On April 27, the Class Struggle Action Network, an inter-union coordination in the U.S., of which our worker comrades are members, in the run-up to May Day promoted a tele-conference meeting between union militants from different countries to share experiences on the reality of the employers’ attack, how workers are trying to defend themselves within or from outside the official unions, and to consider the possibility of starting propaganda for a future mobilization as coordinated as possible. About fifty workers and union organizers attended, as well as from the United States, Turkey and Italy. Here we report the speech of our Italian comrade.

Good morning comrades,

I am a militant worker in the Unione Sindacale di Base, a grassroots union founded in 1980, formed in part by workers who left Italy’s largest union, the CGIL, in reaction to its collaborationist behavior, so much so that it is called by many a union of the regime, that is, of the capitalist political regime. Let me give you a brief overview of the situation in Italy. The struggle of the working class in this country has been in decline since the late 1970s. However, this process is not uniform, as various sectors have demonstrated a remarkable spirit of struggle over these four decades.

Several factors are acting in contradictory ways but will lead to a reversal, a return to workers’ struggle. The factors that have led to the weakening of workers’ struggle can be summarized in four points:

1 - the relative strength of Italian imperialism within the framework of world capitalism, which has allowed the formation of a layer of working-class aristocracy that has provided a material basis for the corruption of the working class; today, however, as the global economic crisis of capitalism advances, this layer is becoming thinner and thinner;

2 - collaborationist and regime unionism, which throughout the postwar period worked to eradicate the methods and principles of class struggle from the workers, mainly through the CGIL;

3 - the crisis of overproduction, which began in the so-called Western countries in the mid-1970s and which in Italy has triggered a process of deindustrialization since the early 1980s, weakening the industrial proletariat; for example, the automobile industry partly moved from Italy to Turkey;

4 - the mistakes of the leaders of the grassroots unions, which in my opinion were dictated by political opportunism.

My union, the USB, promotes what is called class unionism. This definition refers to union conduct based on the principle that the conditions of the working class can only be defended through struggle, because the economic, and therefore also political, interests of the wage-earning class and the bourgeoisie are irreconcilable.

This is, of course, a general definition, and when it is translated into concrete actions, differences emerge. For example, one misconception of the USB leadership concerns its disavowal of the fact that the right of a class union to exist and struggle can be defended in capitalist society only by the strength of the working class: we must not rely on so-called "democratic rules" to ensure that class unionism can operate freely. Conflictual, class-based trade unionism will always be fought by the employers’ political regime, whether in formal compliance with the democratic political framework or through open fascism. In this regard, it is instructive to explain one of the aspects of the trade union movement in Italy in recent years. In reaction to the open betrayal of the CGIL, several so-called "grassroots" unions emerged in various areas in Italy. The main strength of these unions was the weapon of the strike. Against them, the CGIL advocated for years a law restricting the freedom to strike in so-called "essential public services", in the name of the constitutional and democratic right of citizens to have access to such "essential services". It is clear how, in this case, the principles of democracy and the rule of law were used against workers!

Finally, in 1990 one of the most restrictive laws on freedom to strike in Europe was passed, voted by the main governing party in Italy, the Christian Democrats, and the main parliamentary opposition party, the Italian Communist Party. Under this law, a large part of the Italian working class is prevented from striking effectively. To give an example, while in Germany we see rail strikes lasting up to five days, in Italy strikes in sectors subject to this law cannot last more than 24 hours, must be announced about 20 days in advance, and often cannot be called more than once a month or even less.

With the economic crisis of 2008, the situation of workers’ struggle in industry deteriorated further and grassroots unionism in it weakened. Since 2010, however, a struggle movement led by grassroots unions and composed mainly of migrant workers has emerged in the logistics sector. There have been hundreds of strikes, often very hard, involving clashes with police and layoffs, and many of them have brought concrete improvements for these workers. The strength of these strikes has been in the pickets, which have blocked trucks from entering and leaving warehouses. The CGIL has almost always opposed these strikes, fearing the strengthening of grassroots unionism in the industry. This year the right-wing government promoted a bill that, if passed, could make picketing illegal. The bill was converted into a decree law three weeks ago. The president of the Republic, whom much of the parliamentary left considers a democratic bulwark against the right-wing government, signed the decree. Both the law against strikes in so-called "essential" public services and the decree-law against picketing were thus deemed perfectly in line with the Italian Constitution, considered by much of the so-called left to be a bulwark in defense of workers!

So, regarding the first of the two issues we are talking about here, the fascist attack by the capitalist class against the workers, my conclusion is that sure, the attack is fascist, but it can take on the guise of democracy and be supported by parties that call themselves defenders of democracy. Fascism is the true nature of the capitalist political regime, and the working class can defend itself against it only by the strength of its organization and struggle.

Today’s second topic is the general strike. In Italy the law against picketing completes the attack on the freedom to strike by affecting the private, manufacturing and logistics sector, while the 1990 law had affected the public service sector. This was a very serious measure that would have justified the use of a general strike. But the leaderships of the two major grassroots unions - SI Cobas and USB - acted divided, calling general strikes on different dates. This is a serious problem for the labor movement in Italy. The leaderships of these unions belong to different political groups, and they use unions only as tools to wage war against each other, going so far as to divide the workers’ union struggle. This opportunistic behavior of the leaderships of the main grassroots unions prevents the strengthening and harms the prestige of class unionism.

That is why I am a member, together with militants of other unions, of the Self-Convoked Workers’ Coordination (CLA), which promotes and fights for the unity of action of confrontational unionism and workers. In addition, there is a tendency on the part of the leadership of grassroots unions to call "general strikes" without a real connection to union struggles in the various sectors, especially with regard to the expiration of national collective bargaining agreements. The general strike should seek to unite the ongoing workers’ struggles, involving a critical mass and thus reaching even those sections of the working class that are not currently in struggle.

In this sense, the proposal circulating in the U.S. labor movement to align the expiration of contracts with May 1, 2028, in order to promote a potentially large general strike is in line with the reality of the labor movement in the various sectors. Perhaps it sins, on the other hand, in the sense that the strike should not be contingent only on the expiration of collective agreements: if the force is there, it could be the working class that does not abide by agreements and demands wage increases before they expire. But the proposal, which has been taken up by CSAN, is certainly a step in the right direction.

In Italy, too, a proper balance is needed between the two elements: the calling of a general strike of the entire working class by a sufficient number of unions, as a political act in itself, and adherence to the reality of union struggles in the various sectors and categories.

This work, however, requires, at least in Italy, a struggle within the fighting unions against the divisions in action imposed by their opportunist leaders. This struggle can benefit from international relations with class-based labor movements in other countries, not least because the international framework of proletarian struggle is more vibrant and encouraging than the narrow national context in Italy. Today’s initiative is a useful step in this direction.

Long live the struggle of the working class! Long live May Day! Long live the general strike!