Back to homepage...

Chapter 1

Labour Dilemmas and Labour Futures

Ronaldo Munck 

In common with other social groups, workers and their organisations are facing an uncertain future as we approach the end of the 20th century. In an era when, as Marx used to say: "all that is solid melts into air", what were once articles of faith for the labour movement are now painful dilemmas. My purpose here is to carry out a broad survey of these `new times' insofar as they affect the way people work or cannot work across the planet. It is necessary to examine also the various new theories, including post modernism, which are seen to account for these changes and plot their possible direction(s). Labour itself has not been silent in this regard, and has thrown up certain alternatives to the old ways of economic and political unionism, namely a social movement type of unionism. A final section examines to what extent the `old bottles' of the trade unions and other traditional labour organizations can accept the `new wine' of alternative strategies. It is interesting to note, in this regard, the recent call by that once secure bastion of orthodoxy, the British TUC (Trade Union Congress) to learn from the `new unionism' for the 1880's. In mid 1996, TUC leader John Monks declared that if the British unions were to break out of a 17 year cycle of declining membership and influence they would have to rekindle the spirit of the 1880's, the US civil rights movements, and the mythical union organiser Joe Hill (The Guardian, 19/6/96). Targeting part-time and female employment, small workplaces and service and professional-technical jobs as the basis for union growth may not signal a `new model of unionism' for the 1990s, but it does seem to mark a recognition of the crisis of conventional unionism as examined in this volume.  NEW TIMES

At the end of the 20th Century many are predicting the virtual "collapse of work". In its different variants (Rifkin, 1995; Aronowitz and Di Fazio, 1994) this problematic predicts a continuous decline of the working population and a consequent weakening, if not irrelevance, of trade unions. For Jeremy Rifkin, workerless factories and virtual companies in the North are matched by millions of redundancies in the South, which cannot compete with the cost efficiency and speed of delivery of automated production. His conclusion (Rifkin, 1995, p.5) is dramatic: "Throughout the world there is a sense of momentous change taking place - change so vast in scale that we are barely able to fathom its ultimate impact. "An oft quoted figure is 8 million people unemployed or under-employed in the South, which gives us some idea of the magnitude of the problem. In the North, the very meaning of work has changed, as has the social cohesion and consciousness of workers, and thus the possible role of trade unions. There is a general sense of loss and disorientation, matched by a critique of what has been accepted practice in the past. This is the case for labour movements worldwide, whether the `god that failed' be social democracy, communism, military nationalism or the discrete charms of the advanced industrial societies. 

For more confident certainty on future prospects we need to turn to the World Bank's (1996) report on `Workers in an Integrating World'. There is here a welcome recognition that the lives of urban workers in different parts of the world are increasingly intertwined. Their call is for increased international trade and investment and less state intervention as the panacea for all our ills. The World Bank (1995:6) recognises that "In the short term, workers often feel the pain [of structural adjustment measures] as real wages fall, unemployment rises, and employment shifts into informal activities". The inequality between rich and poor nations and social classes will grow but employment restructuring is seen as inevitable and its social costs as manageable. Now, clearly the processes described do not occur from some blind technological imperative but are driven by identifiable social and political forces. Capital flight for example, is not "a fact of life" (World Bank, 1995: 62) which neither workers or governments can do anything about. International market regulation is both possible and desirable. What the World Bank report on workers worldwide does reflect is the absence of any coherent progressive alternative political economy at a national, not to mention international, level. 

Late capitalism has become centrally characterised by a concerted bid at `de-regulation', that is to say driving back state intervention in economic and social affairs. The transformation of workers lives has had both an objective and subjective dimension. At a structural level, the worldwide changes in capitalism which began to take off in the 1980's led to a growing differentiation of the workforce. The nature of jobs became more heterogeneous and there was a disaggregation of the working class. The perceived end of Fordism - as a symbol of capitalism in its heyday - led to wide-ranging changes in the way goods and services were produced, distributed and consumed. The mass production approach of Ford is often contrasted to the `flexible specialisation' approach of the Italian clothing firm Benneton, for example, with its particular blend of new technology and the `old' putting-out system. Of course we must beware of a simplistic Fordist/Post-Fordist divide, as Karel Williams et al point out, a simple "opposition between mass production and flexible specialisation is unworkable because empirical instances cannot be identified; (this) meta-history is contradicted by the case of Ford and suppresses the subsequent history of the assembly industries; (the) analysis of market trends and new technology is unconvincing; and (the) view of where flexible specialisation can take us is incurably romantic" (Williams et al, 1987, p.438). The point at this stage is that, over and above particular criticisms, the New Times writers have used the idea of Post-Fordism as an imaginative way to conceptualize what the future might hold for labour. 

What `de-regulation' (of the market, because labour continues to be regulated of course) means in practice is seen most clearly in a country such as New Zealand, often presented as a `world model' for structural adjustment (see Kelsey, 1996). Here the neo-liberal global agenda was implemented with a vengeance and its social impact was immediate. The trade union movement sought to mitigate the effects of economic liberalization but they could not prevent a decline in union membership from 45 per cent of the workforce in 1986 to 22 per cent in 1994. From powerful partner in corporatist arrangements with the Labour Party prior to 1988 the trade unions slipped into the role of a small pressure group. Global competitiveness spells social exclusion at home. The state carrying out this liberal revolution has not faded into the background as economic dogma preaches, but has become a strong, interventionist state bent on `keeping labour in its place'. 

A variant on the above themes is that of `Japanization' by which analysts mean that supposedly unique (cf Dale, 1995) combination of `lean production', `just in time' work methods and company ethos. This is sometimes elevated into a universalistic analysis as with Kenney and Florida (1993) who see Japanese firms creating a new work model based on `innovation- mediated production' where the knowledge of all employees is mobilized for continuous improvement of the production process. Other authors have, in contrast, sought "to problematize both the extent of diffusion of this approach and the evolving relationship between such innovations and the wider social and economic contexts" (Elger and Smith, 1994, p.9). Indeed, far from bringing some marvellously enlightened method, when Japanese firms came to Britain they deliberately sought out regions of high unemployment with work cultures that would not impinge on their drive for higher productivity. In Brazil, the new `Japanese' management techniques have begun to be implemented, but in piecemeal fashion and only in areas of weak union organisation. Furthermore, it does not represent an enlightened management attitude but simply the spur of international competition and has led to intensification of work and labour discipline (Humphrey, 1994). 

