by Walter Kendall
To assess the influence of the Yugoslav trade unions on Yugoslavia's statised
economy is no easy task. This is in part because there exists no period of
normality with which one may make comparisons. Western democracy never flower-
ed in Yugoslavia, The more than half-hearted Parliamentary system set up after
Versailles was suppressed in 1929, and in the immediately pre-war years Yugo-
Slavia was @ reactionary Balkan police state. Yugoslavian industry, largely
foreign owned, never developed widely. As 4 result, unlike in britain, the
working class remained a minority within a basically peasant population, and the
trade unions, the victims of state suppression, were quite unable to achieve a
Power and influence in any way comparable to that achieved by our own, During
the war Yugoslavia's working class was the victim of a severe repression by the
forces of the German occupation, After 1945 all real power was rapidly con-
centrated in the hands of the Conmunist Party and the state apparatus under its
control, In this absolutist set-up the unions were an essential part of the
apparatus of Government control, Even now the Yugoslav unions do not, as far 5 as we could establish, negotiate collective contracts, at any level, high or low,
of the ecomomy, That being so, it is hard to say that they are trade unions . at all.
Any assessment of Yugoslav trade unionism mst be made against this background,
one which differs from that of our own at almost every point. As is to be
expected, the Yugoslav unions are in very many ways different from those of
Great Britain, Strangely enough, however, recent incomes policy pronouncements
of the Labour Government seemed designed to bring the British unions closer to
the Yugoslav model,
In larger scale industry no private property exists. The ownership of plants
nationalised by the state in the immediate post-war years is now legally vested
in the Workers' Councils of the enterprises concerned. In the years up to the
inauguration of Workers' Self-Management, the unions, organised on the Russian
model, were paternalistic organisations controlled from above, created to enforce
state directives in the field of production, administration and social service
provision, and to carry out idealogical education among the working class .
These "trade unions" , like those of Eastern Europe, could not in any sense be
termed working class organisations, or indeed trade unions in any sense at all,
They were merely disguised governmental agencies - a form of company union
operating in a statised economy.
As a consequence of the Stalin-Tito breach and the subsequent launching of the
Workers' Self Management movement, the role of the unions began to change. The
movement has been for the better, and in the direction, in some essentials, of
genuine trade union practice, At present the unions stand some way between the
norms of what I shall term the opposing poles of "statised company unionism", and
"free trade unionism". At what precise point the transiaion at present stands
it is difficult to express a definite opinion upm the basis of a.ten day investig-
ation, It is my view that on all major questions of policy, the trade unions
continue to fulfil the role of a semi-governmental agency acting in accord with
the leaders of the Commmist League of Yugoslavia. On the other hand the unions
are no longer simple Governmental agencies, as in 1945-50.
The decentralisation of the economy means that at many points and on many occas—
ions the unions are acting independently, and exercising genuine influence on the
course of events. The unions, in addition to exerting governmental ae on
Over a
Workers' Self Management in Yugoslavia § Continued/
the working class, now also, almost certainly exert definitive pressure on the whole range of issues on the government itself, Such pressure would, I imagine, receive real consideration, although remaining less effective than that applied on the British Government by the T.U.C. To visualise the unions as a homogeneous bloc would be anerror. Attitudes seem to vary from region to region, in part at least due to differing economic circumstances. That some union officials are a great deal more sympathetic to dumocratisation and reform than others is also clear. The heavy devaluation of the Yugoslav currency which took place on the eve of our arrivak ded an excellent test case. The devaluation raised import prices and lowered vidual item export earnings, and in many ways seriously affected working class living standards and earning opportunities. Such a currency devaluation is open to legitimate criticism, both as regards its scope and intensity, and as regards the need to take positive steps to safeguard working class living standards from its impact. One would have expected such views at least to manifest themselves at some point in our many discuss dons. They failed to do so. On this question trade union and government views seemed indistinguishable. Similarly in the field of pricing. The adoption of a "socialist market economy" has . led to a large scale abandonment of the arbitray price fixing, formerly the rule, id Prices have increased and with them the cost of living. Adjustment of individual pro- ~ duct prices up and down has produced sharp impact on the earnings potential of most groups of workers. One would have expected to have discovered some specifically trade union view on these matters. We failed to do so. In Zagreb the author wes engaged in a lengthy exchange regarding plans for the total abolition of unemployment benefit for all workers. ‘eplies which we received to questions all refelected a management view - "unemployment benefits too high", people drawing benefits do not wish to work", the "need for mobility of labour", etc., and little or no appreciation of the problems from the workers viwepoint, Suggestions to intelligent trade unionists that they might express their dissatisfaction by protests or deputations were regarded as unnecessary and, I believe, regarded with a certain incredulity, Thetrade unions Seem to accept the basic tenets of government policy as given, and the belief that working class problems can be resolvei by utilisation of worlers' self managment opportunitéss. The bais list in workers council elections is normally proposed by the union. The uiions have economic departmens2 and consider the aim of raising wages is to be achieved by utilising the influence they posses to maximise productivity, improve working of workers council management, etc. Collective contracts on the customary model do not exist. Though industrial stoppages are no longer punishable by law, unions have no strike funds 4nd stoppages are, in fact, very rare. Wages should be based on productivity, and the British view that that fair shares should take precedence over economic incentives was unnacceptable. There was conflict within the unions regarding methods of piece work payment, but piece work as the basic method of wage payment does not seem to have been seriously disputed. The situation, in short,is complex and unstable. Yugoslav unions are neither free, nor totally under state control, As an alternative to the "unions" of Eastern Europe they represent a real advance, As an alternative to the unions in Britain, in the field of industrial democracy and that of basic attitudes to wage payments, they represent a real but far greater regression. The Yugoslav unions raise issues which until now there has been no open and honest endeavour to expose and to solve, What should be the role of the trade unions in a wholly statised society ? That Western and Eastern European experience alike demonstrate that there can be no democracy in a modern industrialised society without a trade union movement independent of state control seems, however, established beyond any possibility of dispute.