The Experience of the Factory Committees in the Russian
Revolution
The Bolshevik Bosses
In May 1918, when the All-Russian Congress of Councils of National
Economy met in Moscow there were delegates from Vesenkha, its glavki
and tsentry, and the trade unions, but not the factory committees.
The door was shutting firmly on the workers, as the committees became
mere local branches of a top-heavy union bureaucracy. The unions were
subordinate to the state, as agreed at the first All-Russian Congress
of Trade Unions. (One anarchist delegate described the unions as
"living corpses"; another said that the factory committees were
"cells of the coming socialist social order, the order without
political power.") A decree on June 28th 1918 nationalised all major
industry, making the state the main employer in Russia; labour was to
be a form of service to society, and piece-rates were regarded as
normal. [33] As the invasions by
Allied Powers and the civil war had only just started, none of what
had happened thus far can be blamed on those factors. The application
of piece-rates and norms of production meant that workers were
driving themselves to ill-health to get a survival wage. Yet at the
end of the year, norms were raised throughout industry because the
state machine considered wages to be "perniciously high". In January
1919, the norms were raised by 150% in the metal industry.
These developments started to cause dissent within the Bolshevik
party, even amongst those who had never worked in their life.
'Kommunist' the journal of the 'Left Communists' contained an attack
on Lenin by Osinsky. Among other criticisms, Osinsky argued that
Lenin's 'discipline' was exactly like that of the capitalists; that
only the workers can emancipate themselves; that Lenin confused
productivity improvements with working harder and faster, "Socialism
and the socialist organisation of work will either be built by the
proletariat itself, or it will not be built at all; but then
something else will be erected, namely state capitalism."
[34] Lenin replied, as he always did
when lost for an answer, with a tirade of abuse and nonsense: for
instance, statements that the introduction of capitalist authority
and labour discipline were an attack on workers' self-organisation
were "a terrible disgrace and imply the complete renunciation of
communism in practice and complete desertion to the camp of the petty
bourgeoisie."
Workers were able to impose themselves occasionally against the
growing monolith of Bolshevik state power. During 1918
state-capitalist combines had been set up in the leather, textile and
sugar industries based on co-operation between the state and the old
owners. The right-wing industrialist Mescherskii wanted to create a
similar 'trust' in the metal industry, with the factories run by the
old bourgeois owners. This was alright by Lenin and Trotsky, and
officials of the Metalworkers Union supported the project. Workers
were however very much against it. A conference of delegates from
affected plants demanded an end to the scheme, and immediate
nationalisation. As the Bolsheviks were not yet strong enough to
crush this sort of thing, the pressure from below put an end to the
project.
The civil war undoubtedly strengthened tendencies to central
control and planning, involving one-man management and the use of
highly-paid technical specialists. Centralisation of itself is not a
bad thing: the question is, who's doing the centralising, and to what
end? Again, using the talents of technical staffs was essential, but
to what end would their abilities be directed? The peasants were
angry that the old exploiters were taken on as managers of the
Sovkhozy collective farms. The 'specialists' got high salaries, and
the managers and directors lived in the luxury of the old landowners'
houses: sometimes the old landowner himself was the director. Lenin's
message to the peasants was "(...) if you yourselves do not know how
to organise agriculture in the new way, we must take the old
specialists into our service." While the Lenin of 'State and
Revolution' said "Smash the bourgeois state", the Lenin of 'Will the
Bolsheviks retain state power ?' said "Use the bourgeois state, take
it over." Thus Trotsky drew heavily on the Tsarist officer corps for
the Red Army.
When Molotov analysed the personnel of the glavki he found that
57% were definitely non-worker; the other 43% included
representatives of the unions, mostly not workers either. He
concluded in his report (given in December 1918) that those directing
policy were "employers' representatives, technicians and
specialists." A 'white' professor reported in autumn 1919 that "the
unprepared visitor to these centres and glavki who is personally
acquainted with the former commercial and industrial world will be
surprised to see the former owners of big leather factories sitting
in Glavkozh, big manufacturers in the central textile organisation,
etc." [35] The willingness to use
the Tsarist state machinery extended to a Sovnarkom (Council of
People's Commissars) decree in January 1920 regretting that "the old
police apparatus which had known how to register citizens not only in
the towns, but in the country" had been destroyed by the revolution.
Despite this destructive act by the revolution, the mobility of
labour was still achieved. A spokesman from Narkomtrud (the People's
Commissariat of Labour) boasted: "We supplied labour according to
plan and consequently without taking account of individual
peculiarities or qualifications or of the wish of the worker to
engage in this or that kind of work." He could have been talking
about any commodity. The governments wages policy was based on
incentives and piece-work; wages were in groups of scales, the
highest by far being for technical and administrative people. At the
8th Party Congress in March 1919, the new programme declared that
"(...) the socialist method of production can be made secure only on
the basis of the comradely discipline of the workers." To the unions
fell the task of creating this new 'socialist discipline'.
Disciplinary courts of labour in 1920 dealt with 945 recorded cases.
About half of these cases related to punctuality; others were about
not doing Saturday overtime, not obeying orders or union discipline,
leaving work and agitating for a shorter working day. The 9th Party
Congress in March 1920 not only fully accepted the principle of
one-man management, but even came up with four different ways of
instituting it.
The utter feebleness of the emerging 'opposition' inside the
Bolshevik party was shown by Lutovinov of the "Workers' Opposition"
saying they'd carry out one-man management while disagreeing with it.
First the party, and a poor last, the workers. By November 1920 only
12% of nationalised industries had any form of collective management.
1783 out of 2051 large enterprises under Vesenkha had one-man
management. To overcome absenteeism and 'inefficiency' the government
had introduced labour books for workers in Moscow and Petrograd (up
till then they had only been issued to the old bourgeoisie for
compulsory labour). 'Communist Saturdays' -- that is, working for
nothing -- were instituted with Lenin's enthusiastic approval. The
massive drive for unpaid overtime, with Subbotniks working Saturday
unpaid, and Voskresniks working Sunday unpaid, eventually collapsed.
Workers were (quite inexplicably!) not too excited. Lenin did try to
set an example: he actually worked a 'Communist Saturday' on May 1st
1920.
Latter-day Bolshevism's other favourite, Trotsky, deserves to say
a few words at this point. In January 1919 at a Trade Union Congress,
he stressed that "At a time when the Trade Unions regulate wages and
conditions of work, when the appointment of the Commissar for Labour
also depends on our Congress, no strikes can take place in Soviet
Russia. Let us put the dot on this i." Having dotted that i, he
proceeded to cross the t in the following year, recognising "the
right of the workers' state to send each working man and woman to the
place where they are needed for the fulfilment of economic tasks";
and "the right of the state, the workers' state, to punish the
working man or woman who refuses to carry out the order of the state,
who does not subordinate his will to the will of the working class
and to its economic tasks (...)" Stripped of verbiage and rhetoric,
Trotsky's message to workers was 'We, the Bolsheviks, are the bosses
now; you, the workers -- back to work !' Trotsky's call for a
'militarisation of labour' "in which every worker feels himself a
soldier of labour, who cannot dispose of himself freely" was taken up
by the party Central Committee, who only debated whether it should
take a 'healthy' or a 'bureaucratic' form.
Notes
[33] "Piece-wages (...) the most
fruitful source of reductions of wages and capitalistic cheating."
"(...) the form of wages most in harmony with the capitalist mode of
production." Capital, Volume 1, Karl Marx, p518, p521.
[34] quoted in Sirianni, p149.
[35] quoted in Carr, p183.