For employers, the new `Post-Fordist' era has meant, above all, a new approach to industrial relations based on `flexibility'. By the mid 1980's, according to Marino Regini (1992, p.7) "Employers became less interested in patterns of industrial relations designed to deal with aggregate problems and solutions". The work force itself had become more differentiated and thus workers' interest and demands seemed less amenable to a collectivist approach. Management, for its part, began to focus much more centrally on the level of the firm seeking to enhance labour flexibility. The days of collective centralised bargaining seemed numbered. The trade unions had already been weakened by the economic and political transformation of the 1970's, and employers sought to translate this into a decisive change in the balance of forces in the workplace, under the watchword of labour `flexibility'. Flexibility of labour, of course, takes many different forms. According to the OECD (cited in Van Dijk, 1995, p.229) there are five main forms: 

1. External numerical flexibility - employers decide how many employees they want at any given time; 
2. Externalisation - various forms of sub-contracting or putting-out of work; 
3. Internal numerical flexibility - working hours and shifts, etc decided according to employers' needs; 
4. Functional flexibility - job assignment and rotation according to employers' needs; 
5. Wage flexibility - wages adjusted according to `performance' and productivity. 

All in all a formidable array of measures which capital abrogates to itself to maintain the subjection of labour. If both the labour contract and labour performance were to become more `flexible', the traditional labour organisations such as the trade unions needed to be marginalized. In some cases, the unions marginalized themselves by fighting the battle with capital on an old terrain that had already shifted. 

Alongside de-regulation and the bid for `flexible specialisation', went the decisive feminization of the labour force. The traditional image of a male-manual model worker lived on only in the trade union banners. As Jill Rubery and Colette Fagan note: "the integration of women into the economy is closely associated with new types of jobs and types of employment: women have provided the main source of new labour for the growth of services and part-time work" (Rubery and Fagan, 1994, p.162). While related to the increased flexibilisation of the labour market noted above, the increased participation of women is not a simple reflection of that tendency. Instead, we need to take into account the overall nature of gender relations in a given country or region. Women are now more than a `reserve labour pool', coming in and out of the labour market according to demand, they are rather a permanent feature of the labour landscape. It is women in the trade unions, and in the wider women's organisations, which have, in particular, helped change the agenda of many trade unions in the 1980s. Issues such as the once sacrosanct (male) `family wage' are now on the table and the `macho' way of waging industrial conflict is no longer `the only game in town' in labour circles. 

As the ILO (International Labour Organisation) notes: "The past decades have seen a surge of women into the paid labour force of most countries around the world, accompanied by fundamental societal change of unprecedented scale and speed" (ILO, 1994, p.3). Yet this process is uneven in many ways, insofar as in 1990 over half of the 828 million women in paid employment worldwide were employed in Asia (35 percent in East Asia). Furthermore, women are concentrated in the so-called `contingency' workforce doing temporary and part-time work. Women workers are often under precarious contracts, and subject to atrocious working conditions. Women, for example, make up over 80 per cent of the total of home workers, working long and hazardous hours for little reward. Overall, flexible labour practices and the drive towards structural adjustment economic policies are threatening to undo any gains made by women in recent decades. Furthermore, as Val Moghadan notes, this situation limits "the capacity of governments, trade unions and women's organisations to improve women's employment opportunities and working and living conditions" (Moghadan, 1995, p.115). This is a general point we will return to. 

Finally, what occurred in the 1980's was the decisive internationalization of production, consumption and distribution, leading for some to a `globalization' of the working class, or at least an internationalization of proletarianization. The various attempts to analyse the new, or changing, international division of labour in the 1970's pointed clearly towards an increase in the proportion of the global population dependent upon the sale of its labour power on the market. There is also a growing inter-connectedness of national economies, and a growing realization that the future of labour depends on processes beyond the national boundaries (cf Belander, Edwards and Haiven, eds, 1994). The globalisation of industrial production, and the increasing integration of Third World workers, especially women, into the international productive system, is having a widespread and ongoing impact. The workers of the `world-market factories' are more than just a passive component of a global reserve army of labour. Like women, the once excluded and peripheralized Third World workers are now playing a key role in revitalizing the strategies of the traditional Western model of trade unionism. Whether it is Brazil, the Philippines or South Africa it is this `new' working class which is helping develop adequate answers to the dilemmas posed by global capitalism in the 1990's. 

In 1992, according to the United Nations, there were about 37,000 trans-national corporations with about 200,000 foreign affiliates employing about 29 million people outside their base nation, 17 million in the advanced industrial societies and 12 million in the so-called developing countries (Simai, 1995, p.237). These giant companies are certainly expanding: since 1983 foreign direct investment has grown five times faster than world trade and ten times faster than world output (The Economist, 1995, p.5). Yet these companies are just part of the general trend towards internationalization and general integration with the world capitalist market. The effect on workers is enormous: whereas in the mid 1970's about two thirds of the world's workforce lived in countries only weakly linked to international markets (due to protectionism or central planning) by the year 2000 less than one tenth of workers will be living in nations which are still in part disconnected from the world market (World Bank, 1995, p.60). In that process of shakedown and reconstruction of the world labour market over half of the world's 2.5 billion workers, will carry the full brunt of transition to an open world economy. 


Faced with uncertainty, fluidity and even chaos, it is not surprising that the labour and socialist traditions have turned to new theories to chart a way forward. For some (eg Jameson, 1992) the post-modernist wave is but the cultural logic of a late capitalism past its time. It can, indeed, be seen as a luxury of a dominant order which, secure in its own position, now wishes to deny to women and the post-colonial peoples their attempt to affirm a missing subjectivity through a casual swipe of the hand which declares the `death of the subject'. Tempting though this dismissal may be it does not really help us deal with the challenges and dilemmas of the 21st century. The post-modern (or, more precisely, post- structuralist) approach bids us reject the broad interpretative schemes or metanarratives of Marx and the socialist/labour icons which seek to provide us with the `truth' of how everything under the sun is connected and why things are the way they are (see Kumar, 1995 for an introduction). Instead of a `totalising' account we are directed, rather, towards a `deconstruction' of narratives and an understanding of the radical contingency of structures and events. 

