COBAS UK?

7 replies [Last post]
catch's picture
User offline. Last seen 6 hours 38 min ago. Offline
Joined: 7-02-06

Looks like a one or two person operation, but anyone else know anything about it?

http://www.cobas.org.uk/

JH
User offline. Last seen 3 weeks 7 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 11-02-07

From googling this quickly it does look like a two person operation - an Italian academic who's given up on the UCU and his partner.

Quote:
I stopped paying fees to the ludicrous union for lecturers UCU several months ago. I do not intend to go back in that mickey mouse club. I will only pay fees and give my support to independent rank-and-file committees if any would be formed in the UK whilst working here.

I am close to the idea of unions as reported at

www.cobas.it/Sito/Commissione%20Internazionale/Presentazione/Cobas%20in%20inglese%20(corretto).doc

although I am not a cobas member.

Sal.

Good luck to him I suppose. I can't make the link work but this seems to be the document on COBAS.

Quote:
CONFEDERAZIONE COBAS, Viale Manzoni 55 – 00185 ROMA tel. 0677591926 fax 0677206060 cobas@cobas.it - http://www.cobas.it

A NEW MODEL OF SOCIAL SELF-ORGANISATION: From a refusal of passivity to the building of a movement against capitalist globalisation

Edited by the International Commission of the Cobas Confederation, Milan, August 2002

Introduction

In recent years a new offensive of capitalist forces has been under way on a world scale, aimed at a re-definition of capitalist control over both peoples and territories in a rapidly changing world. In the rich Western countries, such an offensive takes the shape above all of capitalist dominion over production (wage reductions, job casualisation, mass unemployment) and a new push towards the commodification of every sphere of social life (elimination of the welfare state, privatisation, commodification of everything - including our free time). In the developing countries such processes are visible through the greedy exploitation of oil and gas reserves, raw materials, cheap and non-unionised labour - who are robbed of their most elementary rights. Here capital shows its most barbaric face of violent imposition, dictatorship and war. A new movement has arisen against this state of affairs, and has spread all over the world. Rich, diversified, extremely lively, over the last few years it has become the vehicle of expression for many different demands. The ‘Confederazione Cobas’ (henceforth Cobas Confederation) has been fully part of this movement since its birth. The aim of these notes is to introduce the views and activities of the Cobas Confederation to the rest of the movement.

The new world order and capitalist globalisation

The end of a world which had been dominated by two superpowers opened the road to the creation of a new world order, based on the USA’s monopoly of military power, and on rigid neo-liberalist policies pursued by the governments of the most powerful capitalist nations, at the service of big multinational corporations. Through trans-national bodies such as the IMF, World Bank, WTO, G8 and NATO, the governments of the most powerful nations, under American hegemony, impose their diktats on the workers and peoples of the Earth in the shape of privatisation, sackings, the restructuring of production, which produce poverty for entire populations and increase the level of inequality between rich and poor countries. We call this process - which is only partly controlled by trans-national bodies - capitalist globalisation, through which the commodification of every aspect of peoples’ lives are imposed over the planet’s entire surface, subsuming not only human labour but every aspect of social life: from food to free time, from the water we drink to the air we breathe.

War has become central to such a scenario, whether it be caused by control over strategic resources (energy sources and water reserves), or areas which are geopolitically fundamental to the USA’s strategy of imperialist domination. Furthermore, war is also used as an extreme attempt to fight back against the ghost of recession, through a sharp rise in military expenditure.

The European context

Things are no better in Europe. After the introduction of the Euro, paid for by the blood, sweat and tears of workers, the growth forecast for 2002 is negative, while the stability pact is jeopardised by the need to deal with the catastrophic floods which occurred in August. The same mechanism which creates pollution and climate change is itself creating the conditions for its own unsustainability. In the meantime unemployment keeps rising, public expenditure continues to be cut, the welfare state is slashed to pieces and privatisation is pushed to the limit so as to open up new opportunities for profit. In the last few European summits neo-liberist policies were imposed with even more emphasis, and were unanimously agreed on by all European governments. This is also the end of every illusion of a possible ‘third way’, sponsored by the ‘neo-liberal’ left of Jospin, Schroeder, Prodi, D’Alema and Tony Blair, whose governments all supported and enthusiastically fought in the 1999 NATO war in Kosovo. While European trade unions, deadened by bureaucracies who have transmitted to workers the need for sacrifices to meet the Maastricht treaty condtions, are only be able to negotiate over the residual effects which emerge from a centralised restructuring of the labour market - and consequently have virtually no room for manoeuvre.

