The Marxist-Leninist Daily

Wildcat walkout of Alberta health care workers, February 16, 2012. Left: in front of the Royal Alexandra Hospital
in Edmonton where the wildcat walkout began; right: Rockyview General Hospital in southwest Calgary.

Health Care Workers Stand Up
for Their Rights and Dignity!

Wildcat walkout of Alberta health care workers, near Rockyview hospital, southwest Calgary, February 16, 2012.

Hospital workers across Alberta walked off the job on February 16, demanding that Alberta Health Services and the Alberta government cease and desist from their outrageous attacks on their rights and dignity. In January, the 22,000 health care support staff represented by the Alberta Union of Provincial Employees (AUPE) rejected a mediator's report by 95 per cent. Alberta Health Services (AHS) then came back to the negotiating table with a lesser wage offer than the one the workers had rejected. Information pickets had been planned for cities across the province for February 16, but early in the morning, workers at the Royal Alexandra Hospital in Edmonton set up their picket lines and did not report for work. As news spread, workers across the province joined them and walked off the job in Calgary, Fort McMurray, Westlock, Red Deer, Cold Lake, Lethbridge and other cities and towns.

As AUPE has pointed out, these workers -- the General Support Services (GSS) employees -- "fight superbugs, manage health records, prepare meals, manage finances, maintain facilities, sterilize surgical tools, assist pharmacists and therapists, provide security and much more." The collective response of health care workers to this assault on their dignity shows their spirit of resistance that they will not submit to AHS bullying, lack of respect and refusal to engage in good-faith negotiations. Through their actions health care workers affirmed their right to wages, benefits and working conditions acceptable to their peers and commensurate with the important services they provide.

Late in the afternoon on February 16 AUPE issued a press release that the walkout had ended. The news release stated: "Alberta Union of Provincial Employees and Alberta Health Services reached an agreement that will see health care employees across the province return to work with a guarantee 'there will be no legal action or workplace discipline taken against them for job action that occurred on Feb. 16, 2012.'"

The agreement also provided for negotiations to resume with a binding mediation/arbitration process led by labour arbitrator Andy Sims. AUPE President Guy Smith stated: "I am extremely proud of the thousands of GSS members across the province who took part in today's job action. This was a hallmark event for our union. Your actions raised the profile of your jobs immensely, dominated headlines across the province, and debate in the Legislature."

Health care support workers have been without a contract for almost a year. After their resounding rejection of the mediator's report, Alberta Health Services came back with its "final offer" of a three-year contract in which the workers are only guaranteed a two per cent raise over the entire life of the contract. Workers pointed out this would barely cover the increases in their pension contribution, while the costs of food, shelter and all the necessities of life continue to increase. Worker after worker TML Daily spoke to on the picket line made it clear that they will not tolerate this lack of respect for their rights and the important contribution they make. Being offered less than what the mediator had offered is a "slap in the face" they stressed. Their message is strong and clear. They organized their actions and their walkout because they are demanding to be valued and treated as the critical part of the health care team that they are.

Health care workers have been criminalized by the Alberta government, with legislation passed in 1982 making all strikes of health care workers illegal. The government has made it impossible for the workers to exercise their right to strike legally. In a despicable statement, AHS vice-president Chris Mazurkewich blamed the workers for cancelled surgery. "Labour actions that impact patient care are not reasonable or acceptable. Issues should be addressed at the bargaining table." This of course is precisely what the union has attempted to do for the past year, while AHS has become more and more intransigent.

The blame of course lies squarely with AHS and the Alberta government who refuse to provide health care workers with the rights and dignity they require to carry out their critical role in the health care system. To speak of patient care without caring for the staff who provide that care and service is utterly senseless. One without the other is impossible. For the AHS bigwigs to speak about "impacting patient care" while they are up to their eyeballs in secret plans to expand private health care and take even more funding from patient care and hand it over to the rich is despicable indeed. If they truly cared about their patients, they would fight to ensure that the staff have what they need to do their jobs without worrying about how they will pay the bills and care for their families, and without workloads that lead to exhaustion and injuries. They would pay heed to the workers who know very well what they need to provide a safe and healthy environment for patients and staff alike.

Past struggles to defend the rights of Alberta health care workers and the right of Albertans to health care.

Mass Demonstration at Montreal Exchange
Demands End to Anti-Social Measures

On February 16 beginning at 8:00 am, more than 1,000 demonstrators blocked the activities of the Montreal Exchange throughout the morning. Among them were students, workers, women as well as many social justice groups who came to demand an end to the Charest Liberals' anti-social measures. The protestors began by blocking the World Trade Centre that had been locked down since 7:30 am and surrounded by a massive deployment of police. They then moved to the Stock Exchange tower across the street and successfully brought its activities to a halt.

The Coalition Against Fees and Privatization of Public Services, which organized the event, noted in its press release that, "Social justice groups have had enough of this government that insists on diverting the people's wealth in favour of the rich and big business."

The students, who were out in full force, were the first to speak. Jeanne Reynolds, spokesperson for the Enlarged Coalition of the Association for Student Union Solidarity (ASSÉ) said that the recent tuition fee hike is something that concerns not only students but the entire population. "If the government doesn't back down on this measure, all of society will suffer the repercussions. The accessibility to education itself is compromised, not to mention that student debt, as well as family debt, will skyrocket," Reynolds said.

"Its disturbing to see that the government prefers to enrich private companies and the most fortunate rather than invest in the education of its citizens," said Léo Bureau-Blouin, President of the Quebec Federation of College Students (FECQ), adding that, "students are determined to preserve access to public services."

