trade union movement by integrating it into the governing state apparatus, thereby avoiding direct confrontation. Borrowed from the ever-influential Minerals-Energy Complex, although some would say it is the Scandinavian model, the ANC strategy has largely achieved co-operation from trade unions. In return, Cosatu and its affiliates have contributed ministers and administrators to the ANC government, assisting in its operation.
Furthermore, Cosatu has played a role in drafting labour laws, including the controversial “closed shop” clause. The clause has faced challenges, such as the rise of the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union in the mining industry at the expense of the National Union of Mineworkers. In all fairness, Cosatu’s survival depends on public-sector trade unions due to the rapid decline in union density in the private sector. However, the government has overlooked principles of collective bargaining in recent wage disputes, signalling what will probably befall trade unions.
The Cosatu-ANC pact remains unchallenged. Following in the footsteps of president Jair Bolsonaro in Brazil, the DA has promised to limit trade union power and even scrap the minimum wage law in South Africa. This indicates that trade union existence depends on a “friendly” regime and tolerant capital. The former USSR, Zimbabwe, eSwatini and Bolsonaro’s Brazil should provide Cosatu with a glimpse into what happens when state power shifts away from labour-friendly policies.
From the capital perspective, Cosatu’s influence has been carefully managed through integration. Corporate South Africa has provided investment opportunities for Cosatu and its affiliated unions to contain their power in their companies. This raises the question of whether this constitutes a form of capture. Cosatu and its affiliate unions have significant investments in major South African companies, often where they also represent workers.
In summary, trade unions are like an Achilles’ heel, and the type of political system is irrelevant. On the downside, trade unions often rely on favourable political conditions to achieve their goals. They also face challenges like internal conflicts of interest, economic pressures and outright hostility and repression from governments or powerful business interests. These can be exploited to weaken their influence and limit their ability to protect workers’ rights.