The Berlusconi government in Italy

The Italian government is now in the hands of a centre-right coalition made up of the neo-fascists of National Alliance, the xenophobic and racist Northern League and Forza Italia, the ‘business/party’ owned by Silvio Berlusconi, who also owns one of the biggest economic empires in Italy. This government is accelerating productive restructuring, capital ‘financialization’ and labour market deregulation. On the latter front, in particular, the Berlusconi government has unleashed an unprecedented attack on the very heart of one of the working class’s most important victories of the last 40 years. The battle being fought is over the employers’ right to sack workers without even a ‘just cause’ (by abolishing article 18 of the ‘Workers’ Statute’ law), the introduction of new forms of flexibility into the labour market, the reduction of the state pension scheme together with its creeping privatisation, the elimination of public education and health and the reform of the tax system which will rob the poor to pay the rich.

The attacks by centre-left governments

In a way, Berlusconi is simply continuing the job his centre-left predecessors had already started: policies aimed at reducing real wages; reform of the state pension system that extended the retirement age and which reduced the value of pensions by 30-40% in only ten years; introduction of new forms of flexibility and casualisation at work; equality of status between state and private schools causing the move of precious resources from state schools to private ones; the transformation of the national health service into a business-oriented system; policies of outsourcing of every profitable public service; the implementation of one of the biggest plans of privatisation in Europe (energy, railways, telecommunications and the post office). This picture is completed by the worsening of the already restrictive law governing the right to strike, together with the new law on immigration which created those hypocritically named ‘temporary residence centres’ as well as a system of entry quotas.

How Berlusconi is worse

The Berlusconi government is characterised by its attempts to rehabilitate the fascist regime and a ‘revisionist’ approach to the 1943-45 Resistance movement; by its revoltingly racist attitude towards immigration (the new immigration law allows warships to intercept migrants’ boats as they approach national boundaries); by its furthers attack on the National Health System; by its unprecedented clash with the judiciary and the passing of new laws tailor-made to extricate Berlusconi and his entourage from the numerous trials they are facing; and its almost total control over television.

As regards trade unions, Berlusconi is leading a full-frontal assault against them, and especially against the CGIL, the biggest official trade union confederation. In July 2002 we even reacahed the point in several workplaces of the police asking for lists of union members, an unacceptable and illegal act of intimidation. At the same time the government has managed to reach a separate agreement with the other two big official union confederations, CISL and UIL (both members of CES). In spite of the united strikes of the last few months, CISL and UIL are responsible for breaking trade union unity and dividing the working class through the acceptance of some of the government’s worst demands, including abolition of article 18.

In Berlusconi’s political project the trade unions of the future should be limited to a partial and marginal role in local and regional bargaining on conditions of work (due to the elimination of national contracts); participating in the management of employment-related social security benefits, pension funds and training schemes. Trade unions’ sole function would therefore be as a provider of services for a fragmented working class, deprived of its rights.

The big official unions: CGIL, CISL and UIL

However we shouldn’t view Berlusconi as ‘the big bad wolf’ of fairy tales, who wants to eat nice innocent trade unionists. Most of the political and institutional conditions which have opened the road for Berlusconi’s attacks are the result of CGIL, CISL and UIL’s strategy over the last few years, such as: the signing of national agreements which encourage flexibility and productivity increases, while penalising wages; the acceptance of a reduction in the role of the state pensions system in favour of pension funds, (which they are particularly interested in as potential future managers, together with the employers, of private sector funds - but also public ones in the future); their favourable attitude towards the introduction of new forms of labour market flexibility; their agreement with the transformation of education, health and public administration into profit-making organisations.

