The purpose of this blog is to provide analytical commentary on formal and informal labour organisations and their attempts to resist ever more brutal forms of exploitation in today’s neo-liberal, global capitalism.

Sunday, 31 October 2021

Nothing to Lose but our Chains: reflecting on workers’ key role in resisting capitalist exploitation.

There is widespread pessimism about workers’ potential to take successful industrial action in the UK today. Structural transformation from manufacturing into services and increasing precarisation would make resistance almost impossible. Not so writes Jane Hardy in her fascinating new book Nothing to lose but our chains: Work & Resistance in Twenty-First-Century Britain (London: Pluto Press, 2021). Workers continue to organise and challenge capitalist exploitation. There are no 'no go' areas for trade unions. In this post, I will review the key contributions and major claims made by Hardy.

 

The first major contribution is Hardy’s assertion that while there has been restructuring within the British political economy over recent decades, the decline of manufacturing is grossly exaggerated. There are perennial problems of low productivity and the distinction between manufacturing and the services sector has been increasingly blurred, but production has remained an important sector nonetheless. ‘Pronouncements of the death of Britain’s manufacturing sector ignore the existence of strong pockets of activity where their economic importance is disproportionately greater than the amount of employment generated’ (P.39). Equally, talks about the industrial revolution 4.0 making workers unnecessary are nothing new in the history of capitalism. New technologies putting pressure on employment have always been part of capitalist development. Ultimately, ‘the impact of technology on human progress in general and on working lives specifically depends on who owns and controls technology and how it is organised’ (P.46). High levels of precarity are also fairly common for capitalism. If at all, the post-war, Keynesian decades with higher levels of full-time, permanent contracts were an exception. In sum, structural change is happening, but this does not imply that workers’ resistance would no longer be possible.

 

Second, Hardy, a long-term labour activist herself, correctly assesses the open role of trade unions. Just because they represent workers does not imply that they are progressive agents. Sometimes, they have led successful struggles, sometimes they have been pushed into successful struggles by grassroots activists and sometimes the union bureaucracy has sold out to employers. In short, trade unions are a battle ground of struggle over its direction and the union bureaucracy is often at loggerheads with activists on the ground. For activists, the solution cannot be to abandon trade unions, but to continue the fight inside them. ‘Championing or vilifying the bureaucracy is an abstract and unhelpful formulation for socialists and activists in real-world disputes. Rather there is an ongoing process of working with the bureaucracy at the same time as having a critical relationship with it’ (P.98).

 

Third, Hardy sheds light on the significant role of women in moments of industrial action. While often forgotten in official narratives, female activists have led iconic struggles and secured significant victories for workers. The book provides a wealth of exciting examples throughout Britain’s history. In 1981, for example, at the height of Thatcher’s first Conservative government, female workers at Lee Jeans in Greenock simply occupied their factory, when it was announced that management wanted to move production to Northern Ireland (PP.111-12).

 


Fourth, migrant workers, often perceived to be in the weakest position and, thus, most unlikely if not unable to take action, have been involved in important struggles too. As part of the ‘reserve army of labour’, migrant workers often facilitate capital to increase the rate of exploitation, while fragmentations in the working class can pit migrant workers against other workers. And yet, ‘migrant workers are not passive victims of capital and neither are they unorganisable: they have often been at the forefront of strikes, union organisation and political activity in Britain and the US’ (P.126). When it comes to struggles for higher pay and better working conditions by cleaners in London, it is often foreign workers, who are leading the fight.

 

In short, Hardy’s key message is that workers are not just victims. Despite restructuring, new technology and high levels of precarity, there is always space for organising and collective action against capitalist exploitation. And it is in these moments of struggles that workers gain confidence and manage to convince others to join the fight. It is during moments of struggle that bonds of solidarity are established and collective resistance is forged.

