La démocratie syndicale Union Democracy

Sommaire

L'auteur définit d'abord certains concepts comme « démocratie » et « bureaucratie ». Il fait une analyse critique des principaux éléments de la démocratie syndicale et en présente les critères qu'il juge les plus justes. Enfin, il examine brièvement l'influence éventuelle de la fusion CMTC-CCT sur la solution du problème de la démocratie syndicale.

Summary

One must be very careful when talking about democracy in labor unions, for democracy is fundamentally a political system related to the larger society. The word "democracy", however, has yielded to the fancies of analogy and the needs of a changing world, so that we now have economic, social, industrial and union democracy. In this case, it must be pointed out that the analogy should not be carried to an extreme, for the very simple reason that trade unionism and a fortiori a given national or local union — is not the larger, political society, and should not therefore be expected to seek the general common good to the same extent as the latter, since it is interested primarily in particular, specific objectives and interests.

Trade unions are, among other things, pressure groups with various axes, however noble, to grind. They are a mixture of business enterprise, mutual insurance, recreation club, and fighting unit, the latter feature often being the dominant one and not allowing the unions to tolerate much of the slowness of the "democratic" process with which the larger society has to live.

Bureaucracy has often, and wrongly, been described as the extreme point of a continuum of freedom, the other extreme being democracy. This would not have occurred if Max Weber's ideal type of bureaucratic organization had been kept in mind. For him, "bureaucratic organization fundamentally means the exercise of control on the basis of knowledge", and "experience tends universally to show that the purely bureaucratic type of administrative organization is, from a purely technical point of view, capable of attaining the highest degree of efficiency and is in this sense formally the most rational known means of carrying out imperative control ever human beings".

Democracy does not perforce mean the absence of all compulsion or coercion or of sanctions in a labor union, when and after it is established. Attendance at, and participation in, union meetings are not, in and of themselves, final criteria of union democracy, nor are other forms of union activity such as membership in union committees, bargaining or strike activities, membership in union officialdom, and so on. A rapid turnover of union officers is not necessarily a good criterion of union democracy.

Union democracy is the result of a complex of factors which must be analysed jointly. The union constitution must itself be democratic in tenor; otherwise the democratic mechanism is already blocked. And even when the letter of the constitution is democratic, the members must be constantly vigilant to maintain its spirit.

The union members must be and feel free to express themselves and to associate with their kind for the furtherance of specific interests within the union. Minority rights therein must be respected, although minority protest must not deliberately clog the democratic process.

Union elections must be held periodically and in an honest and free fashion; they are the most efficient instrument of control in the hands of the members. Fear of reprisals should not exist. Obviously, present incumbents always have an edge over opposing candidates for office; but their re-election should not be seen as an automatic and fatal event.

The most specific criterion of union democracy, however, is the sensitiveness of the union leadership to rank-and-file pressure and expressed or felt opinions. If the leaders of a given union genuinely seek the advice of the majority on important questions, lend an ear to member grievances, present their arguments to the members so as to better clarify their own positions, avoid to obstruct the expression of antagonistic views, and respect resulting majority decisions, there is a great likelihood that such a union is democratic.

"Democracy", as Rosen & Rosen put it, "means the opportunity of all union members to develop informed opinions about union goals and means of achieving them, and the opportunity to express those opinions in such a way that the organization will be governed in its activity by a majority of those who do so."

The new CLC has lofty goals with respect to union — and other — democracy. It should not be forgotten, however, that the power in economic and administrative matters still remains with the affiliated unions. The CLC's role regarding union democracy will consist mainly in spreading and enforcing — however gently — ethical norms among its affiliated bodies. But the most solid defenders of union democracy are still to be found among the rank-and-file members of labor unions.