The role of Cobas

What is going on in Italy has already happened, or is about to happen, elsewhere in Europe. Given such a scenario, workers cannot limit themselves to a defensive battle inside their workplaces, whether they have permanent or temporary jobs, or whether their own industry or sector appears to be ‘safe’. Any battle, under these new conditions, would be lost from the start. Capital’s offensive can only be resisted effectively by a struggle involving the entire world of labour, in all its ramifications. Its construction must start from basic union activism, which must then broaden out to a wider political level in order to fight back against the aggressiveness of capital, which is attacking all spheres of human activity. However a coherent anti-capitalist attitude by the working class cannot be taken for granted. Therefore, we believe in the need for a process of workers’ self-organisation from below, which grows and spreads to a mass level in all sectors of employment: public and private, permanent and temporary, manual and white collar - which in any event is under the control of capital: this is the goal of the Cobas Confederation.

Who are Cobas?

‘Cobas’ is the abbreviation of ‘comitati di base’- rank-and-file committees. Part of the Cobas DNA includes the spontaneous uprising of factory workers in the 1960s, those of service sector workers, temporary workers and the unemployed during the 1970s and 1980s - and the mass rank-and-file protest against the neo-corporative official unions in the early 1990s, when the first Cobas were founded. The Cobas Confederation was created in March 1999 with the unification of ‘School Cobas’ and the ‘National Cobas Co-ordination’, which already brought together workers from the health service, the civil service, telecommunications and energy utilities.

The decision to create a self-organised independent union - in sharp opposition to the big official unions - originated in a refusal of their policies of collaboration with neo-liberalism, which reached a peak under the centre-left governments. As a matter of fact, the role of these ‘state unions’ in co-determining policies of job flexibility and wages moderation were absolutely decisive during that period.
Abroad, our model is often considered as an Italian anomaly, although perhaps it finds some echoes in France. The decision to create an alternative organisation - by definition separate to traditional unions - is related to the incompatibility of our conception of trade union and political struggle with that of the official unions. The latter have substituted social conflict with social partnership, being repaid by the state with economic resources for various purposes (services for workers such as help with tax returns; pension funds; professional training), which are vital in sustaining an ever-growing army of officials and bureaucrats. No wonder, therefore, that these organisations base their strategy on closed and watertight majorities which make all the important decisions, heavily penalising any form of internal dissent or organised minority. Hence the unavoidable necessity to organise outside of such bureaucracies, starting from the clear refusal on principle of trade union activism as a full-time paid job.

The Cobas Confederation is a political, trade-unionist and cultural force. The recomposition of political and trade-union struggle is one of our basic principles, based on the awareness that social subjects can never reach class consciousness unless they develop - starting from material contradictions - an understanding of how they are connected to society in general. Separating trade union conflicts from political struggles means subsuming the conflict between capital and labour to specific political projects or acceptance of the current state of affairs. This is the real meaning of us wanting to be both a political and a trade-union organisation, i.e. a social force, which acts in a generalised fashion, trying to bring economic and political struggles together. This explains our emphasis on workplaces, the area where we are the most active, which is constantly aimed at exposing the nature of class conflict inherent in trade union demands.

The Cobas Confederation is based on both the principle of workers’ self-organisation and on the struggle to overcome a culture of ‘passivity’ (delega). This has characterised trade union culture over a long period, as well as the mentality and behaviour of workers themselves in Fordist societies. It consists in fully delegating the defence of one’s own rights to professional trade unionists, forcing workers to become passive and ignorant of their own condition and how they can change it. Such an attitude is still deeply rooted among workers. This is why, once again, we refuse activism as a career, together with facility time paid by the employers which create permanent ‘professionals’. On the contrary, we are in favour of the rotation of responsibilities.

