Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/html.php on line 1164 Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/html.php on line 1168 Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/html.php on line 1171 Warning: Trying to access array offset on value of type bool in /customers/3/0/2/riff-raff.se/httpd.www/texts/inc/html.php on line 1172

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
en:sic1-how-one-can-still-put-forward-demands-when-no-demands-can-be-satisfied [2011/12/01 21:41]
titorelli
en:sic1-how-one-can-still-put-forward-demands-when-no-demands-can-be-satisfied [2015/04/12 21:08] (current)
Line 7: Line 7:
 Cases of threats to blow up factories have also been repeated in 2010, following the example of New Fabris the year before, a struggle which enabled the employees to receive a compensation over the legal minimum of 12,000 euros. This method was used in 2010 at Sodimatex, an automotive equipment manufacturer, and the same month also at the Brodard Graphique printing house and at Poly Implant Prothèse, a manufacturer of breast implants, where on April 12 2010 the employees threatened to set the premises on fire. Eric Mariaccia, a representative of the CFDT union, stated the following: ‘We have made Molotov cocktails and placed highly flammable products at the site’s entrance.’ The workers also spilled several thousand prostheses in front of the site and set fire to tyres. Cases of threats to blow up factories have also been repeated in 2010, following the example of New Fabris the year before, a struggle which enabled the employees to receive a compensation over the legal minimum of 12,000 euros. This method was used in 2010 at Sodimatex, an automotive equipment manufacturer, and the same month also at the Brodard Graphique printing house and at Poly Implant Prothèse, a manufacturer of breast implants, where on April 12 2010 the employees threatened to set the premises on fire. Eric Mariaccia, a representative of the CFDT union, stated the following: ‘We have made Molotov cocktails and placed highly flammable products at the site’s entrance.’ The workers also spilled several thousand prostheses in front of the site and set fire to tyres.
  
-Even though the usage of such methods seems unthinkable in other Western countries, in France they are considered acceptable by a large proportion of the population.((In the spring of 2009 a survey showed that close to one Frenchman in two, 45 per cent, consider taking bosses hostage as ‘acceptable’ in the case of a factory closure. See ‘Sondage choc sur les séquestrations de patrons’, //Le Parisien//. The entire survey can be found at [[www.csa-fr.com/dataset/data2009/opi20090402-l-opinion-des-francais-sur-les-sequestrations-de-patrons.pdf|www.csa-fr.com/dataset/data2009/opi20090402-l-opinion-des-francais-sur-les-sequestrations-de-patrons.pdf]].)) Abroad, such occurrences are regarded as an expression of a ‘certain French mentality’ and a tradition of revolt that can be traced as far back as the revolution of 1789. If the stupidity of such a view is obvious, the reasons behind such a specificity cannot be explained without both a study of the concrete cases – the most recent ones as well as those before – and also an analysis of the development of the mediations between the classes that were established in France after the end of the Second World War.+Even though the usage of such methods seems unthinkable in other Western countries, in France they are considered acceptable by a large proportion of the population.((In the spring of 2009 a survey showed that close to one Frenchman in two, 45 per cent, consider taking bosses hostage as ‘acceptable’ in the case of a factory closure. See ‘Sondage choc sur les séquestrations de patrons’, //Le Parisien//. The entire survey can be found at [[http://www.csa-fr.com/dataset/data2009/opi20090402-l-opinion-des-francais-sur-les-sequestrations-de-patrons.pdf|www.csa-fr.com/dataset/data2009/opi20090402-l-opinion-des-francais-sur-les-sequestrations-de-patrons.pdf]].)) Abroad, such occurrences are regarded as an expression of a ‘certain French mentality’ and a tradition of revolt that can be traced as far back as the revolution of 1789. If the stupidity of such a view is obvious, the reasons behind such a specificity cannot be explained without both a study of the concrete cases – the most recent ones as well as those before – and also an analysis of the development of the mediations between the classes that were established in France after the end of the Second World War.
  
 The questions that we seek to respond to by going through these moments are: Why do these forms of illegal struggles reappear today? why in France? and why only in the context of a redundancy plan? The questions that we seek to respond to by going through these moments are: Why do these forms of illegal struggles reappear today? why in France? and why only in the context of a redundancy plan?
  
-===== Luttes illégales en France =====+===== Illegal struggles France =====
  
 While cases of bossnapping or physical violence against employers can be traced back to the Popular Front of 1936, they are very unusual in the boom years from the end of the Second World War to the years immediately preceding May 1968. In the few examples that do occur in this period, such as at Peugeot Sochaux in 1961 (the employer manhandled), or in 1967 (bossnapping), we do not find any that are due to the closure of a factory. These forms of action were taken with a view to obtaining better working conditions and wage increases.((See //Le Monde//, November 11, 12, 14, 16, 1961, and Xavier Vigna, //L’Insubordination ouvrière dans les années 68: Essai d’histoire politique des usines//, Presses universitaires de Rennes, Rennes 2007, p. 103.)) While cases of bossnapping or physical violence against employers can be traced back to the Popular Front of 1936, they are very unusual in the boom years from the end of the Second World War to the years immediately preceding May 1968. In the few examples that do occur in this period, such as at Peugeot Sochaux in 1961 (the employer manhandled), or in 1967 (bossnapping), we do not find any that are due to the closure of a factory. These forms of action were taken with a view to obtaining better working conditions and wage increases.((See //Le Monde//, November 11, 12, 14, 16, 1961, and Xavier Vigna, //L’Insubordination ouvrière dans les années 68: Essai d’histoire politique des usines//, Presses universitaires de Rennes, Rennes 2007, p. 103.))
Line 19: Line 19:
 It is only in the 1970s, when mass unemployment became a reality throughout the country, that bossnappings became a form of action specific to struggles around factory closures. In this period very violent struggles broke out. They often persisted for a long time, gathered a large number of workers in whole regions, and were supported by actions of solidarity from further afield. It is only in the 1970s, when mass unemployment became a reality throughout the country, that bossnappings became a form of action specific to struggles around factory closures. In this period very violent struggles broke out. They often persisted for a long time, gathered a large number of workers in whole regions, and were supported by actions of solidarity from further afield.
  
