We spoke with Deniz Gülşen, General Secretary of the Social-Labor Union affiliated to DISK, about the union's recent organizational efforts, its organizational work in industry 10, and its understanding of trade unionism.
Interview: İlteber Uçar
The Social-Labor Union has recently stood out for its work focused on organizing store and supermarket workers. In a period where even the most basic demands such as water, food, and the right to sit while working are subjects of struggle, you were in front of the A101 General Headquarters last week. Could you explain the perspective behind this campaign and your goals?
We are currently fully focused on our work with supermarket workers. There is far more interest than we expected. Most of this interest comes from people who worked in supermarkets at some point. Another part is as follows: Everyone knows there is definitely a supermarket worker that everyone recognizes and sees every day. Some lower the shelves; some are retired, some are very young, women predominate among them, and they carry this burden every day. The public is aware of this. There are inhumane working conditions here. That is, besides supermarket workers, people are also aware that there is a problem with the class as a whole. We saw this in our activity. We haven't done anything yet; we just made a voice and received a lot of response. They ask, "What will you do from now on?"
I tried to say in that press statement: This issue cannot be solved only with supermarket workers. Actually, there is a story here about the new labor regime. Supermarket workers are part of it, store workers are another part, and the food and beverage sector is another part. There are millions of people around us who are insecure, fragmented, work for 11 months, three or five people; there are people that classic trade unionism cannot cover and cannot fit into collective labor contract law. We need to find their actions. We need to find how they can win rights.
Boycott comes to everyone's mind. But this is insufficient. Everyone thinks about the power derived from consumption, but now A101 is considered one of the largest cooperatives in Turkey. Of course, it is an area fed and strengthened by capital and the government. It sells things very cheaply. Because it buys so much, it has such power. Some days there are discounts there, some days here. People go and buy because of that. Therefore, we need to organize worker solidarity beyond boycott.
"There are millions of people around us that classic unionism cannot encompass, that we cannot fit into the law of collective bargaining agreements. We need to find their actions. We need to find how they will win their rights."
Industry No. 10 is very broad and covers different work areas. Social-İş also carries out work through commissions in various fields, including store-market workers, as well as NGOs and foundation universities. What are the handicaps of organizing in such a fragmented area?
Yes, here there are 200 professions. The thought that comes to mind is: "This should be divided." Yes, let it be divided. For example, the Private Teachers Union's main demand is actually Industry No. 21. Or set workers, culture-art workers want to be divided. Similarly, stores-markets can also be divided. But I don't think the fundamental problem of this industry is being such a bag or anything like that. This is a rote memory. There are 998 thousand companies in this industry. One could say one million. Many have zero people working. Established, zero people, it doesn't concern us. But most places where 3-5 people work... You can't believe it, half are 20 and under... In terms of classic unionism, I think it should be: 30 and under. That is, removing places where reinstatement lawsuits are not filed from the statistics will ease us regarding collective bargaining agreement issues.
Another problem here is this: There are many calls coming from public universities. And not just Munzur, Dicle, Boğaziçi but also Afyon, Konya, Kayseri... The organization of DISK in these universities, Social-İş's, especially DISK's, has a very great significance. Having 500 DISK workers in Afyon has a very great meaning. I tell these friends: "No, unfortunately, it won't happen." Because the law is not signed; because we are unauthorized. This is a package.
I can think of other formulas besides 30 and under, but the issue here is the other part. For example, when looking at pharmacies as a whole, 80 thousand people work in total. But the average number of workers in one workplace is four. Stores-markets are actually like that. Tax advisors, offices, real estate agents' employees... There is a very large pool here. So who will defend the rights and legal standing of these people? Unions naturally look at it like this: "It won't benefit me," "Is there a collective bargaining agreement here or not? Will it bring dues or take them away?" They look at it like that. But there are workers here. There are millions of workers. There are such workers in all industries. Most are with us. We should also find solutions to the plight of these workers.
The fundamental problem of our industry is the lack of an organizational form for the new worker mass, the newly proletarianized services sector, their constant changing of professions, and being detached from production. We are also trying to reach these workers and these areas and try to make collective bargaining agreements. There are places where we are organized. On one hand, we watch the dam. The dam is currently 43,500, we have 6 thousand members. An incredible gap. But on the other hand, there are 70 thousand workers only in A101. So actually, we are as much as an enterprise, an industry. Most places that can be organized are held by various status-quoist, yellow unions. The way to change them is being cut off.
As you mentioned, the industry dam, union organization, and the use of collective bargaining agreement rights are important obstacles. In your opinion, how can this problem be overcome?
40 thousand people, it's not easy... Turkey's largest contract became Migros contract with 47 thousand people, finally after passing the warehouses too. Of course, they won't want to give us this contract. People look at it as a contract agreement, but I think like this: 47 thousand market workers being organized, that is, a union being organized neighborhood by neighborhood; knowing who is poor, who is needy, what job they do there; building a significant neighborhood organization, building a worker neighborhood organization structure... On one hand 47 thousand people. This is a very great power spread all over Turkey. When you think like this, the meaning is much greater.
Or for example, in our industry, there are 250 thousand workers in total in two unions organized in Türk-İş. With 250 thousand workers, the law will change. With 250 thousand workers, not only that industry, not that profession, demands can be won regarding the whole class. That's why this dam issue has been made into a tremendous story. Now because we don't have a contract, workers are not organizing; because workers are not organizing, we cannot reach the number to cross the dam. I think what should be done here is to divide. The Information Union was established. The Information Union is actually our commission. We are fundamentally against professionalism. That is, we are against any division of the class. But we saw that people do not see themselves as Industry No. 10 workers but define themselves as market workers, information workers, private teachers. Then if we can do this, let's make separate unions. Let them grow, then unite and walk towards the dam. I am sure that tomorrow we will be side by side with other unions in our industry.