The Cobas Confederation is made up of a grouping of industrial or employment categories, each with its own statute and with financial and operational autonomy. The vertical nature of this system is counterbalanced by the rank and file element, represented by workplace Cobas, the local industrial grouping and the Confederation itself. Such a system protects us from the risks of traditional trade unionism on the one hand, while on the other strengthening the possibility of a real growth on the ground through typical trade union economic intervention. The Confederation level, with its strong political connotation, puts forward a more complex vision of social reality, overcoming the (potentially) narrow focus of single industrial categories, thus achieving an autonomous analysis of society independent of other political groupings or parties.

The most recent struggles

In the last three years the activity of the Cobas Confederation has been frenetic because of both the intensification of the capitalist offensive and, after Seattle, the opening up of new opportunities thanks to the new international movement. In such a promising phase we (and other rank-and-file Italian organisations) have been able to organise many mobilisations, and orientate significant segments of social and political life - above all those without property or power - as well as opening up broad union struggles of quite a generalised character, and overall contributing in a significant fashion to the resumption of social conflict in Italy.

Some important moments in this period were the protests against the OECD forum in Naples in March 2001, our involvement in the July demonstrations in Genoa, the 150,000 strong demonstration against the war on 10th November in Rome, the mobilisation of immigrants between October and December against the revolting new bill of the Berlusconi government, culminating in the huge demonstration of immigrants in Rome on 19th January 2002 with 150,000 participants, and the 70,000 strong national demonstration for Palestine in Rome on 9 March.

The Cobas Confederation has been active in workplace disputes, creating a campaign against various government proposals concerning the renewal of national work agreements. The main area though has been state schools, where traditionally we are strong, and where through our slogans we became a reference point for many workers, to the extent of forcing the official unions to rediscover ‘conflictuality’ under pressure from their rank-and-file. The school strike and national demonstration in Rome on 31 October 2001 opened the way for the conflict which engulfed most Italian schools in the following months.

We have also worked together with other rank-and-file organisations in the building of a general strike in response to the plans of both the government and the bosses. On 14 December 2001 we declared a general strike with demonstrations in all main cities; followed, by a bigger general strike of all rank-and-file unions on 15 February 2002, with a 150,000 strong demonstration in Rome. In April we called a general stike on the same day as the CGIL, CISL and UIL in order to avoid counter-productive divisions among workers, but separate demonstrations and rallies were organised in eight Italian cities, in which over 300,000 workers took part.

Finally, we have been active in the referendum campaigns which are aimed at extending workers rights, abolishing the law which equalised state and private schools, as well cutting down on electro-magnetic smog, the use of pesticides and incinerators.

To contact the International Commission: internazionale@cobas.it http://www.cobas.it/

User offline. Last seen 1 day 5 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 29-07-05

A couple of years after the defeat of the miners' strike in GB. 1984, a great effervesence exploded in workers' struggles, particularly in Europe, mainly calling into question the unions and also showing tendency twoards the outbreak of spontaneous struggle and towards a degree of anti-union self organisation.
The trade unions, particularly the "radical" elements of them, were the bourgeoisie's response to this development of the potential unification of struggle:
- In GB in early 87 a strike by 140,000 BT workers showing early anti-union sentiments;
- Spring 86 in Belgium saw massive and generalised struggles giving rise to workers' committees and delegations to all factories;
- France 86/7 saw hard strikes with tendencies towards self-organisation and base committees;
- Spain saw months of strikes and demonstrations in 87 with workers going from factory to factory calling workers out in solidarity - a real atmosphere of conflict;
- Holldna and Germany saw strikes, demonstrations and workers coming together. In Yugoslavia (soon to be ex-Yugoslavia) strikes went on for months before the bourgeoisie could control them with workers explicitly rejecting the stalinist unions and the "workers' paradise".

