European Tribune

Another strike in France

by mofembot
Sat May 24th, 2008 at 06:40:25 AM EST

Approximately 34% of French teachers are out on strike today [ed: 15 May] to protest pending personnel cuts. Some other functionaries are also on strike, either as a separate movement or "in solidarity" with the teachers. I have to ask: what good will it do?

What good are strikes when the prevailing narrative is against them? - Diary rescue by Migeru


I went to mail a letter today in my tiny town here in France's Upper Provence, and it's a good thing that all I needed to do was drop the letter in the mailbox: there was a paper affixed to the closed door: "En grève ce jeudi" ("on strike this Thursday"). Curious, I went home and took a look at Le Monde online; sure enough, today one-quarter of all French functionaries, and nearly 34% of all French teachers are on strike today. And once again I find myself thinking: There have to be more tools in workers' and unions' boxes other than strikes to get the government (and the public) to respond in a positive way.

Given my background as a former school administrator here in France, my focus is on l'Éducation Nationale:  teachers are protesting cuts in personnel that will create even larger classes.

I am in total sympathy with the teachers, but I have to wonder: what good will this strike do? Who is hurt? Who is moved? I remember the Big One back in 2003, when all four teachers' unions banded together and participation was on the order of 70% or higher, at least for the first several days. As the strike wore on, the public's patience and sympathy wore out. Worse, once it was finally over, the net result was that the Raffarin government hadn't budged. The teachers got nothing for their troubles, except a great deal of personal debt. There were no concessions whatsoever from the government.

--And that strike, to me, seemed to mark a sea change that continues to be in evidence to this day: strikes rarely work. About the only effective strike I've witnessed since moving to France in 2001 was the strike of university and high school students over the CPE (contrat premier embauche). That was a genuine populist movement, not a union-based affair.

Cutting teaching staff is not in France's long-term interests. Huge class sizes are detrimental to effective education, and an educated populace is necessary to a vibrant democracy... [trail off]. Well. What an educated populace isn't vital to is the military-industrial complex, and France, like the U.S. and far too many other countries, spents a wildly disproportionate percentage of its budget on "defense." There are lots of powerful interests who do not care about education, who do not care about anything other than their bottom lines. Strikes don't affect them in the slightest, and yet they are key players in influencing current policy here in France and abroad. What will make a difference to them?

"Sarkozy l'américain" is not going to be any more sympathetic to the philosophy and goals of professional educators than was Raffarin. Today's strike is not going to stop the cutbacks. It will not affect brainless and heartless Education Ministry policies that make teaching less and less attractive as a profession (for example, passing a CAPES or other exam necessary for the equivalent of tenure nearly always means being transfered to a different school in some other part of France).

The CPE was a brainchild of corporate interests, and the populist student movement beat it back. Does this mean that this refrain needs to be sung out again?: Aux armes, citoyens! Formez vos bataillons! I hope not, given our species' propensity for violence, but I really have to wonder these days.

Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password

Display:
galvanize a segment of popular opinion that hasn't been galvanized, and the fact is students, future voters, tend to line up behind teachers these days, so this is as much perhaps an industrial action as a long-term strategic one.

And these cuts are wrong: we need more personnel, not less.

And you never know, sometimes critical mass is achieved, and the industrial action has a more or less good result, as you yourself observed over CPE.

One thing it will not do - harm anything.  

PS - you get your CAPES, they stick you in Lille or Bergues or whereever but if you've got family back south, usually you can pretty quickly get a mutation back to the Nice or Aix rectorats...hang in there, I see in film that Bergues isn't so bad!

"C'est un scandale !"

by redstar on Thu May 15th, 2008 at 11:22:18 AM EST
It's a perennial problem, how do you register a protest against your employer in a public service profession ? If you withdraw your labour, you don't annoy your employer, you hurt those who use the service.

I don't know that anybody has ever worked out a good response to this.

keep to the Fen Causeway

by Helen (lareinagal at yahoo dot co dot uk) on Thu May 15th, 2008 at 03:38:24 PM EST
I was wondering if you could arrange a one-week-class with only half the students, so as to show the benefits of  smaller groups, and communicate about it.
by Xavier in Paris on Thu May 15th, 2008 at 03:47:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
When I was living in Paris, the museum workers once when on strike by doing everything as usual, but not collecting money...
by gk (g k quattro due due sette "at" gmail.com) on Thu May 15th, 2008 at 04:58:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well, in this precise case, since teachers are state employees, the public is the employer.