If the traditional labour/socialist projects of transformation are now in crisis, we should perhaps turn to the `new' social movements and their associated politics of reconstruction. These movements conventionally contrasted to the `old' movements of labour or nationalism, are taken to include the women's, peace, and human rights movements, as well as, in some conceptions, a diversity of regional, local or community associations. These are seen to represent a qualitatively different form of transformative politics and, in embryo, a new societal paradigm. These movements stress their autonomy from party politics and prioritise civil society over the state. In social movement politics, power itself is redefined, no longer being seen as something out there ready to be seized, but as a diffused and plural quality woven into the very fabric of society. These social movements have, arguably, helped to create a new political space where new identities have been developed, new demands have been articulated and the dividing line between the public and private domains has lost much of its meaning. The very notion of power is, hereby, redefined, the limits of state politics exposed and a challenge laid down to the atomization and alienation characteristic of contemporary capitalism. 

The main set of theoretical principles, explaining the strategies and nature of the `new' social movements can be traced to the work of, amongst others, Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe (Laclau and Mouffe, 1985). This work helps us understand the open and contingent nature of political identities and political struggles. Against the privileged status of workers in traditional labour/socialist discourse, they examine the plural nature of society and the autonomy of the various oppressed groups. Radical politics, for them, should abandon a narrow productivist logic, and adopt a broader strategy aimed at articulating new democratic political identities across society. Society is seen as open, unstable and contingent, being discursively constituted through a process of articulation and negotiation. Once the traditional idea of the working class, as central unifying feature in the socialist strategies, is abandoned, the doors are opened on a new radical democratic politics more attuned to the needs of the late 20th Century. This, more pluralist, politics entails an engagement with the multiple identities and diverse struggles of the new social movements. 

Critics of Laclau and Mouffe have accused them of seeing history and society as totally random. By undermining causality they are seen to lapse into indeterminacy. Their politics has been accused of being an anarcho-voluntarist fantasy, where every link of the political chain is equally weak and susceptible to pressure. Laclau and Mouffe have also been accused of a eurocentric, post-industrial bias (Escobar, 1992, p.39). Their proclamation of a radical pluralist democracy seems restricted to "societies in which the democratic revolution has crossed a certain threshold" (Laclau and Mouffe, 1995, p.166), meaning the `advanced' countries. Thus the multiplicity of antagonisms and identities in the `Third World' seems destined to a lower level national-popular revolution. A general critique from Best and Kellner (1991, p.281) argues that `their discourse theory lacks concrete analysis of the new social movements which they champion". Nevertheless, their approach has found a wide resonance amongst the intellectuals of the new social movements which labour theorists ignore at their peril. 

In terms of an over-arching theory seeking to explore the role of labour in the current period we need to turn towards the work on `post Fordism'. In the Fordist era we saw the `commodification' of all areas of life. Mass production went hand in hand with mass consumption. Sometime in the 1970's, this integrated system and `way of life', known as Fordism, entered into crisis. In its stead we have seen a post-Fordism which is seen as consumption rather than production-led. It is seen to be based on segmented niche markets rather than the mass market. Within the realm of production, post-Fordism has led to the development of the `flexible specialization' approach already referred to above. New technology and computer-assisted production methods have made possible the `just-in-time' approach to stock keeping which helped Japanese industry establish its world lead. The mass of semi-skilled machine-minders typical of the modern auto-plant gives way to a smaller, more diverse, multiple skilled workforce participating in the labour process through the likes of quality circles, for example. There have been many criticisms of the concept of post-Fordism (see Amin, ed, 1994) but one of the main ones is that it, like its predecessor, is applied in a somewhat blanket form to a diversity of situations. In particular, we can question its approach to the world's majority of workers living in what used to be called the Third World, notwithstanding the attempt to develop a concept of `peripheral Fordism' (e.g. Lipietz, 1988). Also, this school of analysis sometimes tends to adopt a narrow national optic neglecting the relationship between national economies and the processes of internationalization. While we need to be aware of the analysis carried out into post-Fordism, and the related approach to `disorganized capitalism', we might not wish them to become new master narratives as debilitating as the old ones. 

Post-Fordism is a fluid and ill-defined concept, however suggestive some of the analysis of its forms might be. As with the concept of globalization, tendencies have been confused with an actually achieved new mode of social regulation. A flexible regime of accumulation may be a more common feature in the advanced industrial societies, but it hardly affects more than a few sectors in the so-called Third World. The breakdown of Fordism, and the seemingly fatal weakening of Keynesian social regulation does not, necessarily, lead to something called post-Fordism. Nor does the rise of neo-liberalism appear to be the unstoppable tide it was a decade ago, as its inherent contradictions and flaws become apparent. Flexible production systems, and faith in the market, seem hardly adequate to solve the massive social dislocation present and reproduced under global capitalism. Referring to the systemic instability of the global system Tickell and Peck, (1995, p.359) argue that: "Workable post-Fordist `solutions' at the national or local scales, .... will not stabilize until a new institutional fix its found on a global scale." Labour will, necessarily, intervene in this process, which may be no more than a pale imitation of the old national-keynesian `social compromise' or a more radical conceptions of global citizenship, depending on the balance of forces. 

In a striking phrase Scott Lash and John Urry refer to the `end of organized capitalism' (Lash and Urry, 1987). National economies are losing control as international financial flows assume greater importance. The transnational corporations cause a growing fragmentation of the production process. The working class as we know it is rooted in a spatial and cultural fix which no longer exists. For Lash and Urry (1987, p.312): "The world of a `disorganized' capitalism is one in which the `fixed, fast-frozen relations' of organized capitalist relations have been swept away. Societies are being transformed from above, from below, and from within. All that is solid about organized capitalism, class, industry, cities, collectivity, nation-state, even the world, melts into air". The fragmentation of working class cultures and communities which this process has led to cannot be underestimated. The mass homogeneous working class of the Fordist era has been replaced by a core workforce which is skill flexible and a peripheral workforce which is time flexible (Jessop et al., 1987, p.109). A reconstituted progressive politics will not occur, in this context, by harking back to the past, but by recognising the transformation which had taken place and boldly intervening in them. 