In Italy, Spring 87, initially in the railways, airlines, hospitals and schools, these tendencies above expressed themsleves. The base committees of the school sector, first from 120 schools in Rome, then nationally, gained a majority over the unions organising 3 national delegate assemblies in Florence, Rome and Naples. There was a clash in this process between the tendency that wanted to solidify the committees into new unions - the Cobas (unione Comitati di Base - which had a majority in Rome) and the "assembyists" who had a majority nationally and more clearly reflected the rejection of the unions.
On the railways, an assembly in Naples gave rise to a regional coordination and then a national one in Florence. At a railworkers' demonstration in Rome, a leaflet was put out by the non-union majority of the base committees calling for a unified struggle. Clear, anti-union sentiments were expressed from a council workers' wildcat in Sicily to an assemby of different public sector workers in March 87, which explicitly debated how to organise face with trade union treachery.
But like in the coordinations and base committees that appeared in France, Spain and Belgium, the left wing of the bourgeoisie was active in turning these (soemtimes confused0 expressions of the class openly questioning trade unionism, into the divisive terrain of "fighting both inside and outside the unions" or for new trade unions. for the first time in Italy, the Trotskyists were involved in the teachers' movement, ending up polarising the question around "the recognition of the Cobas as a negotiating body", rather than the needs of the struggle.

In France, militants of the CNT, proposed that the committees of the gas, electricity and postal workers should have a platform for membership "for a renewal of class unionism". Like the Cobas, fixing the workers into the boundries of the state when the whole tendency was to go beyond it.

After the collapse of Stalinism and the massive ideological assault against the working class, the bourgeoisie in France and Italy strengthened their union apparatus in the mid-90s with the renewed development of rank and file structures largely animated by leftism and supporting the unions: the SUD and FSI in France and the Cobas in Italy.

The statement above shows the leftist nature of the Cobas, radical organs of the state strengthening the union apparatus with all the leftist baggage; the discovery of "globalisation" over a hundred years after it's happened; the "nasty" USA; the "nasty" right wing, the lesser evil argument; taking part in "referendums" (there's the official stamp of leftism) and so on.

JH
User offline. Last seen 3 weeks 7 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 11-02-07

Here's a description of the various different Italian base unions from an article by the FdCA - http://libcom.org/history/anarchist-communists-italian-base-union-movement

Quote:
USI: Revived in 1978, it reached a certain consistency in the '90s, before it split into two (following disagreement on union practices), with a more syndicalist, open wing and the more orthodox, ideological wing. The split was later sanctioned by the IWA (AIT). USI-AIT today claims a historical legitimacy as a revolutionary, anarcho-syndicalist union, which is lost to the collective memory, and seems to attract workers who have already made a political choice towards anarchism or libertarianism. It considers its anti-war activities to be central. The other USI, excluded from the IWA, is limited more or less to the city of Rome where it is quite active through its policy of labour forums. Both organizations lay claim to the name USI.

CIB Unicobas: This union was born from the cobas movement in the schools in 1991 and describes itself as an independent, libertarian union, something which has been responsible for an appreciable growth over recent years, particularly in the schools sector. It makes no ideological claims and has a horizontal organizational structure. Having been, in the early '90s, a driving force for the aggregation of base unions, it is now going through a phase of self-isolation due to differences with other base unions who tend to exclude it. It is part of the SIL network and, together with CGT-Spain, SUD-France and SUD-Switzerland it is working towards the creation of a European federation of alternative unions, the FESAL.

Confederazione COBAS: This is the Cobas that is most commonly seen in demonstrations and on TV, despite it only formally becoming a union quite recently. It is descended from the remains of the school cobas groups of the '80s and is still strongest in this area. It presents itself as a political, syndicalist and cultural entity, which makes it seem something of a party-union-cultural association. This, in fact, leads one to suppose that its members share not only a common labor strategy, but also a political and ideological line. This characteristic together with its tendency to want to devour all around it, was mainly responsible for the failure of the policy of trying to get "all the cobas into one single union". It enjoys great political and media support among the Italian communist left wing, which also serves to make it much more visible than the other base unions, but also much more susceptible to the general political choices of parties such as Rifondazione Comunista or structures like the Social Forums, one of whose greatest exponents is in fact the Confederazione COBAS leader.