I keep saying it: we need to look not at the dam but at the fact that there are tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of workers here… We need to discuss how to organize them. That is not easy. We constantly recruit members. It has been 2.5 years since I came to the leadership; we recruited 3,000 members, but the numbers are not increasing. One worker from a supermarket left for a day, went into a café, and came back. We need to find him again and reorganize him. As soon as he moves to another sector, his membership is lost.
In total, excluding GENEL-İŞ, DİSK does not have 100,000 members. We need to recruit nearly 50,000 members. This is something that only SOSYAL-İŞ can do. It is not a task we can accomplish alone with experts. Therefore, we need to increase our subjectivity and set such a goal together with hundreds, even thousands of workers. We will actually push the supermarket work in this direction. We will establish councils in each province, perhaps in each district, worker councils. With these friends, it may be more likely to reach this number.
SOSYAL-İŞ defines itself as "class and mass unionism" and advocates for a participatory-democratic union approach. What kind of union understanding is needed for workers to truly see the union as their own struggle organization? How does SOSYAL-İŞ evaluate its own practice from this perspective?
First of all, we do not need just one union or just one confederation; we need a united, combative center. We need a structure that is participatory, transparent, and combative. There are many combative friends in many confederations; there are branches of unions, independent unions, and these are also our friends. Or, of course, there are many situations we criticize in the confederation to which we belong. That is why it is not easy to struggle with the capitalist class amidst this disarray right now. It is not possible to struggle with individual bosses one by one with this law. We need a much stronger struggle center.
In the Smart Solar struggle, the support that BİRLEŞİK METAL gave to ENERJİ-SEN was a very good example. Or the support shown to BAĞIMSIZ MADEN-İŞ was good, but these are very isolated examples. We need forces that will coordinate, support, nourish, and expand all of these. It is not very difficult to create this.
"When unions close themselves off, they produce bureaucracy. We need to establish worker committees, worker councils, worker congresses. This can be overcome from the grassroots; it cannot be overcome in any other way."
As for us: Since there is a very large sector now, for example, if you sign Turkey's largest contract, the contract you sign defines you. It also defines that union, its internal structure, and its culture. We know that SOSYAL-İŞ had such problems in previous periods, even without such huge contracts. We tried to tell a more transparent story, we tried to do more participatory work. I think we gave a more combative image, but of course it is not enough. There are also subjective shortcomings on our part. We constantly try to overcome them, but they can only be overcome with worker supervision. They cannot be overcome by intention alone. We are aware that these can be overcome with the change in structure.
In Turkey, even in structures we call "the most unionized" and "combative," friends have been managing for very long years. This is not correct. This can be overcome with supervision; it cannot be overcome by intention alone. The center has become incredibly powerful while weakening its branches. The delegate system is very problematic in elections; delegates are appointed, and appointed delegates hold elections. We all know that these delegates are appointed. Of course, who gets elected depends on you; you appoint your own people there. Because the structure is set up this way, it cannot truly be overcome by intention.
We need to establish worker committees, worker councils, and worker congresses. We do not need to establish them only with workers covered by collective labor contracts; the councils we establish must struggle. When unions close themselves off, they produce bureaucracy. This can be overcome from the grassroots; it cannot be overcome in any other way.
Different struggles emerge in various sectors and workplaces; however, finding a common and lasting line of struggle remains an important issue. How do you think it is possible for different sectors, unions, and non-unionized workers to meet on a common line of struggle?
I am going to say something disheartening: Unfortunately, as the pie grows, the working class is trying to take an even larger share of it. But as unemployment rises and the crisis of distribution deepens this much, of course, the class is afraid. Our friends are working; even when they work, debt accumulates. Those with spouses and children now have housing problems if they remain unemployed for 3-5 months, and nutrition problems. That's why if you look at the resistance movements, they are resisting without having received a salary for 8 months. This is not an advanced or exciting situation from the class perspective. It has gone so far back that most of the recent resistance movements come from these places; there is very little new unionization struggle. There is such a problem. Secondly, no single union has a chance to win on its own. That's why we need a struggle center, coordination, whether unionized or not.
"We don't need just one union, nor just one confederation; we need a united center. We need a structure that is combative, participatory, and transparent."
In the classic story itself, they have already set up occupational barriers, workplace barriers, and put in place an incredibly absurd thing called "objection to authority." Even if you overcome all of these, this time a ban on strikes comes up. Two years ago, Serkan Öngel did a very good study: In the metal sector, collective labor agreements could only be made in only 28% of the places where United Metal had obtained the authority for collective agreements. Actually, classic unionism has been banned. Okay, you have overcome all of these, and there is also a new mass of workers. That's why we need something that will unite all of these, watch over the class's comprehensive problems, and its political dimensions. These are ailments that cannot be overcome with just economic struggle.
In the inability to establish this center, of course, all existing confederations and all existing unions are responsible. We need to quickly take responsibility for this and establish something, we need to create a focus of struggle. But only in this way can it be overcome: a permanent, continuously monitorable, and again I say, an entity that also watches the political dimension of the matter. That's where DİSK's whole distinctive mark came from. Now all our structures have been pulled into their own area, saying "Can I hold on?" You can't hold on. No one can hold on here alone.
- Tags
- DİSK Sosyal-İş
- güvencesiz çalışma
- işkolu barajı
- mağaza market çalışanları
- sendikal bürokrasi
- sendikal demokrasi
- sendikal mücadele
- sınıf hareketi
评论
暂时没有评论。