Party Reports

Latin America
Anti-Labor Policies, Repression And Media Offensive of the Bourgeoisie and its Governments, Betrayal of the Trade Unions and Conciliation of Reformism Slow Down the Resumption of the Class Struggle of the Wage Earners

While the governments and the institutions of the bourgeois world speak of economic growth in the countries of the region, the wage conditions and working environment of the wage earners maintain their tendency to impoverishment, with a fall in real wages, labor instability, high unemployment rates, food insecurity and poor access to drinking water, electricity, health services and so-called "social assistance".

The governments, although with some differences in approach, are concentrating on fiscal discipline measures, inflation control, reduction of current spending and reduction or elimination of some subsidies. In this regard, it is striking that the governments that call themselves "leftist" or progressive and are known for their "anti-neoliberal" discourse are the most aggressive in adopting policies of this type and have not hesitated to use repression against their opponents. In this regard, Venezuela, Brazil and Colombia stand out, where the "anti-neoliberals" impose an agenda of increasing the rate of exploitation and reducing the fiscal deficit, measures commonly associated with neoliberalism. These demonstrate that the policies necessary to maintain the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, such as a level of exploitation adequate to valorize the total national capital, and a fiscal deficit focused on absorbing the overproduction of commodities, are independent of any bourgeois program, which on the contrary, must accommodate them, whether enthusiastically, or in an improvised manner.

The trade union movement in Latin America displays all the erroneous and opportunist positions already known, which have historically pushed the workers to class conciliation, paralysis, division and disorganization, leaving them unarmed and defenseless in the struggles for their demands. The traitorous trade union centers dominate the scene, integrated into the bourgeois state, submissive to the governments and the laws. Only sporadically have we seen that the discontented workers have taken up the struggles, united by the rank and file, escaping from the control of the union leaderships; but even in these cases the traitor unions take advantage of the first opportunity to boycott the struggles and reach agreements with the bosses on the basis of betrayal. But it has also been relevant that these spontaneous struggles have focused on demands for wage increases or improvements in working conditions and environment. That is to say that only in these spontaneous struggles, where the workers have gone over the heads of the treacherous union leaderships, the union movement has taken up the strike as a form of struggle, has focused on the economic demands of the class and has united over artificial divisions such as union affiliation, nationality and trades. We have seen this in the strike of workers of the National Institute of Social Security (INSS) in Brazil and we have already observed it in 2023 in Venezuela with the education workers.

To the extent that there have been struggles in which workers have mobilized spontaneously, despite the conciliation of the union leadership with the employers, we have seen how governments have been reinforcing strategies of criminalization of workers’ protests, promoting opinion matrixes in which wage demands struggles are placed as part of "terrorist plans", "coup plans" or even qualifying strikes as "destabilizing" actions, of "treason" and of a "criminal" character in general. It is no coincidence that in Venezuela what they called an "Anti-Fascist Congress" was held and that the government is promoting a Law against Fascism, which already has as precedent the legislation "against terrorism" and "against hatred". In general, the intention is to promote throughout Latin America the supposed confrontation between democracy and fascism, despite the fact that these are two faces of the regime of bourgeois domination. This "booby trap", with which the so-called "public opinion" is manipulated, imposing a new version of the political polarization between the bourgeois factions disputing the control of the governments, is really directed against the wage-earning workers and their organizations of economic struggle, whose control by the State is sought to be deepened.

The workers are subjected to a "psychological and ideological war" of the bourgeoisie which, from the media and the social networks, from the governments and from the different parties that converge in parliament and in the electoral campaigns, carries out operations of distraction, confusion and disorientation of the workers, calling them to assume bourgeois-democratic demands (defense of the vote, defense of the National Constitution, etc.), to the defense of the homeland, to the defense of the national economy and to class conciliation with the bourgeoisie. And it is precisely in this context that every struggle in which the workers are able to escape from this great ideological coercion to take up their economic struggles stands out.

The real economic demands of the working class remain buried by bourgeois-democratic demands and diluted in polyclassist or petty bourgeois oriented movements and generally subordinated to the interests of the political groups that dispute the control of the government.

Our party has insisted in its propaganda, in the call to the workers’ movement to form in all countries a Single Class Trade Union Front, which expresses the unity of action in the economic struggle and that goes beyond the artificial divisions associated with nationality and trades. We have even insisted that in struggles workers must unite even if they are affiliated to different unions. A front like this should arise in an atmosphere of multiplication of the struggles of the wage earners, as a way to free themselves from the chains of betrayal of the Central Unions of the regime. Likewise we have insisted on the need for the class union movement to assume the agitation in favor of the general strike as the only way to defeat the bosses and their governments in the economic struggles for demands.

In Brazil the strike of the workers of the National Institute of Social Security (INSS) stands out, which since July 10 began a struggle demanding better wages and working conditions. At the end of September this strike will have been going on for approximately 11 weeks (September 23 was 70 days). The workers organized at the local level and have rejected the various government offers. Although some union officials signed an agreement with the employer, this was rejected by the workers, who remained on strike. The government has remained inflexible in its offers to the workers and has been declaring that the INSS workers are infiltrated by "Bolsonarism", thus pushing an opinion matrix that justifies them to repress this movement arguing that they are facing "coupism", of which ex-President Bolsonaro and his followers have been accused. Regardless of the results of this strike and the weaknesses in part of its demands, we have seen once again how when the workers unite at the base and throw themselves into the struggle, despite the passive and conciliatory attitude of the union leaderships, the movement tends to approach the methods of class struggle and organization: debate and decisions in assemblies, indefinite strike without minimum services, focus on proletarian economic demands and rupture with any kind of artificial division in the movement. To the extent that the boss-government remains intransigent, it is to be expected that the fighting movement will tend to wear down and, in order to advance, it will need to seek contact with other sectors of the workers to extend the strike. But the agitation for the extension of the strike and to raise to the other workers the need for a general strike, which becomes a necessary condition even for victories in initially isolated struggles, requires a break with opportunist policies, which for now is not possible in Brazil, where opportunism controls the trade union movement.