-At the end of the 1970s a European agreement on the restructuring of the steel industry threatened hundreds of jobs in the region of Lorraine. In this context, in January 1979, at a factory in the city of Longwy, 300 of the 1,800 employees took the manager and two executives hostage at the time of a meeting deciding on layoffs. When the police intervened to free the manager, the steel workers responded by attacking the city’s police station. Their struggle went on for five months, making use of a variety of means of action (strike, free radio, destruction of material…) and mobilising throughout the whole region. After this the workers obtained, among other things, an early retirement at fifty years with 84 to 90 per cent of the salary.((See //Le Monde Diplomatique//, October 1997 [[www.monde-diplomatique.fr/1997/10/RIMBERT/9295]] (in French).))+At the end of the 1970s a European agreement on the restructuring of the steel industry threatened hundreds of jobs in the region of Lorraine. In this context, in January 1979, at a factory in the city of Longwy, 300 of the 1,800 employees took the manager and two executives hostage at the time of a meeting deciding on layoffs. When the police intervened to free the manager, the steel workers responded by attacking the city’s police station. Their struggle went on for five months, making use of a variety of means of action (strike, free radio, destruction of material…) and mobilising throughout the whole region. After this the workers obtained, among other things, an early retirement at fifty years with 84 to 90 per cent of the salary.((See //Le Monde Diplomatique//, October 1997 [[http://www.monde-diplomatique.fr/1997/10/RIMBERT/9295|www.monde-diplomatique.fr/1997/10/RIMBERT/9295]] (in French).))
  
 At Pointe de Givet on 9 July 1982, workers held the manager hostage for 48 hours to protest against the closure of the factory at Chiers in Vireux, in the Ardennes. The workers’ struggle lasted for almost two years, in conjunction with a struggle against a nuclear facility in the region. Violent clashes with the police took place every month (involving Molotov cocktails, and even gunshots) as well as violent actions: the burning down of the managers’ mansion, occupation of banks, the public treasury looted. After many years of struggle the workers obtained a ‘historical’ severance package that allowed some to keep their salaries for ten years.((See the radio documentary //Ça leur coûtera cher// available at [[http://reposito.internetdown.org/videosetsons/vireux/|http://reposito.internetdown.org/videosetsons/vireux/]] (in French).)) At Pointe de Givet on 9 July 1982, workers held the manager hostage for 48 hours to protest against the closure of the factory at Chiers in Vireux, in the Ardennes. The workers’ struggle lasted for almost two years, in conjunction with a struggle against a nuclear facility in the region. Violent clashes with the police took place every month (involving Molotov cocktails, and even gunshots) as well as violent actions: the burning down of the managers’ mansion, occupation of banks, the public treasury looted. After many years of struggle the workers obtained a ‘historical’ severance package that allowed some to keep their salaries for ten years.((See the radio documentary //Ça leur coûtera cher// available at [[http://reposito.internetdown.org/videosetsons/vireux/|http://reposito.internetdown.org/videosetsons/vireux/]] (in French).))
Line 66: Line 66:
 nouvelles métamorphoses de la question sociale’, //Le Monde//, April 7, 2005.)) but the very connection between productivity gains and wage increases disappeared. This disconnection resulted from the globalisation of the valorisation of capital and an enormous extension of the international division of labour.((Some would of course argue that capitalism has always been global, but the process which began forty years ago and has now resulted in //a global nouvelles métamorphoses de la question sociale’, //Le Monde//, April 7, 2005.)) but the very connection between productivity gains and wage increases disappeared. This disconnection resulted from the globalisation of the valorisation of capital and an enormous extension of the international division of labour.((Some would of course argue that capitalism has always been global, but the process which began forty years ago and has now resulted in //a global
 cycle of accumulation// is something qualitatively different from international trade //between// countries. The growth of multinational firms is inseparable from the phenomenon of offshoring. In the case of France, as in other Western countries, this started in the 1970s with the textile industry. (See the cycle of accumulation// is something qualitatively different from international trade //between// countries. The growth of multinational firms is inseparable from the phenomenon of offshoring. In the case of France, as in other Western countries, this started in the 1970s with the textile industry. (See the
-examples of the companies Kindy and Bidermann given in //L’Expansion// no. 691, November 2004, quoted at [[www.m-lasserre.com/educpop/dossierdelocs/+examples of the companies Kindy and Bidermann given in //L’Expansion// no. 691, November 2004, quoted at [[http://www.m-lasserre.com/educpop/dossierdelocs/ 
 +DusecteurindustrielaceluidelaR&D.htm|www.m-lasserre.com/educpop/dossierdelocs/
 DusecteurindustrielaceluidelaR&D.htm]].) )) DusecteurindustrielaceluidelaR&D.htm]].) ))