Work in the "workers' state".
- (supposedly) no exploitation. Workers worked for themselves and each other, for the
common good, not for the profit of employers.
- no unemployment. Work was a right - but also a duty.
- production for use rather than profit.
- all work, manual and intellectual, had high status since it all benefited society.
- because of the above, workers would not feel alienated.
Alienation.
To Marx, this meant that workers had lost control over both the labour process and the
product of their labour. They were forced to sell their labour for a wage; hence it became a
commodity.
'Man's labour becomes an object, an external existence,...something alien to him....'
(Karl Marx, Economic and Philosophical Manuscripts.)
Because work feels like something alien to him, the worker 'does not fulfil himself in his
work but denies himself, has a feeling of misery rather than well-being, does not
develop freely his mental and physical energies but is physically exhausted and
mentally debased. ... His work is not voluntary but imposed, forced labour. It is not the
satisfaction of a need, but only a means for satisfying other needs. Its alien character is
clearly shown by the fact that as soon as there is no physical or other compulsion it is
avoided like the plague..' (Marx, Alienated Labour.)
To Marx, alienation was caused by ownership relations - by the fact that the product of the
worker's labour is appropriated by the capitalist for whom he must work.
But later theorists place more stress on the type of work one does rather than ownership
relations.
R. Blauner (Alienation and Freedom) studied American factory workers'
experience of work and decided that alienation resulted from:
powerlessness/meaninglessness/isolation/self-estrangement.
History of work in Soviet Union.
Background:
Industrial Revolution. Shift from traditional society, with little division of labour, largely
agricultural, self-sufficient; plus small-scale craft production.
Anthony Giddens suggests that there were no more than 20-30 major crafts, plus some
specialised professions/vocations (e.g. merchant, soldier, priest).
Industrial society: urban, complex division of labour, no-one self sufficient; some 20,000
different jobs.
Specialisation began to grow at the start of industrial development.
In the 18th Century, Adam Smith famously described, in The Wealth of Nations, how the
pin making process could be 240 times more productive if it were broken down into different,
small tasks performed by different people.
By the end of the 19th C these ideas had developed into Taylorism: Frederick Winslow
Taylor's 'scientific management' of the work place, with the work process broken down into
simple operations which could be precisely timed.
Henry Ford took this still further in his car factories by introducing the automated
conveyor belt in 1914, which led to the mass production of cheap cars.
But there was a cost.
A woman factory worker quoted in Broom, Bonjean and Broom (Sociology):
'I worked on an assembly line of about forty women. I put little things on wires into
something else, with wirecutters. After a while, I found out what the little things were, but I
never found out what they were used for... Most of the jobs in the plant were like mine, a
series of the same ten or so motions all day.'
A worker in a Citroen factory in the 1970s (quoted by Giddens, Sociology):
'each man has a well-defined area for the operations he has to make, although the boundaries
are invisible: as soon as a car enters a man's territory, he takes down his blow torch, grabs his
soldering iron, takes his hammer or his file, and gets to work. A few knocks, a few sparks,
then the soldering is done and the car's already on its way out of the three or four yards of
this position. And the next car's already coming into the work area. And the worker starts
again. ...if the worker's too slow, he 'slips back', that is he finds himself progressively behind
his position, going on with his work when the next labourer has already begun his. Then he
has to push on fast, trying to catch up. And the slow gliding of the cars...looks as relentless
as a gushing torrent which you can't manage to dam up...sometimes it's as ghastly as
drowning.'
Work in the Soviet Union.
Through abolition of private ownership of the means of production, the state - and hence the
people - owned the factories themselves. Work was no longer just an economic necessity,
but valuable in itself. People would even be happy to do unpaid work: hence 'subbotniks'
established in 1919.
But Soviet ideas and policies had to be tested in conditions 'of war, economic chaos,
increasing unemployment and hunger, a militant but undisciplined and untrained proletariat,
a backward and individualistic peasantry, and in part a hostile intelligentsia...'
[Margaret Dewar, Labour Policy in the USSR 1917-1928]
Lenin:
- 'The organisation of accountancy, of control over the largest enterprises, the conversion of
the entire economic mechanism of the state into one large machine, into an economic
organism which will work so that a hundred million people can be directed by one plan - this
is the gigantic task that has fallen on our shoulders.'
'The Soviet Republic must appropriate for itself, at whatever cost, the most valuable
conquests of science and technology in this field. We shall be able to bring about socialism
precisely in the measure that we have succeeded in combining Soviet power and the Soviet
system of administration with the most recent advances of capitalism. We must organise in
Russia the study and teaching of the Taylorite system...'.