The concept of globalization has certainly "taken off" in the last few years, producing a voluminous and multi-faced literature. It has gone far beyond the academy to become common currency in international media and business circles. Paul Hirst and Grahame Thompson in a valuable survey of the actual evidence for globalization conclude that "one effect of the concept of globalization has been to paralyse radical reforming national strategies, to see them as unviable in the face of the judgement and sanction of international markets" (Hirst and Thompson, 1996, p1). There has indeed, been a huge leap from the internationalisation of production to posit an actual globalisation. Much mythology has been built around the transnational corporations ignoring the very real weaknesses, dilemmas and vulnerabilities of these organisations (Ramsay, 1996, p.1). In reality the famous "multinationals" retain, on the whole a clear national base and are subject to national laws. Indeed, lately there has been considerable attention (see Dicken, P. et al., 1994) paid to the local `embededness' of transnational corporations, not that this makes them dynamic agents of local development of course, but it does counter the `footloose' image of these organisations. These companies, according to the most recent data "are not becoming footloose global capital" (Hirst and Thompson, 1996, p.17). The Economist goes as far as to argue that "globalisation exposed the multinationals' weaknesses. Deregulation and lower trade barriers have reduced the value of their carefully cultivated relationships with governments..." (The Economist, 1995, p.6). The transnationals are not an undifferentiated species and they are simply not invulnerable to labour. It may be more fruitful in regards to the phenomenon of globalisation to conceive it in terms of "the relationship between the internationalisation of the state and the imposition of new forms of labour discipline" (Burnham, 1996, p.4). We should see the state and the market as distinct forms of the capitalist social relations of production. As Burnham (1996, p.3) points out: "A new research agenda for labour studies in the 1990s is to chart how changes in state form - what can be referred to as the internationalisation of the state - are employed to restructure labour/capital relations". 


Do the `new theories' on the `new times' provide a new, viable progressive strategy to take labour forward into the 21st Century? I would like to start with the assertion by Richard Hyman (1994, p.113) that: "Rather than a crisis of trade unionism, what has occurred is a crisis of a specific, narrowly based type of trade unionism". The purely nationally oriented male manual manufacturing based type of trade unionism is, indeed, in crisis for the reasons outlined above. But different voices, experiences and interests are now coming to the fore and pointing us towards possible alternatives for labour in the 21st Century. 

Sometimes there is a stark counterposition between the `old' labour movement and the `new' social movements around gender, race, ecological or peace issues. Alan Scott (1991) has usefully summarised these assumed differences in terms of the distinct location, aims, organisation and medium of action of the workers' movement and the new social movements respectively. Whereas the struggles of labour have increasingly been located within the polity, the new social movements are usually assumed to operate within civil society. As to the aims of labour they have usually focused around securing economic rights for workers and the political integration of labour within the dominant system. Conversely, the new social movements stress the autonomy of civil society and often seek changes in social values or life-styles. The organisational mode of labour has traditionally been formal and has adopted a hierarchical aspect (the famous `iron law of oligarchy' of Michels). For their part, the new social movements tend, at least during their inception and in theory anyway, towards a networking and/or grass roots type of organisation. Finally, whereas the worker's movement has usually stressed political mobilization, the new social movements often went for direct action and/or daring attempts at cultural innovations (witness the dramatic tactics of Greenpeace). The above represents two ideal-types, not always reflected in practice. But we can see in this general picture, albeit tempered by empirical counter-examples, the challenge posed by the new social movements to the old, or at least traditional, labour movements. 

I think we need to take seriously the warning by Allen Hunter (1994, p.6) that: "the harsh juxtaposition between the (bad) old politics and the (good) new social movements is self-deceptive, misleading, and can inhibit the kind of critical interrogation of current prospects for radical change that is needed". For one thing, the international labour movement has, in recent decades, explored innovative forms of actions. From the `social movement unionism' of Brazil, South Africa or the Phillippines to the `new realism' of Western Europe and elsewhere, labour has been seeking ways out of the apparent impasse of the old tactics, organizational modes and even objectives. Union leaders, as much as workers themselves, increasingly realize that unions are no longer `representative' in the old way. Contemporary trade union discourse is well attuned to the need to go beyond the traditional demand for `more and more', to address the quality of life of workers today. Australian union leaders came back from a fact finding mission in Europe in 1986 recognising precisely this type of issue and waxing lyrical on the need for a new type of `strategic unionism' (ACTU/JDC Mission of Western Europe, 1989). This realization that the old way of doing things was producing rapidly diminishing dividends was far from unique. 

It is important to note, following, Marino Regini (1992, p.102) that "some trade unions have undertaken a search for new, less defensive responses to the current challenges...". The growing heterogeneity of the labour force and the increasing impact of `flexible specialisation' can be, and has been, seen as an opportunity for labour even while it is a constraint on traditional strategies. As against a homogeneous working class we now have a heterogeneous labour force. Union leaders presume less to speak `on behalf' of a mythical working class, instead diverse identities find their own voices and articulate their own strategies. Interest representation in a simple one-to-one model gives way to the pluralism of identity politics. As to `flexible specialisation' there is now the possibility, as Regini (1992, p.106) notes that for workers "flexibility means viewing their working time and work performance as less standardised, rigid and uniform". To find Japanese auto workers speaking in these terms is, indeed, significant, coming as it does from a trade union view supposedly characterised by life time commitment (cf Kamata, 1984) albeit for men mainly, but now advocating reduced working hours. 