The Brazilian government, in collusion with the Superior Judicial Court (STJ), has tried to use legal measures to intimidate the workers and make them back down, such as the imposition of a daily fine on unions participating in strikes and the demand to limit strike membership to only 15% of the workers in the category, guaranteeing a "minimum service" of 85%. The bourgeois press attempts to pit service users against INSS workers, repeatedly claiming that the strike is affecting service delivery. Likewise, in municipalities such as Londrina, in the north of the state of Paraná, the government used subcontracted workers as strikebreakers to guarantee minimum services in the agencies.

Despite these attempts at intimidation, isolation and repression, the workers have responded to this employers’ offensive with some direct actions. Of particular note was the occupation of the INSS headquarters in Brasilia on September 10, led by the FENASPS union federation, which succeeded in getting the government to back down on some repressive measures.

In Colombia so far the government has managed, with the support of the traitorous clowns of the unions and the backing of the opportunist parties and the so-called social movements, to keep the workers in passivity, in expectation of an offer of reforms presented to parliament, which however leave aside the fundamental economic demands of the workers.

The Colombian government is seeking to remove some burdens from its budget, such as subsidies of different types. For the government, the concern for correcting fiscal and budgetary imbalances leads them to implement many neoliberal policies that they have normally criticized and that have a social impact that will hit many sectors that gave them electoral support. In this context, between August 31 and September 6 a "Truckers’ Strike" took place, which according to the analysts of the bourgeois press put at stake the stability of the government. It was not an action of workers but of small, medium and big businessmen of the transport sector. The Ministries of Mines and Energy and of Finance and Public Credit issued resolutions establishing an adjustment in the retail price of a gallon of diesel, effective as of Saturday, August 31. The government intended to reduce the deficit in current spending and to advance in the elimination of the subsidy on diesel, something that had not been achieved by the previous Duque administration. On August 6 the strike was lifted, after an agreement between the government and the transporters and although the government resolution was modified and the increase was reduced and divided into 2 parts, the government managed to advance in its policy of freeing fuel prices, without stopping for the impact it will have on public transportation used by workers, as well as on the price of food and services, without anyone putting on the table the issue of salary increases.

In Venezuela, the effect of the electoral campaign on the workers’ struggles continues, and they have tended to demobilize. This effect has been prolonged due to the struggle of the bourgeois factions and their parties for the recognition or not of the results of the July 28 presidential elections. In the post-electoral stage the government massively repressed its electoral opponents and has indiscriminately used accusations, arrests and sentences with the backing of anti-terrorist and "anti-hate" laws. With this precedent of repression and state terrorism the workers, besides being distracted by the whole media offensive, are frightened by repression at the moment of raising their struggle and demands. There are no class unions to defend the workers. The governmental Labor Inspectorates are in favor of the bosses and apply procedural delays and administrative silence, giving long delays to the attention, so that the worker gets tired or is forced to look for another job in precarious conditions in order to survive for himself and his family.

The government keeps the minimum wage and the bonus payment policy frozen and thus manages the payroll of public sector workers. But the private sector also relies on this public policy, only that it pays higher bonuses. But in general workers face salaries that do not allow them to cover the cost of living. It is in this context that the educators, the education workers, who in 2023 staged massive mobilizations demanding salary increases and who, abandoned by the union federations, did not achieve any increase, will return to work. However, the education workers have imposed on the employer in practice the same working days that were implemented during Covid 19, limited to 2 or 3 working days a week. Not receiving a salary increase, the education workers in the last few years, contracted for 36 hours a week, have been working 2 or 3 days a week and have been performing different complementary activities to obtain income and supplement the insignificant salary they receive from the Ministry of Education. Therefore, for the start of classes in October 2024, the government will expect the workers to work every day of the week, threatening with dismissal those who do not comply with the schedule. The workers, always without the support of the union federations, are disorganized and, if they are not able to make a collective opposition and take up the struggle for a wage increase, they will be defenseless at the mercy of the employers’ offensive.

In Argentina, on September 2, President Javier Milei vetoed a Pension Mobility Law passed by Congress. Since then, older workers have been demonstrating in the streets to the point of being subjected to harsh repression by the government. The Pension Mobility Law proposed a monthly update of the amount of the payments based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) and also included an extra compensation of 8.1%, with the purpose of allowing retirees to equalize their income with the 20.6% inflation rate of January; month in which the Executive granted only a 12.5% increase. The law also stipulated that the minimum pension should not be less than the value of a basic basket for senior citizens and that the formula could not be tied only to the CPI, but had to take into account salaries. Parliament maintained the government’s veto to the Retirement Mobility Law and therefore the minimum retirement amount remains the same (234,000 pesos) and the government will implement the payment of a Compensatory Bonus of 70,000 pesos. The government stated that its veto to the Law is due to the fact that it does not have the funds to pay these increases. But the government did not make clear whether it has the resources to maintain the compensatory bonus over time and whether it will adjust it according to the behavior of inflation and the cost of the basic food basket. Pensions have been devaluated during the Macri and Fernandez governments by more than 60%. Again government and parliament unite to legislate against the workers and the trade union centers continue without taking action, nor assuming the general strike. Meanwhile the wave of layoffs in the public sector continues and by the end of September 65,000 more layoffs are announced.