CUB: Federated with the RdB (which is strong in the civil service), the CUB is the largest grassroots confederation in Italy, with unions in several different categories. It grew out of a split in the machinists' sector of the CISL. It has been able to reach the requisites which enable it to enjoy national representativity, something which has permitted it to participate in talks for national work contracts, while placing itself firmly as an alternative to the CIGL-CISL-UIL trio. It has a vertical organizational structure, with paid officers and services for workers. It employs a distinct syndicalist line, with no apparent ideological interference.

SLAI COBAS: This union exists above all within certain large industrial plants where it practices highly radical policies and is able to win votes and seats in the union representation elections in the workplace. It is strongly biased towards the communist left-wing, but autonomously with respect to the parliamentary left, which was to result in a split which led to the birth of the S.in.Cobas. Its original statute foresees a horizontal structure.

S.in.Cobas: A split from the SLAI guided by Rifondazione Comunista. It is active above all in certain factories and in local administration, thanks also to its parliamentary connections.

Other base unions are active only within certain categories, for example the Or.S.A. and SULT in the transport sector and SNaTeR in telecommunications. All the so-called base unions, with the possible exception of the USI, found themselves effectively forced to present candidates at the union elections in the workplace, with some even obtaining excellent results. However, there is unfortunately no data available to allow us to establish if the base union delegates have been able to practice a proper relationship between delegate and workers, as one would expect of anti-bureaucratic syndicalists, in respecting the mandates they have received from their workmates who have elected them.

888
888's picture
User offline. Last seen 13 hours 13 min ago. Offline
Joined: 30-09-03

Baboon, what alternative to forming unions do you suggest in the situations you mentioned? The vanishing into thin air of these networks after a few weeks after the conditions have changed? Isn't it useful to havesome kind of permanent structure (memory, experience, mobilising power) that can respond to conditions in a more organised way?

Quote:
In France, militants of the CNT, proposed that the committees of the gas, electricity and postal workers should have a platform for membership "for a renewal of class unionism". Like the Cobas, fixing the workers into the boundries of the state when the whole tendency was to go beyond it.

How does this necessarily fix the workers into the boundaries of the state? The CNT isn't bound to operate purely legally.

Quote:
the left wing of the bourgeoisie

Does this bit of ultra-left speak actually serve any useful purpose? They aren't literally the left wing of the bourgeoisie, nor are they sponsored or consiously acting on behalf of the left wing of the bourgeoisie, maybe their ideas reflect those a very forward thinking left wing section of the bourgeoisie might have if it actually existed... what does this phrase actually mean?

Alf
User offline. Last seen 3 hours 28 min ago. Offline
Joined: 6-07-05

The point is not that workers can´t try to have ´permanent´or rather long lasting groups which have an activity in the workplace. The mistake made over and over again is that groups which can really only express the viewpoint and activity of a small minority outside periods of open struggle set themselves up as representatives of the entire workplace and end up playing the role of alternative unions. This process of recuperation takes place irrespective of the conscious wishes the participants.

User offline. Last seen 4 days 21 hours ago. Offline
Joined: 9-07-06
Alf wrote:
The point is not that workers can´t try to have ´permanent´or rather long lasting groups which have an activity in the workplace. The mistake made over and over again is that groups which can really only express the viewpoint and activity of a small minority outside periods of open struggle set themselves up as representatives of the entire workplace and end up playing the role of alternative unions. This process of recuperation takes place irrespective of the conscious wishes the participants.

It is true that this happens, but what do you suggest workers who have some faith in the importance of class struggle do instead?

Django's picture
User offline. Last seen 36 min 33 sec ago. Offline
Joined: 18-01-08
Alf wrote:
The point is not that workers can´t try to have ´permanent´or rather long lasting groups which have an activity in the workplace. The mistake made over and over again is that groups which can really only express the viewpoint and activity of a small minority outside periods of open struggle set themselves up as representatives of the entire workplace and end up playing the role of alternative unions. This process of recuperation takes place irrespective of the conscious wishes the participants.

Out of interest, have these kinds of groups ever existed? Do you mean organisations of political minorities?