Russian trade unions and the 1995 elections

By Boris Kagarlitsky MOSCOW — After the Russian parliamentary elections of 1993, in which the trade unions failed to participate as an organised and independent force, the majority of union leaders declared that they would not repeat this mistake in the elections due for December 1995. Indeed, trade union bodies are now showing enormous interest in the elections. But apart from the trade unions of the agro-industrial complex, these bodies lack both clear plans and reliable allies. Since 1989, Russian trade unions have been divided into two camps, "alternative" and "traditional". Most of the latter are affiliated to the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia (FNPR). The FNPR has been preparing to take part in elections for many months, but its own inconsistency has repeatedly forced it to abandon existing gains and to start again from the beginning. Between 1991 and 1993 discussion took place in the trade unions about establishing a Party of Labour. However, this idea was not supported by most of the trade union bureaucracy and was rejected in the end as too radical. In 1994 discussions were held on a proposal to found a "Union of Labour", but again there were no positive results. In the spring of 1995 FNPR chairperson Mikhail Shmakov made a fresh attempt to form a political bloc around the trade unions; on the basis of the FNPR, the movement "Trade Unions of Russia — to the Elections" was established. In launching this movement, the FNPR declared its readiness to go to the polls independently. In the meantime, however, the federation's leaders held talks with a number of political groups. Here the internal contradictions of the FNPR made themselves felt. Many sectoral trade unions were gravitating toward their respective ministries. The trade unions of the fuel and energy complex in particular showed a readiness to set up their own electoral bloc together with management. When this alliance failed to materialise, leaders of these unions preferred to collaborate with the pro-government bloc "Our Home is Russia" rather than with the opposition. This course, however, met with resistance from the trade union rank and file. The Independent Coal Employees Union formed its own electoral movement with the name "Miners of Russia"; this received support from the coal industry management. In similar fashion, the trade unions of road transport workers also drew up their own list of candidates. The Union of Workers of the Agro-Industrial Complex remained faithful to the Agrarian Party of Russia, which it had been instrumental in setting up. Basing itself on the union's local organisations, the Agrarian Party is the only one of the "new" parties to have an all-Russian structure comparable in breadth to that of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation (KPRF). Meanwhile, the regional trade union federations that operate within the FNPR structures have tended to collaborate either with the Communists, or with the Federation of Manufacturers of Russia, headed by Yuri Skokov. When Skokov emerged as a key leader of the Congress of Russian Communities (KRO), many local trade union leaders promptly began supporting this organisation. Shmakov, however, was categorically opposed to collaborating with the KRO because he feared that the trade unions would be subordinated to the Federation of Manufacturers. The possibility of a bloc with the KPRF was also ruled out by Shmakov to convince the government of FNPR's moderation. Igor Klochkov, Shmakov's predecessor as chairperson of the FNPR, was forced to resign in October 1993 under pressure from the Kremlin. But because the lower-level trade union bodies are less intimidated by threats from the authorities, the FNPR Executive Committee has been forced to allow local trade union organisations to choose their electoral allies for themselves. As a result, the regional union federations have begun working with the KRO or the KPRF, irrespective of decisions taken in Moscow. The KPRF election slate includes seven trade union officials. Meanwhile, as many as a third of the territorial organisations of the FNPR have signed independent agreements with the KRO. At one point, the leaders of the FNPR held discussions with State Duma speaker Ivan Rybkin on joining his pro-Yeltsin "left- centrist" bloc. Within the FNPR apparatus, this move was said to be less the result of the union federation's own wishes than of demands from the authorities. A preliminary agreement was reached with Rybkin, but Shmakov was unable to force this through the FNPR's Executive Committee and General Council. The conference of the "Trade Unions of Russia — to the Elections" movement took place in two sessions. The first, in August, rejected collaboration with Rybkin but left open the question of the general course of the FNPR. The second session, in September, decided to bloc with the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs (RSPP) and the United Industrial Party. Unlike the Federation of Manufacturers, the RSPP was a long-time partner of the FNPR. Leaders of the FNPR took the view that collaborating with the RSPP would not threaten the independent role of the trade unions in the workplaces, particularly since the enterprises involved were mainly in the military-industrial complex, where the survival of production was under threat. This alliance of the trade unions and industrialists of Russia was named "Union of Labour". However, this bloc has little chance of attracting the 5% of votes needed to win representation in parliament, especially since local union bodies are orienting toward the KRO. Of the traditional trade unions that are not affiliated to the FNPR, the most prominent is the Union of Workers of the Mining and Metallurgical Industries. This union quit the FNPR in 1993, accusing the then leadership of pursuing an excessively leftist and "anti- reformist" course. The leadership of the metallurgical union has remained true to its liberal bent and has now joined the "Yabloko" bloc. However, most of the rank and file members of the union are likely to vote for the KPRF and other "anti-reformist" formations. The alternative trade unions have also split into several groups. Although some alternative unions have declared that they will not participate in the elections, the general level of electoral activity by these unions is high. A typical example is the Confederation of Labour of Russia (KTR). Candidates from the KTR are running in single-member constituencies in St Petersburg and Pskov. The KTR has a certain influence among seafarers, air traffic controllers and locomotive drivers. But in August a split occurred, and the Independent Union of Miners (NPG), traditionally the leading force within the alternative union movement, left the KTR. NPG leader Alexander Sergeev joined Rybkin's bloc. For years, the NPG had the reputation as a pro-Yeltsin "liberal trade union" so this amounts to a shift to the left. And it is obvious that the NPG's shift to the left is only just beginning. At the local level, members of the NPG are establishing contacts with the KPRF and with the "traditional" Independent Coal Employees Union. Together with other alternative unions that left the KTR, the NPG established the All-Russian Confederation of Labour (VTK). The founders of the VTK anticipate that Shmakov's failure in the elections — which they see as inevitable — will seriously shake the FNPR, and perhaps lead to its downfall. In these circumstances they foresee the reorganisation of the Russian trade union movement and the creation of a new, large federation on the basis of the VKT. This prospect is remote because of the feeble chances of Rybkin's bloc, to which Sergeev has linked his fate. The sole hope for Rybkin's bloc now lies in sinking the Union of Labour, while the latter has no chance of success except through campaigning against Rybkin. The two forces thus gravely weaken one another. Apart from the NPG, the strongest group of alternative trade unions is the federation Sotsprof. Officially, Sotsprof has given its support to Vladimir Polevanov's bloc "For the Homeland". Sotsprof members are running in Chelyabinsk, Lipetsk, Udmurtia and in Orekhovo-Zuyevo near Moscow. The centrist electorate is small — no more than 15% of the total — and it is to this sector that most of the blocs that include trade union candidates are appealing. So there are unlikely to be any victors in this fight. The actions of trade union leaders during the pre-election period bear absolutely no relation to the goal, proclaimed in union charters, of defending workers' interests. The trade unions are linked to weak electoral blocs that hope to strengthen their positions with the help of millions or at least thousands of trade union members. But these members do not see why they should support some new party list they have never previously heard of. It is not hard to foresee that whatever the overall result of the voting, an acute crisis will emerge in the trade unions after the elections.