In South Africa, the trade union movement, coming out of the apartheid era, took a pro-active stance towards industrial policy. COSATU (Congress of South Africa Trade Unions) sponsored the Industrial Strategy Project which began as early as 1992 to devise a new post-apartheid industrial strategy in consultation with unions and employers. Its brief was to investigate "the competitive status of 13 of South Africa's industrial sectors, assessing not only their abilities to withstand global competition, but also their potential for meeting basic needs" (Joffee et al, 1995, p.17). It addressed the issues of raising productivity, creating employment, reviving investment and improving trade performance. Significantly, this strategy advocated a corporatist industrial relations framework to move "away from the conflictive relations endemic to the apartheid era", and start a process of consensus - building which is "only likely to be achieved in the context of tripartite policy formulation" (Joffee et al, 1994, p.23). It is interesting that it is Sam Gindin, an official of the Canadian Auto-Workers Union, who provided one of the most explicit critiques of this perspective from a labour point of view, exposing the dangers of the ideology, of `international competitiveness' and the desperate need for a democratic counter-project based not on a debilitating corporatism but on building the capabilities of labour and the unions (Gindin, 1995). 

As the old paradigms of labour structuring and organisation dissolve, so new forms are developed. Women working worldwide have thrown up novel and effective forms of struggle. Whether in the Free Trade Zones on the Mexican border, homeworkers in India or African township traders, women are imagining ways of resisting the neo-liberal capitalist onslaught. In introducing a collection describing new forms of economic organising among poor women in the Third World and the First, Sheila Rowbotham and Swasti Mitter (1994, p.6) point out that "The experience gained by Third World poor women, in developing forms of survival and resistance, are becoming increasingly relevant to women of the First World." Organising outside the trade unions in various ways linked into the community, these women are often developing a synthesis of old and new forms of organisation of great relevance. In a parallel move, some commentators are now pointing to the potential of the `third sector' or social economy. Thus Rifkin (1995, p.283) refers to how: "The third sector is emerging in every region of the world. Its meteoric rise is attributable in part to the increasing need to fill a political vacuum left by the retreat of both the private and public sectors from the affairs of local communities". 

We increasingly find trade unions worldwide moving beyond the factory gates and breaking with a narrow, economistic conception of trade unionism. As De Martino argues, in relation to the U.S, there was once a powerful left workerist orthodoxy which "grants privileged status to workers in an enterprise, they alone are empowered to determine when and how to struggle, and for what" (De Martino, 1991, p.116). The broader community could express its `solidarity' when called upon, but could not interfere with union `autonomy'. Today it is widely recognised in labour circles that unions are not simply about defending workers rights at the place of work, and the artificial barriers between workplace and community are not so impregnable. After all, workers are gendered, they are citizens and they are consumers too, often unions become `populist' campaigning organizations, from South Africa, to Poland to the US, with a fluid view of how to pursue their struggle under contemporary capitalism. In introducing a collection discussing various ways of mobilizing the community in the era of the `global city' Fisher and Kling (1993, p.xiv) note that: "The old ways of thinking about social movements are not commensurate with the realities of today's complex society, and new ways of imagining the workings, forms and ends of collective struggle have not yet been established or stabilized". 

In the era of globalization many argue that trade unions must perforce have an internationalist perspective as the national optic is no longer adequate to its objectives (See Globalisation and the Unions 1995 and ICEM, 1996). This is seen as a realistic as well as a politically desirable goal. As Brecher and Costello (1990, p.122) put it, the goal of this new labour internationalism would be "to regulate the global economy to the interests of working people, their communities and the environment". Trade unions, following the new social movements, are finding their feet in the new global order. In North America, the new free trade zone has forced Canadian, U.S and Mexican workers to cooperate to eliminate if possible, labour as a factor in capitalist competition. The Canadian Autoworkers Union (CAW, 1994, p.9) has argued that: "While we do not see a role for formal international bargaining, we do see a vital role in mobilizing, across borders, around specific issues.... where local support is solid, international solidarity and actions can be built". This seems to be a sophisticated understanding of the local - global nexus in the new international political economy. Internationalism does not entail forsaking the national terrain, as a mystical understanding of globalization as the new terrain superseding all others would have us believe. 


A cursory glance at labour worldwide still shows trade unions to be the dominant form of organization, notwithstanding their diverse manifestations and political colourings. So, can the `new wine' we talk about above, fit into the `old bottles' of the trade union form of organization? 

For Alain Touraine (1988, p.153) the history of trade unionism takes an organic or biological form: "Movements such as unionism have a life history: infancy, youth, maturity, old age and death". Though not uncritical of its application, Touraine works with a chronological model of trade-unionism: a) business unionism or focus on purely economic objectives, b) a more radical, class conscious phase, c) a turn towards economic or political bargaining based on success, and d) a defensive current phase based on the crisis of industrialization and the traditional working class. There is something fundamentally flawed in such an evolutionist schema whatever nuances are added. Just like capitalism, with its capacity for mutation, regeneration and transformation, so trade unionism is capable of many more lives before it is declared dead. 

Labour has, in the past, been dismissed as obsolete, this is not the first time in history it has happened. There even appears to be a cyclical element of regeneration and decay in labour movement histories. We need to understand the relationship between the past and the future better. Firstly, we must counter the feeling that things are bad now compared to a mythologized heroic past. The idea of the labour movement, breaking up today because of the disaggregation of the working class, is counterposed as Hyman (1994, p.159) puts it, to "a golden age when workers were spontaneously collectivist, and labour organizations joined ranks behind a unifying class project". However, in practice, solidarity has always been constructed, it is not natural. If anything atomization, division and conflict is `natural'. The second point that needs to be made is argued clearly by Allen Hunter (1994, p.11) for whom: "a self-deceptive feature of the current celebration of post-revolutionary politics is the view that rejecting past practices and proclaiming fidelity to new values is sufficient to avoid problems similar to those faced in past political struggles". Just as one example, the danger of bureaucratic deformation is as relevant to the `new' social movements as it was for the `old' labour movements. 

