These are difficult, yet decisive, times for the Iranian workers movement. Three characteristics define the current situation:
Firstly: Even though workers face a life and death situation, minor improvements in their living conditions are dependent on fundamental changes in the entire political and economic circumstances of the country. After nearly three decades of the rule of the Islamic Republic workers are facing the ravages of a structural crisis and manufacturing collapse. Living conditions are dire not only for workers, but for the majority of the inhabitants of the country.
At a time when the official poverty line is drawn at a monthly income of less than 2.5 million rials (US dollars 230) the minimum wage this year was set at 1.2 million rials. In many large factories even this meagre wage remains unpaid and in arrears for up to two years! More over, workers, especially in large industries face massive lay-offs. For example workers' representative from Karaj province Ali Dehghan Kia reported recently that more than half the industrial units in the Karaj industrial townships have been closed and their workers laid off [1]. Inside Iran they refer to this as the “crisis” of manufacture or of factories, the depth of which can be seen in the report by the Chairman of the Confederation of Industries in Iran. He admitted in October that approximately one third of the labour force of the country, nearly 10 million people, have no job of any kind. [2]
Second: the struggles of Iranian workers are mostly confined to the large industrial units such as textiles, automobile manufacture, producers of household goods, tyre factories and others. These workers tend to have some degree of organisation and the crisis of stagnation and bankruptcy has driven them to the forefront of the labour struggles. With over 5,000 large and small units closed, the textile industries, which were once one of the driving forces of the Iranian economy, face total annihilation. Yet those working in the large industrial sectors comprise only a small fraction of the labour force in the country.
Even at its height large industry numerically comprised only 7% of all manufacturing units, employing approximately one third of the industrial workforce (not including workers in the other sections of the Iranian economy). For example about 9 million people work in the thousands of carpet-weaving workshops across the country compared to the 2 million workers currently employed in the large manufacturing industries. Moreover, since the Islamic Republic came to power the latter section has shrunk from 30 percent to 13 percent of Iran’s economy, indeed it currently holds a share of the total productive sector, similar to what it was prior to the process of industrialisation, half a century ago in the 1950’s.
Obviously conditions of mass redundancies, stagnation and bankruptcy of manufacturing have a negative impact on the ability of the working class to negotiate or to organise in a major way. Similarly these circumstances explain the understandable, though to some extent inexcusable, caution of workers in large strategic industries, such as oil and gas, and workers in state sectors who have greater job security. Indeed they too are threatened by the neo-liberal policies and privatisations that have come into effect over the last two decades in the name of economic adjustments, policies in line with the structural adjustment programmes advocated by the World Bank and IMF. Both the so called conservative and reformist
factions of the government in Iran have pursued the same economic policies with equal vigour. On present evidence the so-called radical Ahmadinejad will also walk down the same road.
Third: the inability of the working class of Iran to defend its human existence and most basic rights is enhanced because to its fragmentation and lack of any independent and effective nationwide organisation among the class as a whole, not just its progressive and industrial sector.
As already mentioned workers in large industries, respond to threats of redundancies and non-payment of wages and have achieved a certain degree of consciousness and organisation. They have made a number of attempts to extend their fragmented struggles and demands to go beyond single factories and even to reach out across various industrial sectors. These industrial workers have also demonstrated a high level of militancy. As a labour ministry official admitted, they (workers) have organised over 2,600 action at various levels – from petition writing to demonstrations outside management offices, from strikes to blocking roads and highways and occupation of factories, from hostage taking of managers to sit-ins outside parliament and the office of the presidency. Yet success mostly eluded them. From 300 actions collected by Radio Voice of Iranian Workers last year, only 8-10% ended in victory by workers from this industrial sector. Moreover, while 80-85% of these protests were demands for unpaid wages or attempts to stop lay-offs, less than 12% used traditional and recognised means of struggle, or resorted to strikes as the highest level of such forms of struggles. Indeed approximately four out of five resorted to unusual methods, measures often used in crisis situations, such as taking management hostage, factory occupation (up to 6 months to control production), road blocks, sit-ins outside government buildings such as the local labour office, outside regional and provincial government offices, or even the parliament and presidential office. In just one month, October 2004, there were three workers’ sit-ins outside the latter two buildings: 400 workers from Naz-Nakh textile factory because of non-payment of wages for 25 months, west Alborz mine workers opposing privatisation and job-losses, and 150 piece-work teachers for job security and official employment.
Despite the militancy and consciousness of the workers in large industries the downward spiral in the fragile conditions of this section of the labour force continues as amongst other workers. Indeed the Islamic regime has been able to push back the Iranian labour movement, particularly in recent years, without any specific repressive measures. Today Iranian workers have less rights, and are more defenceless, than many of the most backward countries of the world. Even the government appointed chairman of Teheran Islamic labour council, Hassan Sadeqi admits that Iranian workers who previously were better placed than their Turkish or Malaysian counterparts, now earn one seventh of the wages of a worker in Malaysia and a quarter of one in Turkey.
Moreover 90% of Iranian workers are currently not covered by any protective legislation, even the reactionary Labour Code of the Islamic Republic. The approval of of a number of anti-worker laws in recent years by the Islamic Majles– such as exemption of workers in workshops of less than 10 employees (including carpet-weavers, and workers on contract labour) from the labour legislation, has ensured that over 95% of Iranian workers work according to the laws of the jungle or regulations of the slavery era.