Aleksei Gastev, founder of the Central Labour Institute:
'Let us take the storm of the Revolution in the Soviet Union, unite it to the pulse of American
life and do our work like a chronometer!'
Civil War Period:
Universal forced labour organised on military lines. 'Factories were instructed to keep all
records of all employees and to report any redundancy to the authorities' (Margaret Dewar).
Trotsky: 'ordinary, normal methods of work will not save us now. We need... an
exceptionally authoritative economic apparatus. ' The government had to be able 'to direct
every male and female worker to the place where he or she is needed for an economic task' and 'to punish the worker who refuses to comply with orders of the state, who does not
submit his will to the will of the working class and its economic tasks.'
Trade Unions would serve a very different function in the USSR than in the West. In theory
they provided 'a link between the vanguard and the masses'. In reality, they attempted to
'reconcile the masses to labour service' (Trotsky).
After the establishment of the NEP, their role was spelt out more clearly: 'the Party was to
supervise all appointments to trade union posts and all union nominations to leading
positions in the economic apparatus' (M. Dewar).
New Economic Policy (NEP).
Unemployment high, benefits low. Until November 1921 only those employed in state
sector got any benefit if they lost their jobs. Skilled unemployed got the minimum average
local wage, and unskilled workers and white collar workers only 1/3 to 1/2 of this, or, from
the end of 1921, between 1/6 and 1/2 of average local wage, depending on claimant's skill
and length of service.
Strikes occurred throughout the 1920s, over dismissals, non-payment of bonuses or
overtime, output norms and rates, holidays, protection of labour. Most were not authorised
by the trade unions, which were unable to convince workers they were legitimate bargaining
bodies; they were accused of forming 'blocs' with management and party. Even some
scandals about union officials embezzling funds!
But had a significant role in the educational and cultural realm. Set up clubs, libraries,
professional training courses, sports sections, nurseries, kindergartens, summer camps, rest
homes, and so on.
Stalin Era.
- End of unemployment, at a time when it was growing in the West.
'The Soviet Union, with its full employment and its high rate of industrial growth, seemed to
many in the West to have provided fundamental proof that socialism, or at any rate
comprehensive planning, offered the only way forward.' (R.W. Davies)
- Central planning. But this was not complete. The Soviet attitude was 'centralised planning
and leadership in all main questions, but ... this should be accompanied by decentralisation of
operational functions. While basic guidance is to be given from the center, it is the people on
the spot who must make the concrete local decisions and guide the specific implementation
of all plans' (David Granick).
- worker participation. Much made of this, but not really that great. High proportion of
managers came from rank and file, but this because so many were disappearing in the purges
that there was an inevitable constant movement upwards to replace those who had been
arrested. There were many conferences and organisations at which workers were invited to
discuss management reports and criticise the work of management, but mass meetings do not
necessarily mean mass participation in decision-making, just the appearance of it.
- The Stakhanovite and Shock-worker movements.
Shock workers over-fulfilled the plan, but stakhanovites worked beyond the previously
understood limits of human capability. Named after the miner Alexei Stakhanov, who, on
August 30-31 1935, hewed 102 tons of coal, or 14 times his quota.
But had considerable help:
'As operator of his mining crew's automatic cutting tool, he was
relieved of all auxiliary work and thus was able to use his tool continuously instead of by
starts and stops' (David Granick).
And there was resentment on the part of other workers. Managers 'created ideal conditions
for one or a few Stakhanovites, who thus (were) able to set records, and... ignored the work
conditions and supply problems of the other workers' (Granick).
Yet: 'a substantial part of the rank and file [did probably] favour [Stakhanovism]. Patriotism
and the desire to 'build Socialism' play[ed] their part as motivational factors' (Granick).
There was also an atmosphere of 'mass enthusiasm ...engendered by discussions, speeches,
and resolutions' (ibid).
- Forced labour.
Several forms:
i) if worker breached labour discipline (by absenteeism, lateness, idling on the job etc.),
could be forced to work at same place for substantially reduced wage, for up to a year.
ii) could be exiled to specified area, kept under armed guard, obliged to do work set by the
authorities. Still technically free, and received wages.
iii) could be sent to a corrective labour colony for up to five years; these were generally
attached to enterprises or construction sites. Prisoners formed part of the general labour
force, even though they were prisoners.
iv) prisoners serving longer terms could be sent to a labour camp. Generally in remote and
harsh regions, administered by the NKVD, they provided the whole labour force for the
work involved; i.e. there was no mixing of forced and free labour.
At the most conservative estimate, around one fifth or one sixth of the urban work force
were in forced labour. 'The captive workforce performed an important economic function in
providing labour for industries and for regions to which free labour was difficult and costly
to attract. In this sense it remedied some of the deficiencies of the labour recruitment system.