There can be no simple or one-sided balance sheet of the state of international trade unionism. For Henk Thomas (1995, p.235): "The finding that stands out is the loss of power, in economic, social, and political terms, of the trade union movement during the last decades". Undoubtedly this captures part of the picture but not all as this introduction and the texts which follow amply illustrate. We need to unpack the concept of `labour/ movement'. It is far easier to agree with Frances Fox Piven (1991, p.19) that "even economic hard times and conservative disarray do not lead me to think that a revival of labour politics as we once knew it [emphasis added] is likely". Indeed, labour parties may win elections by becoming `classless' or pragmatically oriently towards the identity politics of gender and ecology. While the classic labour party/trade union coalition on a Keynesian platform seems obsolete indeed., we must not forget (cf Arrighi, Hopkins and Wallerstein, 1989) that the social democratic project's demise may be in part due to its very success in achieving its fundamental objectives in the post-war era. 

We also need to recall that the trade unions, and the working class more generally, were prime movers in promoting democratic politics across the globe (cf. Rueschemeyer et al, 1992). Trade unions are still one of the most important voices promoting the extension of the welfare state. Trade unions across the globe are adapting to the new situation albeit unevenly, and with considerable time gaps. This new unionism, as Julio Godio (1993, p.165) writes for Latin America, cannot just jettison previous trade union traditions but, rather, integrates them with new political and organisational content to make them adequate to the new socio-political matrix. It is also necessary to maintain some tension between the development of the new identity politics and the `traditional' aspiration of the left to speak for the people as a whole and to advance general solutions to the crisis (cf Hobsbawn, 1996). Finally, in the false polarization between a `realism' which spells retreat and a `utopianism' which spells immobility, there has always been a revolutionary reformist transformative project in various guises (cf Gorz, 1968; Kagarlitsky, 1990) which has been deployed thoughtfully in many situations, for example in the new South Africa. 

Trade unions, over and above their specific organizational form and political orientation, exist as a means of collective representation of workers. They are, indeed, old bottles, but the question arises as to whether `new wine' can be poured into them. We have looked at the supposed differences between the old and new social movements above. Many of these differences seem to be a product of the particular environments of these new movements and the early stage of these anti-systemic movements. One way to account for the routinized character of many labour movements today is precisely in terms of their relative success in achieving their basic demands. For example, it is no use bemoaning that today South African trade unions appear to be less `revolutionary' than they did in the mid 1980's. That would be an abstract critique with little purchase amongst ordinary union members. To launch the dreaded accusation of `co-option' has little meaning unless we can show that there is some actual ill-effect in terms of results. It is no coincidence that Brazilian trade unionists today have often forsaken the language of class struggle to advocate a `trade unionism of results'. This may just imply the famous `more' orientation as articulated by Samuel Gompers, but not necessarily. 

Throughout the existence of trade unionism there has been a tension between the realism of everyday business and the utopianism of the `promised land' where exploitation would cease. Listen to an Australian trade union mission (ACTU/ADC Mission to Western Europe, 1989, p.297): "A `wish list' of unattainable objectives or a series of `motherhood' statements is worse than useless. A strategy must be practical, achievable and relevant if it is to have any impact". So, today South African trade unions advance coherent business plans for their sector rather than just demand. Japanese trade unions do likewise. Yet the Australian trade union statement goes on to say that a trade union strategy "should also challenge the union movement". While utopianism needs to be tempered by realism, the contestatory nature of trade unionism as anti-systemic movement needs to be extended into the trade unions themselves. Trade unions worldwide face many problems today. Muller-Jentsch (1989, p.177) has located three main axes: a) a crisis of interest aggregation, due to the differentiation of labour and the trends towards `flexibility', b) a crisis of workers' loyalty to the union, due to the ideological onslaught of employers and the new right, and c) a crisis of union representation, due to union's difficulty in organising the new high-tech sectors, will need to be faced with imagination if `new wine' is to be poured into the trade unions. 

Trade unions have always displayed a blend of utopian (read token sometimes) and practical attitudes towards internationalism. For example, in June 1996 the International Transport Workers Federation (ITF) launched a successful, international week of action against `flags of convenience' (see Lloyds List, 1996). The FOC (Flags of Convenience) issue had focused effectively on the main way in which international capitalists had been able to evade labour and safety regulations. The ITF, with the help of the dockers unions in many cases, were able to organise boycotts of ships which did not comply with ITF labour and safety standards. The week's campaign, based on well organised European ports, managed to secure crewing agreements on a substantial number of ships. Dockers who supported the seafarers boycott can, in the future, confidently expect seafarers to refuse to encroach on dockers' jobs as the shipping companies are planning. Idealism and pragmatism are not mutually opposed qualities. Over and beyond the particularities of seafarers' unionism (see Lane, 1996) there may be general lessons here. 

Also, early in 1996 leaders of the world's largest trade unions pledged to fight any attempts to drive down workers' living standards while lobbying the World Economic Forum in Davos. Bill Jordan, general secretary of the ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions) said his 127 million members were being affected by world poverty, unemployment and social exclusion in an unacceptable way. Even the United States government, at the World Trade Organisation meeting of 1996, argued that trade should be linked to basic labour standards. The reasons for this stance are hardly altruistic - partly economic and partly due to domestic politics - but nevertheless shows that globalisation is not a hermetic blanket on all forms of labour resistance. Globalisation may be an important weapon for international capital but it also opens up possibilities for labour. Diverse social and political organisations worldwide are increasingly discussing the mechanisms whereby we can move towards a global mixed economy, an internationalisation of the concept of the welfare state, and an international democratic order where all countries can participate equally in the new global decision making process (cf Held, 1995). 

Labour today, with the rest of society, faces the challenge of sustainable development. Feminist writers (e.g. Mellor, 1992 or Mies and Shiva, 1993) have for some time been developing an `eco-feminism' which develops the `elective affinity' between women and nature. If the dangers of essentialism are obvious (Molyneux and Steinberg, 1995) at least there is a political effectiveness here. For the labour movement, on the other hand, there are many contradictions when engaging with ecology. As Ulrich Beck, who developed the concept of `risk society' to describe our ecologically threatened world, points out "the switch to an ecological theme leads to profound shifts in and threats to the power of labour and its organized interests" (Beck, 1995, p.151). Labour has historically dissociated itself from the product of its labour and is ill placed to define ecological hazards. Furthermore, while employers can change products fairly easily, the threat of ecological devastation seems to further fragment the working classes pitting workers as consumers or citizens against workers as producers of ecologically suspect products. But more positively we have seen some serious moves internationally to link up the themes of `Postfordist' transformations with those of ecology and democracy in the search for a new economic order (see Lipietz, 1992). 