A number of factors are operating to produce this downward spiral in the living conditions of Iranian workers. Above all is the ruinous policies of the Islamic regime, and in particular its neo-liberal economic adjustment policies, the Russian-style privatisation handover to government officials and plunder of national wealth by mafia-like cliques linked to the leaders of the regime.
Workers in large industries, who are in the front-line of bearing the brunt of such policies could not, and cannot, reverse this process alone, even when organised. It is unrealistic to expect a working class to put up an effective resistance when firstly: its struggles are confined to the workers in large industries. Second: this sector has traditionally been a small part of the class and perhaps accounts for less than 20% of the working class. Third: even this group of workers is standing on shaky grounds as structural adjustments, economic ruin and the collapse of manufacturing and a parasitic economy have removed the material conditions for its resistance. Thus in the last two decades 2 million of the 4 million working in this sector have entered the mass of unemployed. Fourth: as a consequence, the fulfilment of their most basic demand such as non-paid wages, let alone improvement in working and living conditions, is dependent on fundamental changes in the political and economic scene of the country. Fifth: struggle even for these demands requires a particularly high level of preparation and consciousness and a complex organisational ability in the face of the quasi-fascistic repression and the despotic conditions prevailing in the country. A semi-guerrilla like struggle is needed where the slightest error can be fatal. This is a country which according to the latest ICFTU report, is amongst the 10 most dangerous countries of the world for trade union activity.
It is obvious from the above that workers in large industries, notwithstanding their importance for the entire working class (especially in Iran), cannot gain their rights, or even perhaps retain their current position, by relying on their power alone. They cannot hope to overturn the negative balance of power that is continuously working against the entire working class without linking with other sections of the class. These include workers in small units that make up over 90% of all production units in the country, workers in the service sector, a sector which is growing daily, the struggles of the unemployed and semi-employed who make up about half the active and youthful force of the country, the struggle of women who have been driven to accept slavery wages in order to support their poverty-stricken families and according to official reports are breadwinners for one third of families (2.8 million of the 12 million families). Finally the labour movement in its totality cannot overturn the balance of power in its favour without linking to the movements of the majority (over three quarters of the population) to gain their most basic social and civil rights.
Unless the industrial workers understand and act on these conclusions, the key problem in the labour movement, which is precisely the absence of a general class-based movement linking the various sections of the working class will not be resolved.
In my view unless the labour movement accepts these conclusions it will be unable to draw up a class strategy to achieve its rights and organise for victory. A number of hopeful early efforts have already been initiated to form independent workers organisations. Obviously this strategy must strive to set up organisations which are both independent and nation-wide. Without such organisations, the working class will not gain anything even if the Islamic Republic is overthrown.
Steps have indeed been taken to create nationwide independent and free labour organisations. More importantly they have succeeded to some extent in imposing these on the Islamic regime. This is a remarkable achievement considering the Islamic Republic belongs to the ten most dangerous countries for trade union activity. These organisations include:
1. The committee for pursuing the establishment of independent and free workers’ associations. It announced its existence last year with 4,000 signatories from a wide range of workers. Since then it has had four general assemblies of workers representatives from across the country. This year it held an independent May Day celebration in Teheran attended by about 2,000.
2. Co-ordinating committee for the creation of independent organisations. This organisation too had about 4,000 signatories and declared its existence last year. It endorses anti-capitalist organisations of workers in the form of workers’ councils.
3. The inaugural committee for the trade union of Iranian workers.
4. The inaugural committee for the trade union of Greater Teheran transport workers (Sherkat Vahed) which in its first assembly gathered about 4,000 workers from Sherkat Vahed. This union has been involved in a series of clashes with the authorities. Attacks on its central office last year resulted in the arrest and expulsion of its inaugural committee. Last year it was finally able to impose itself as the true representative of workers and won its demand for the closure of the government-controlled Islamic council. The campaign in support of the arrested union members achieved wide domestic and international exposure.
5. The unemployed committee of Greater Teheran. This committee was able to organise a May Day meeting attended by 1,000 unemployed or expelled workers this year.
In addition left-wing students and labour groupings published declarations in defence of the labour movement and the necessity for linking the workers struggles with the struggle for freedom and democracy. They publish regular monthly reports addressing specific labour issues.
These efforts are taking place in the context of promising developments in the Iranian labour movement – or more accurately have roots in these developments. Struggles have now progressed beyond single units and workers are trying to organise themselves as a class-based movement with united demands presented to government and the ruling class. It is precisely these advances that have forced the Islamic Societies, which had hitherto functioned as the repressive arm of the regime in factories, to change tack and try to don the mask of defending workers’ and trade union rights.
Years of experience has taught workers that readiness for a difficult struggle or even being prepared to lay down one’s life may create suitable conditions for self-organisation, but are not enough to defend the right to life and basic human rights. This realisation has encouraged different sectors of workers to support each other’s struggles against the regime, forcing the government to recognise their basic rights. Today almost on a daily basis one or other group of workers assemble in front of regional, provincial institutions or even the parliament.
As a final note, the efforts to commemorate Mayday independently of government organisations, more importantly passing resolutions these gatherings endorsing the united demands of the workers should also be seen as steps towards the historic march of the Iranian workers in self-organisation as a class.
October 21, 2005
Footnotes.
1. Iranian Labour News Agency October 19, 2005.
2. ibid October 17, 2005.