The New York Times has gotten around to noticing that there’s a major strike happening in France: Stranded French Commuters Could Test Macron’s Reform Agenda. Adam Nossiter frames it this way:
PARIS — In what is emerging as the first serious test of the determination of President Emmanuel Macron to stick to his reform agenda, France on Wednesday endured the second day of a train strike that left stations empty, platforms deserted and millions of travelers frustrated.
French unions, blindsided by the pace of Mr. Macron’s labor and fiscal reforms, have been spoiling for a fight. The terrain they have chosen, the country’s heavily used rail network, has the potential to either make the president buckle by crippling France’s economy or infuriate its citizens and turn them against the unions.
I’d written about this a couple of days earlier — In Case You Hadn’t Heard: Major Labor Action in France.
In America, where our media is dominated by a handful of corporations, coverage of labor issues never seems to get much beyond unemployment numbers. There are plenty of stories about “lean and mean” companies”, productivity, off-shoring, downsizing, doing more with less, etc. There’s not a lot about labor actions, other than that “it makes us less competitive”, will “hurt consumers with higher prices”, etc.
Notice that what Macron proposes is called a reform agenda. There are problems to be sure: the French national railway system SNCF is $68 billion in debt, and has higher costs than the comparable German rail system. French worker benefits include: “hired for life, can retire in their 50s — as young as 52 — have the right to pensions based on their highest salaries and enjoy subsidized housing.” As the Times notes,
Mr. Macron has been criticized for not adequately explaining his reform agenda and for not preparing the public enough. But his newest reform target— the railways — is in line with what he has criticized before as “the Statutory Society,” on which he has had a fat bull’s-eye from the beginning. Mr. Macron’s idea is that overprotected entities in French social and economic life block “any prospect of mobility” and must be transformed.
emphasis added
Who is an overprotected entity, and what does “prospect of mobility” mean? Macron’s reforms will apply only to new hires at the railway, so the workers currently on strike (for 2 days out of 5) don’t stand to lose anything, and the immediate gains from Macron’s reform will be small. The Times also helpfully notes:
But the railway workers, led by the once Communist Party-affiliated CGT, broke a government in the 1990s and they have not forgotten.
emphasis added
The union is pursuing a risky course of action for what seems like a small matter — but it isn’t. What Macron is proposing is a form of wealth transfer. He’s attempting to restructure the French economy in a way that will direct money away from workers and towards… who? His background is suggestive.
Before entering politics, he was a senior civil servant and investment banker. Macron studied philosophy at Paris Nanterre University, completed a Master’s of Public Affairs at Sciences Po, and graduated from the École nationale d'administration (ÉNA) in 2004. He worked at the Inspectorate General of Finances, and later became an investment banker at Rothschild & Cie Banque.[1]
emphasis added
Macron sounds like the president for Money with a capital M, and Money does not like Labor. When Macron talks about prospects of mobility, is he talking about people — or investment opportunities for Money? Bankers will always tell you workers want too much — but never ask them how much they get paid.
However much those railway workers make now, they put much of it right back into the economy. If Macron succeeds, that will begin to decline — and it won’t be only rail workers who will be targeted for cuts. Paying workers less and calling on them to do more will spread through the economy, and want to bet who will reap the benefits as wealth is redistributed?
Will the Politics of Envy succeed, or will the French people ask “Who will be next on the chopping block?” The destruction of unions has always been an objective of capital. This is going to be a fight to watch.