It is the feminist vision which is providing some new perspectives for trade unions internationally. Thus the Dutch trade unions in their New Trade Union Perspectives statement of 1994 declared that "Trade unions have much to gain when increasing numbers of women join their ranks: more bargaining power, new policies, new female leadership, the mainstreaming of reproductive needs, and a general revitalisation" (Women and Development Project, 1994). That document goes on to discuss in well-informed detail the `multiple identity' of workers, the need for `networking' and respecting the autonomy of women's organisations. That this is not just an aberration caused by Dutch liberalism or colonial guilt is clear from the once remote ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions) stance in their 1995 document `The Trade Union Vision' (ICFTU, 1995), which addresses the need to change the world through equality, addressing problems of `sexism', `oppression' and a `transformed world community', terms not usually associated with the international trade union bureaucracy. Now, it would be easy to take a cynical attitude towards these documents, putting them down to `window-dressing', or, at best, a pragmatic bid to win new recruits by a declining if not moribund, trade union movement. However, it might be wiser to reserve judgement and encourage this `gendering' as well as `greening' of the trade union movement. Feminist scholarship on labour worldwide and working women organising has created new problems and new visions, it might just help revitalise labour's prospects. 

The advances and the limits of the institutionalised labour movement are clear enough from a close reading of the 16th World Congress of the ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions) in 1996. As O'Brien notes in his comments: "The Congress may be viewed as the date when class struggles officially went global" (O'Brien, 1996, p1). Globalisation was a constant theme in many speeches and most resolutions of the Congress. Yet recognition of the processes and impact of globalisation does not lead automatically to a new labour internationalism. Instead, the ICFTU welcomed the Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) into their midst and heard him call on the trade unions to assist in making globalisation available to all. It seemed that the IMF wished to enlist the help of trade unions in policing national government's policies. As to cooperation with other groups in civil society the rhetoric may have had borrowed some tones from social movement unionism but most delegates saw cooperation with other social movements in a fairly hierarchical manner. In practice, the ICFTU would see itself implementing social alliances by attending the Beijing Women's Conference and the much vaunted 1995 UN World Summit for Social Development where the ICFTU played a prominent role in drafting the Ten Commitments including basic labour rights, which governments would supposedly commit themselves to. 

Finally, the 1996 ICFTU Congress saw the launching of the international trade union body's Web site ( Again we find a (belated) recognition of radical themes, but this is hardly the start of a new electronic based international labour communications network. Indeed, as some African delegate pointed out, the Internet was of little use to those labour organisations still using typewriters. It would seem that, in practice, while the official international labour organisations are making some of the right poises they are still not the priority forum for genuine democratic labour organisation and empowerment. 


ACTU/TDC Mission to Europe (1989), `Strategic Unionism' in Ford, B. and Plowman, D. (eds), Australian Unions. An Industrial Relations Perspective, Houndmills : Macmillan. 

Amin, A. (ed.) (1994), Post Fordism - A Reader, Oxford : Blackwell. 

Aronowitz, S. and Di Fazio, W. (1994), Jobless Future, Minnesotta : University of Minnesotta Press. 

Arrighi, G., Hopkins, T. and Wallerstein, I. (1989), Antisystemic Movements, London : Verso. 

Beck, U. (1995), Ecological Politics in an Age of Risk, Cambridge : Polity Press. 

Belander, J; Edwards, P. and Haiven, L. (eds) (1994) Workplace Industrial Relations and the Global Challenge, New York: ILR Press. 

Best, S. and Kellner, D. (1991), Postmodern Theory: Critical Interrogations, Houndmills : Macmillan. 

Bowring, F. (1996), `Misreading Gorz', New Left Review, No. 217, May-June. 

Burnham, P. (1996), `The internationalisation of the state: a new agenda for researching the regulation of labour', ESRC Labour Studies Conference, University of Warwick, 17-18 May. 

Canadian Auto Workers Union (1994), Discussion Papers : Globalisation, National Unions and Internationalism, 4th Constitutional Congress, Quebec City, August. 

Dale, P (1995), The Myth of Japanese Uniqueness, London: Routledge. 

De Martino, G. (1991), `Trade-Union, Isolation and the Catechism of the Left', Rethinking Marxism, Vol. 4, No. 3. 

Dicken, P., Forsgren, M. and Malniberg, A. (1994), `The Local Embeddedness of Transnational Corporations', in Amin, A. and Thrift, N. (eds), Globalization, Institutions and Regional Development in Europe, Oxford : Oxford University Press. 

Elger, T. and Smith, C. (1994), `Introduction', in Elger, T. and Smith (eds), Global Japanization? The Transnational Transformation of The Labour Process, London : Routledge. 

Escobar, A. (1992), `Imagining a Post-Development Era? Critical Thought, Development and Social Movements', Social Text, No. 31/32. 

Fisher, R. and Kling, J. (1993), `Introduction : The Continued Vitality of Community Mobilization' in Fisher, R. and Kling, J. (eds), Mobilizing the Community : Local Politics in the Era of the Global City, London : Sage. 

Gindin, S. (1995), `International competitiveness and the democratic development of capacities', South African Labour Bulletin, Vol. 19, No. 3, July. 

Godio, J. (1993), Los Sindicatos en los Economicas de Mercado de Ameríca Latina, Colombia : FESCOL. 

Gorz, A. (1968), `Reform and Revolution', in The Socialist Register 1968, London : Merlin Press. 

Globalization and the Unions (1995), Seminar: The Monthly Symposium, No. 429, May. 

Held, D. (1995), Democracy and the Global Order. From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance, Cambridge : Polity Press. 

Hirst, P. and Thompson, G. (1996), Globalization in Question. The International Economy and the Possibility of Governance, Cambridge : Polity Press. 

Hobsbawn, E. (1996), `Identity Politics and the Left', New Left Review, No. 217, May/June. 