It's a bit rich to vote for Sarkozy and then complain about getting strikes...

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.

by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Thu May 15th, 2008 at 05:04:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If the politicians care more about their budget then what they deliver a strike can be a net gain for them. Cut backs on services and being able to blame the unions for it!

In such cases and if there are fees involved (which I hope there is not in the case of french education), one way is to take out those that handle the fees in strike. Trains keep running, but tickets are not sold or checked. Then the unions are providing a better service while ruining the budget...

by A swedish kind of death on Tue May 20th, 2008 at 06:05:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
That assumes that the public is willing to buy the notion that the unions are to blame, and not the politicians. We just had a semi-major strike in Denmark where nurses and various groups of unskilled workers (primarily in the health care sector and daycare for children) went on strike and successfully secured twice the real wage increase that they had initially been offered (the initial offer was 12.8 % increase over three years. The new offer is 14 %. The official inflation is 3.6 % pr. year - the former two numbers have been reported ceaselessly, while the latter is never mentioned in the corporate press).

Presumably this is because the people who are "hurt" by the strike know bloody well that there have been cutbacks in the service and were fully prepared to support a strike for decent wages and working conditions.

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Wed May 21st, 2008 at 04:13:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]
True.

We have a similar situation right now with a nurses strike going on. It is soon (next weekend I think) reaching semi-major scale (the nurses are well unionised in one union, but they are escalating carefully), and last poll showed a 73% support for the strike. The union members has been good in keeping up LTE writing throughout the strike and keeping a consistent message: the low wages causes lack of nurses and are bad for health care. The union has been good in getting out information and their side of every story, with a site and good response times.

by A swedish kind of death on Wed May 21st, 2008 at 09:40:12 AM EST
[ Parent ]
More evidence for the conclusion: we need a new narrative.

Och nu den svenska kocken bakar en Alaskan älg jägare. Bonk! Bonk! Bonk!
by ATinNM on Thu May 15th, 2008 at 04:15:34 PM EST
And I still say that Withdrawal of Purchase will replace Withdrawal of Labour. When millions of consumers (including workers) can decide together not to buy something - they will have discovered the Achilles Heel of Capitalism.

It matters not that we don't 'buy' very much from government. Their corporate backers will soon make things clear.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Sat May 24th, 2008 at 07:29:11 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Withdrawal of purchase works only in specific, limited cases. The company can survive not getting your money longer than you can survive not buying food.

The notion that one can "vote with one's €" is arguably the greatest scam of our age. Take a look at the stuff you have in your house. A computer, presumably a phone, light bulbs, curtains, a wardrobe, a stove, cupboards, a shower, clothes, shoes, etc.

Now, tell me how many of those items were produced with sweatshop labour? How many of them contain gold? How much of that gold was mined using cyanide? How much of your food was produced on farms that dump untreated waste water into streams? Or leak fertiliser?

You don't know. And even if you know the answers to these specific questions, there are a million and one other questions that could just as well be asked. Keeping up with the environmental, humanitarian and resource impacts of just one class of products is a full-time job for several people.

The ethical consumer is, in other words, a very inefficient way of going about things compared to proper government regulation.

Of course, boycotts can be used in combination with strikes, blockades, parliamentary action and other activities, as parts of coordinated campaigns against specifically targeted companies for a limited time and with clearly defined objectives.

But thinking that withdrawal of purchase is a magic bullet is, I'm very much afraid, a pipe dream.

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon May 26th, 2008 at 07:19:56 AM EST
[ Parent ]
It works in any trading where there is competition. There are rival chains of food sellers - you only need to target one. You personally have no burden - you don't have to go without food - you buy from a rival.

It is not difficult to keep up with all the footprint data - the process has been automated by Natural Interest and the Carbon Trust. The information about toxicity/labour abuse etc is also all out there and is being aggregated for datamining.

YES it is true that your average consumer has zilch knowledge of this stuff and will never be an 'ethical' consumer'. We don't need ethical consumers, we need angry consumers.