That it did so cannot have been fortuitous. It seems an unlikely coincidence that the two
largest expansions of the labour-camp population, in 1930-31 and 1937-39, took place at
times of acute labour shortage' (R.W. Davies).
Post-Stalin Era.
To end of Brezhnev era, no official unemployment, apart from some 'hard-core
unemployables' (Philip Hanson).
In fact, increasing concern about immanent labour shortage because of inefficiency of
system. Managers hoarded staff because:
i) the more workers an enterprise had, the more pay the managers got.
ii) the irregularity of supplies meant they needed enough workers to be able to 'storm' at last
minute to meet production targets.
iii) the plan target might unexpectedly be increased during the year;
iv) some of your work force might be taken away to work on some other project deemed
more important by the state, regardless of how this might disrupt production in your
enterprise: 'your local Party secretary [might] call up unexpectedly and requisition some of
your employees for road-building, road-sweeping, harvest work and the like...' (Phillip
Hanson).
Workers' experience of work:
- periods of idleness followed by storming.
- high level of job security.
- high level of tedium.
Decline of productivity under Brezhnev: high level of absenteeism, drunkenness on the
job, collusion between workers and managers against the system: managers would conceal
resources, lie to meet plan targets etc., while workers got stable if mediocre salaries only
loosely tied to their work performance; much of their income paid in the form of free or
subsidised services and goods, much of which came through the trade unions. In return they
would accept substandard conditions and violations of the law, such as safety regulations
(see David Mandel's chapter in White, Pravda and Zvitelman (eds) Developments in Soviet
Politics).
Last years of Brezhnev regime: attempt to involve workers more in decisions in the
workplace - probably a response to what was happening in Poland (development of
'Solidarity', the free trade union). The Soviet Union attempted to defuse potential worker
unrest by 'a concerted campaign ...by the Soviet authorities (late 1980-early 1981) to spruce
up the image of the officially-controlled trade unions' (Elizabeth Teague, Solidarity and the
Soviet Worker).
The Gorbachev Era:
Gorbachev was more concerned about overcoming worker passivity. Tried to use the unrest
amongst miners to promote perestroika. 'Identifying himself with their demands, he cited
their discontent in support of his own calls to press ahead faster with his reform program...'
(David Mandel).
But was not so happy when miners began striking and demanding his resignation. Nor
when independent conservative workers' organisations began to form, e.g. the United Front
of Workers which insisted that the working class was being 'robbed' of its privileged status,
that perestroika was helping the criminal underworld, that it was flooding Russian cities
with foreign speculators and prostitutes, and that the Soviet Union was engaged in a blind
imitation of capitalism which threatened the USSR with 'impoverishment and enslavement.'
The authorities were concerned that the Russian people were too slow to understand that
losing their past securities was offset by the benefits they would get from a market economy.
Post-Soviet situation:
- consumer goods now available, but at high prices.
- many old enterprises have closed down, pay their work force 'in kind' , or are unable to
pay them at all
- loss of job security.
- unemployment, much of it disguised under so-called 'Administrative leave'.
- the threat of unemployment used to keep workers in check. 'Despite official denials, some
economists are quite frank about the utility of a "small reserve army of labour" for enforcing
discipline.' (David Mandel, in White, Pravda and Zvitelman, Developments in Soviet
Politics]
- emergence of "New Russians"
(i) some came from the old communist bureaucracy
(ii) some were former black marketeers.
(iii) most were male. Women formed 25% of workers in private business, mostly in
secretarial positions.
Women also formed 70% of the unemployed. As Sue Bridger explains in her chapter in Sue
Bridger (ed)., Women and Political Change, Macmillan 1999), many of these women
previously held professional jobs in the state sector as engineers, economists etc. For those
in their 40's, no chance of getting a job again in their specialism. Many attempted to turn
traditional skills into private businesses, setting up cafes, restaurants, sewing and
embroidery businesses etc., providing 'inessential goods [that] presupposed that the
employed population were continuing to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle with money to spare...'
This market inevitably shrank: 'As greater numbers of families struggled to make ends meet,
they were ever more likely to join the ranks of the producers themselves' (ibid).
But there is a tendency to idealise the situation in the past. Have to remember:
- Enormous cost in terms of health and of private life of the production patterns due to
alternating periods of enforced idleness and then massive over-work to complete the plan.
- Health and safety conditions were terrible.
- Trade unions were the tools of management.
- workers experienced every day 'the waste and irrationality of a system that deprived them
of the satisfaction of doing good work even if they wanted to' (David Mandel, in his chapter
in Stephen White, Alex Pravda and Zvi Gitelman (eds) Developments in Soviet Politics).