Humphrey, J. (1994), ``Japanese' Methods and the Changing Position of Direct Production Workers : Evidence from Brazil', in Elger, T. and Smith, C. (eds), Global Japanization? The Transnational Transformation of the Labour Process, London : Routledge. 

Hyman, R. (1994), `Changing Trade Union Identities and Strategies', in Hyman, R. and Ferner, A. (eds), New Frontiers in European Industrial Relations, Oxford : Blackwell. 

ICEM (1996), Power and Counterpower. The Union Response to Global Capitalism, London : Pluto. 

ICFTU (International Confederation of Free Trade Unions) (1995), Changing the World Through Equality : The Trade Union Vision Document, Brussels : ICFTU. 

ILO (1994), World Labour Report 1994, No. 7, Geneva : International Labour Organisation. 

Jameson, F. (1992), Postmodernism, or, The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, London : Verso. 

Jessop, B., Bonnett, K., Bromley, S. and Ling, T. (1987), `Popular Capitalism, Flexible Accumulation and Left Strategy', New Left Review, No. 165. 

Kagarlitsky, B. (1990), The Dialectic of Change, London : Verso. 

Kamata, S. (1984), Japan in the Passing Lane: An Insider's Account of Life in a Japanese Auto Factory, London : Unwin. 

Kelsey, J. (1996), The New Zealand Experiment : A World Model for Structural Adjustment, Auckland : Auckland University Press. 

Kenney, M. and Florida, R. (1993), Beyond Mass Production : The Japanese System and its Transfer to the US, Oxford : Oxford University Press. 

Kumar, K. (1995), From Post-Industrial to Post-Modern Society. New Theories of the Contemporary World, Oxford : Blackwell. 

Laclau, E. and Mouffe, C. (1985), Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Towards a Radical Democratic Politics, London : Verso.

Lane, T. (1996), "International seafarers trade unionism in an era of globalization" paper for international conference on The Globalization of Production and The Regulation of Labour, University of Warwick, 11-13 Sept. 

Lash, S. and Urry, J. (1987), The End of Organized Capitalism, Cambridge : Polity Press. 

Lipietz, A. (1988), Mirages and Miracles. The Crisis of Global Fordism, London :Verso. 

Lipietz, A. (1989), Towards a New Economic Order. Postfordism, Ecology and Democracy, Cambridge : Polity Press. 

Lloyds List (1996), 4/6/96 to 8/6/96. 

Mellor, M. (1992), Breaking the Boundaries, London : Virago. 

McShane, D. (1992), `The New International Working Class and its Organizations', New Politics, Vol. 4, No. 1. 

Mies, M. and Shiva, V. (1993), Ecofeminism, London : Zed Books. 

Moghadan, V. (1995), `Gender Aspects of Employment and Unemployment in a Global Perspective', in Simai, M. (ed.), Global Employment. An International Investigation into the Future of Work, London : Zed Books. 

Molyneux, M. and Steinberg, D. L. (1995), `Mies and Shiva's Ecofeminism: A New Testament?', Feminist Review, Vol. 49. 

Muller-Jentsch, W. (1988), `Industrial Relations Theory and Trade Union Strategy', International Journal of Comparative Labour Law and Industrial Relations, Vol. 19, No. 3. 

O'Brien, R. (1996), `Contesting Globalization: A Response from the ICFTU 16th World Congress', paper, Conference on The Subdization of Production and the Regulation of Labour, University of Warwick, 11-13th September. 
Piven, F.F. (1991), `The Decline of Labour Parties: An Overview' in Piven, F.F. (ed.), Labour Parties in Postindustrial Societies, Cambridge : Polity Press. 

Ramsay, H. (1996), `Know Thine Enemy : Understanding MNC's as a requirement for strategic international labourroom', ESRC Labour Studies Conference, University of Warwick, 17-18 May. 

Regini, M. (1992), `Introduction: The Past and Future of Social Studies of Labour Movements', in Regini, M. (ed.), The Future of Labour Movements, London : Sage. 

Rifkin, J. (1995), The End of Work. The Decline of the Global Labour Force and the Dawn of the Post-Market Era, New York : Putnam Book. 

Rowbotham, S. and Mitter, S. (1994), `Introduction', in Rowbotham, S. and Mitter, S. (eds), Dignity and Daily Bread. New forms of economic organising among poor women in the Third World and the First, London : Routledge. 
Rubery, J. and Fagan, C. (1994), `Does Feminization Mean a Flexible Labour Force', in Hyman, R. and Ferner, A. (eds), New Frontiers in European Industrial Relations, Oxford : Blackwell. 

Rueschmeyer, D., Stephens, E.U. and Stephens, J.D. (1992), Capitalist Development and Democracy, Cambridge : Polity Press. 

Scott, A. (1991), Ideology and the New Social Movements, London : Unwin. 

Simai, M. (1995), `Employment and the Internationalization of the Labour Markets', in Simai, M. (ed.), Global Employment. An International Investigation into the Future of Work, London : Zed Books. 

The Economist (1995), A Survey of Multinationals, June 24th. 

Thomas, H. (1995), Globalization and Third World Trade Unions. The Challenge of Rapid Economic Change, London : Zed Books. 

Tickell, A. and Peck, J. (1995), `Social regulation after Fordism: regulation theory, new-liberalism and the global-local nexus', Economy and Society, Vol. 24, No. 3. 

Touraine, A. (1988), `Unionism as a Social Movement' in Lipset, S.M. (ed.), Unions in Transition. Entering the Second Century, California, ICS Press. 

Van Dijk, M.R. (1995), `The Internationalization of the Labour Market', in Simai, M. (ed.), Global Employment. An International Investigation into the Future of Work, London : Zed Books.
Williams, K., Cutler, T., Williams, J. and Haslam, C. (1987), `The End of Mass Production?', Economy and Society, Vol. 16, No. 3. 

Women and Development Project (1994), New Trade Union Perspectives: Organizing Women Workers in the Agricultural Sector, Export Processing Zones, Informal Economy, Amsterdam : CNU/FNU. 

World Bank (1995), World Development Report 1995. Workers in an Integrating World, Oxford : Oxford University Press. 

Back to the top