 

There are, however, a number of points on which I do not agree with Hardy’s assessment. First, her analysis is rather agency focused overlooking the structuring conditions of the capitalist social relations of production. As a result, she underestimates the relentless capitalist pressure towards further expansion and higher levels of exploitation out of sheer structural necessity. Hardy is right to celebrate the victory by university lecturers in 2018 against the imposition of savage cuts to their pensions (PP.177-81). Nevertheless, only three years later, employers have now returned with demands for further cuts. Against the background of the pandemic and an exhausted workforce, they seem to be confident to succeed now where they failed three years ago. Of course, this struggle is open-ended as always, but workers are again on the backfoot. 

 

Second, Hardy’s understanding of class struggle is rather narrow, privileging almost exclusively workers as the only relevant actors of resistance. Of course, workers are the only ones who can put direct pressure on management by threatening to withdraw their labour and disrupt production (P.68). Any successful struggle against capitalism will have to include workers as a result. However, capitalism does not only depend on the exploitation of wage labour. It also relies on a relentless supply of unpaid labour in the sphere of social reproduction (see, for example, Bhattacharya 2017). Hence, struggles such as the resistance against the privatisation of water and sanitation services including not only trade unions but also citizens’ movements and environmental groups are also moments of class struggle against capitalist exploitation (Bieler 2021). Moreover, capitalist accumulation also depends on the constant access to cheap natures (Moore 2015). Struggles by Indigenous people in North America against the construction of oil pipelines are, therefore, equally a direct contestation of capitalism (Estes 2019), as are the struggles by the anti-fracking movement in the UK (Brock 2020) or even the actions of civil disobedience by groups such as Extinction Rebellion and Insulate Britain, which are also disrupting the smooth functioning of capitalist accumulation.

 

Rejecting the widespread pessimism about workers’ ability to resist, Hardy is in danger of adopting an undue optimism. She does acknowledge that we are at a low ebb of workers’ struggles. And yet, she concludes that ‘it is the self-activity of workers that is key. As the sole producers of wealth, the working class has the power to break the chains of capitalism where they are forged: in the workplace’ (P.208). Of course, every successful struggle for better pay for cleaners at a particular employer is a major victory and often improves the lives of affected workers significantly. However, successful struggles for the Real Living Wage such as at London University, are unlikely to result in generally higher pay levels across the whole cleaning sector, not to speak about challenging capitalism as a whole. With the Corbyn-McDonnell project of the Labour Party, there was a moment in which it seemed possible to make more substantial gains. Victory in the 2017 general elections would have implied a £10 minimum wage across the whole economy, re-nationalisation of key industries such as water and the railways, as well as strengthened trade union rights in the workplace. The defeat of this project is a major defeat of the British working class. Hardy, due to her narrow focus on the workplace, does not assess these wider developments.


There is no doubt, workers and trade unions as their representatives will play an important role in any struggle against capitalist exploitation. To challenge capitalism more fundamentally and explore alternatives beyond capitalism, these struggles will have to link up with resistance against environmental destruction and expropriation in the sphere of social reproduction. Trade unions have to align themselves with environmental groups and the Black Lives Matter movement. Simply focusing on workers and the workplace is too narrow a focus, if we want to assess the possibilities of contesting capitalism more fundamentally.

 

My disagreements with some of Hardy’s conceptualisations and her political conclusions do not undermine, however, the excellence and importance of her book. This is a must-read for everyone interested in the possibilities of challenging capitalism in the workplace and the continuing role of workers, and here especially female and migrant workers, in resistance.


Andreas Bieler

Professor of Political Economy
University of Nottingham/UK

Andreas.Bieler@nottingham.ac.uk

Personal website: http://andreasbieler.net


31 October 2021

1 comment:

  1. The brightest light on labor's horizon is China. For decades, workers there have doubled their real wages every 8 years, as regular as clockwork and 98% of them own their homes.

    Add to that the PRC's drive to make available to everyone the advantages that middle-class Westerners take for granted–Shared Prosperity–and our workers will have enough evidence to scare their employers silly.

    ReplyDelete

Comments welcome!