Let us have this conversation in 12 months, OR when gas is 15 bucks a gallon, OR when demand drops like stone disrupting all mobility - whichever comes first - and we will see  how much of a pipe dream it is. ;-)

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon May 26th, 2008 at 09:11:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
You don't just need angry consumers. You also need a background organisation that can provide ready-made targets. Because there is practically no place in Denmark where I can buy groceries without supporting companies that have policies that I don't like. If there is little to distinguish between the different companies, consumers will boycott willy-nilly and the effect will average out to nothing unless you have some kind of organised campaign to target each company in turn.

And that also leaves aside the fact that there is practically no competition on the Danish grocery market. There are two companies who both operate under a gazillion different names. But the profits go to the same place, and the marching orders go the other way. And both of those corporations are arseholes. One of them is slightly worse than the other, but not enough to matter.

Yes, when you have an organisation that can apply a boycott screw, you have a point. And when there is such an organisation, I am pretty sure that strikes, blockades and boycotts will be used in concert. And then they will be valuable. But as individual, uncoordinated actions? Hardly.

- Jake

Ceterum censeo Chicago esse delendam

by JakeS (JangoSierra 'at' gmail 'dot' com) on Mon May 26th, 2008 at 01:09:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Of course

There are already such online organizations, but so far their audience has not been mainstream. Angry people will take them mainstream. And I have always been talking, in these posts and in others earlier, about www having given new tools for new democratic action, not about individual action.

We are just seeing the beginning IMHO. And ET is a place to fly with new ideas, not pick the reasons why something won't work. Things that haven't been tried yet on the scale necessary for impact, that are still in their infancy,  do not work out of the box. They have to be made to work.

There is a very simple equation at the bottom of this. There are more of us than of 'them'. Billions more. But these billions have never been able to organize before in sufficient numbers at a faster speed than governments or corporate action can react to protest. Now the tools for organization are there. But they came without a manual. It's up to us to write that manual.

And it has already happened. 2001 saw the ousting by popular protest of President Joseph Estrada of the Philippines by Group SMS. A huge number of people were able to assemble in angry protest on the streets faster than security forces could get into place - let alone with a plan. Once a crowd totally occupies a public space and excludes the security forces, there are only two top down decisions: withdraw or start shooting to kill.

Group SMS is powerful in situations of anger. All communication tools that enable large numbers of decentralized people to centralize their anger are powerful.

You can't be me, I'm taken

by Sven Triloqvist on Mon May 26th, 2008 at 03:38:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
As one fellow teacher told me here recently, "ça sent la poudre." (It smells of gunpowder)

Having worked on CDD contract for the Education Nationale, I support the strikes 100%. I left (didn't renew my contract) because I saw a lot of this mess coming years ago. More and more "vacataires" (temp workers) at the universities, to fill the gaps, while permanent positions aren't created.

Working now in the private sector, I can't see myself going back to the EN in the immediate future, despite my wont to pass the CAPES and have that job security. The disavantages are starting to far outweigh the upsides.

So yes, change the narrative, et aux armes, les citoyens!

by Monsieur le Prof (top notch records [all one word] at gmail dot com) on Thu May 22nd, 2008 at 09:31:55 AM EST
How is the strike presented in the media? What sort of things does the government accuse the strikers of? What sort of arguments is it using against the strikers' points? Is there any sort of popular support for the strike? In other words, how is the government spinning the fact that it is making French education quantifiably worse?

The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom - William Blake
by talos (mihalis at gmail dot com) on Wed May 28th, 2008 at 07:03:36 AM EST
The government is essentially trying to hide the fact that the strike is about public education, communicating about the effects of the strikes. The Civil service minister, André Santini, said that striking was a thing of the past and that strikers should work with a brassard expressing the fact they are striking, "like the Japanese". Sarkozy and the government are making a lot of noise about asking for the municipalités to provide some way to watch over the kids as their parents go to work. In short, making sure strikes do not disturb the parents' work day - the common rhetorical response to a strike now is that "it shouldn't come in the face of the right to work".. Shades of Orwell here.

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Wed May 28th, 2008 at 07:35:15 AM EST
[ Parent ]
And thus the MSM narrative is that essentially strikes happen (those lazy civil servants) and thus what is important is making sure they don't disturb the normal people, similar to having umbrellas preventing them. The fact that polls show the strikes have a small majority support in the population doesn't seem to enter the equation...

Auferre, trucidare, rapere, falsis nominibus imperium; atque, ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
by linca (antonin POINT lucas AROBASE gmail.com) on Wed May 28th, 2008 at 07:39:14 AM EST
[ Parent ]


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]