Background
on Brazil’s labour movement
After a long period of repression and co-optation under Brazil’s
dictators (unions were rarely present in workplaces, and some merely
served to provide welfare benefits), there emerged in the ’70
and ’80 an autonomous ‘new unionism’ or ‘novo
sindicalismo’ how it is has been called in Brazil. When critically-minded
unionists began to regroup after mass strikes by metalworkers around
Sao Paulo in the 1970s, they were initially forced to do so in isolation
from and in opposition to their former union leaders. But in 1983
they founded the CUT (Central Unica dos Trabalhadores) and as they
won more and more union elections, the CUT finally ceased to be
merely an alliance of opposition groups and became a true trade
union federation. By 2001, with over 19 million union members, Brazil
had about the highest trade union density in Latin America. The
career of Brazil’s current president since January 2003, Luis
Inácio ‘Lula’ da Silva, a co-founder of the CUT,
the largest union confederation, is emblematic of trade union power.
Yet that success has evoked mixed emotions.
For despite their potent presence in civil society and considerable
achievements in promoting respect for the rights of workers, trade
unions are falling short of their potentials. A pro-union Brazilian
specialist has summed up the situation as follows:
It is possible to discern some of the main characteristics
of the structure of trade unionism in Brazil. In first place, it
lacks a centre, being fragmented and dispersed by a myriad local
unions, for the most part with little force and scant bargaining
capacity… In the second place, (it) is decentralized, with
few forms of unified action (in spite of the setting up of union
centrals beginning in 1983). In the third place, it lacks roots,
by virtue of its not being inserted in work places and being a structure
external to enterprises. Finally, the union structure is verticalised,
with immense difficulties to link, in a wider horizontal perspective,
the organisation (and resistance) across classes, as it remains
tied to the waged sector. (Alves, 2000, p. 113-114)
The problems mentioned by Alves are inherited from the corporatist
system described above, but are at the same time nourished by some
of the unions and union leaders. For instance, there is still no
freedom of association: all workers are divided into sectors by
a government commission and only one local union can be registered
for each location (factory, community, state) in each industry.
The result is a massive fragmentation and decentralisation in which
every union strongly holds on to its own status and power. A situation
made worse by the guaranteed state funding-system. Voluntary contributions
by members only represent a minor source of union revenue. Far more
comes in the form of union dues, formerly called the union tax and
payable by all workers covered by a union, including non-union members.
Unions are thus not dependent on their members for their financial
well-being.
This analysis might be overly pessimistic in light of recent developments.
In 2004, for example, Brazil’s major confederation of bank
sector workers, signed a national collective agreement with the
country’s banking employers’ association, thus breaking
with the past pattern bargaining within a sector on a localised
basis. A large, seasoned organisation, the Union of Metalworkers
of ABC, has pioneered new styles of unionism: financial autonomy
from the state fiscal system, new forms of union democracy and solidarity
with NGOs and social movements. Workers in the public sector have
also taken initiative to break with non-transparent, verticalised
unionism.
Unions
in Brazil
Active work population 76,8
million
Union density 26% (19,96 million members)
Number of unions 15.963
Company unions 4.609
Worker unions 11.354
organised in one of the big federations ±4.300
Most important unions federations
CUT, Força Sindical, SDS
Associated unions of CUT ±3.100
Membership of CUT 7,5 million
Number of workers represented by CUT ± 22 million |
|