The President of the Interprofessional Health Federation (FIQ), Régine Laurent, highlighted that everyday, nurses see the effects of poverty on people's health. "When we were preparing for this, we never imagined we would succeed in blocking the stock exchange. And yet we managed to block the doors of the exchange. Each time we say, it's the energy of the victors, the energy of the people who say, 'I've got nothing to lose and everything to gain.' So we'll carry on because its not possible that we elect a government that then doesn't listen to us," she said.

Alexa Conradi, President of the Quebec Women's Federation (FFQ) denounced the health care "contribution" as a disguised tax, which will reach $200 per year starting this year. "This measure must absolutely be removed from the government's plans, as it is profoundly regressive and adds to the multiple costs associated with maintaining health care. In addition, this "contribution" unjustly penalizes women who only earn 74 per cent of men's salaries and therefore must sacrifice a larger proportion of their earnings to fee increases across the board," she said.

The coordinator of the People's Action Front on Urban Renewal (FRAPRU), François Saillant, denounced the planned increase of electricity rates in 2014. "Its clear that electricity is an essential service. The fact that government intends to increase rates by 20 per cent in five years, in addition to regular increases, will greatly affect families. The poorest will be the first to be penalized," he said.

At noon, an official from the Montreal Police tactical squad declared the demonstration an illegal assembly. The police used batons and pepper spray to breach the crowd and brutally end the blockade. Several of the employees who entered the building appeared to disapprove of the violent intervention that lead to the arrests of four demonstrators.

Far from condemning this newest criminalization of dissent, Minister Bachand claimed it was the demonstrators who were out of bounds. "People have the right to demonstrate and express their rights, but they don't have the right to stop others from working. Everyone in society has rights and that must be respected. They have the right to demonstrate, but blocking downtown, this is forbidden and unacceptable in a society," he said.

These empty words show the extent to which the recognition of the rights of all is an abstraction for the Charest government which opposes all those who demand concrete measures so that everyone's rights are fully recognized.

Capital-Centred Dispute Exposes the
Missing Voice of the Working Class

A rather typical anti-worker opinion piece in the National Post was quickly refuted with a "special letter." "Labour costs overblown" (the letter) challenged the veracity of "Labour loses its advantage" (the op-ed). The differences in the two were mostly over statistics. The similarity of the two was their anti-worker capital-centred economics.

In economics and politics, the working class is used to having others speak in its name but oppose its basic interests. The missing voice of the working class in the affairs of the country is a problem that TML and groups of writers and disseminators have vowed to resolve.

Note: The numbers used in the letter and op-ed vary significantly and should only be accepted as useful for grasping the thesis of this article.

The letter took exception to the op-ed for "arguing that [the working class] accounts for 60% of the final transaction price of new vehicles," calling the figure "seriously off-base." Both items agree that the "average 2010 hourly compensation rate in Canada, including benefits and taxes on labour [of] $35.76 amounts to about $875 per vehicle." The letter says, "Only the most exaggerated calculations of benefits and other labour costs would see that amount climb to the range of $1,500 per vehicle, or [about] 4% of the $35,000 average cost of a new vehicle in Canada."

The op-ed disagrees even with the "exaggerated 4%" stating, "While the labour portion of the manufacturing cost of a car may be 7%, the labour portion of all the parts and other elements that go into the manufacturing process ... makes labour a major cost factor. Add it all up and the labour content of a typical vehicle in North America is at least 40% of its final transaction price and in some cases as high as 60%."

This dispute over per cents is confused anti-worker gibberish. Work-time or "labour content" accounts for 100 per cent of the value of the finished vehicle and workers' claims on the added-value they produce are not costs. At every stage of the production process, including the building of machines that are integral to vehicle assembly lines, workers are the creators of value and their work-time is the measurement of that value. The work-time that goes into a vehicle whether new added-value from active workers at a particular stage of the production process or transferred-value from previous work-time is the measure of the value of the vehicle. This value comes from the work-time of workers who construct the plants, build the machines and tools, make the steel, produce the raw materials, design and assemble the vehicles, clean the plants and provide the electricity and water.

According to the letter, the total work-time to make an average vehicle when expressed in money amounts to $35,000. The $35,000 is the sum of the monetary equivalent of the value workers have added through their work-time at each stage of the production process and within different ownership groups whether in Canada or abroad.

The op-ed says the total workers' claim on the $35,000 from all production sites from raw material to finished vehicle is 40 to 60 per cent. The letter disputes this amount saying the claims of workers amount to a lower percentage. If 50 per cent is used, keeping in mind the objections of the letter, workers' claims amount to $17,500. The other $17,500 of value is claimed by owners of capital mostly either equity or debt, along with claims by governments, at each stage of the production process and particular ownership group. Around half the $17,500 claimed by workers ($8,750), at least in Canada, is clawed back from workers and becomes a government claim in the form of income tax, payroll tax, sales taxes, individual property taxes etc.

The letter says assembly workers in Canada claim from $875 to $1,500 of the total value of an average vehicle worth $35,000. Assembly workers claim this amount on the portion of the added-value that they produce in their plants. The added-value is equal to the proportion of work-time they add in the production of a vehicle. Owners of the auto assembly plants and debt in Canada and governments make their claims as well from the same portion of added-value assembly workers produce. If the 50 per cent holds true at the level of the assembly plants, the total added-value produced by Canadian assembly autoworkers with work-time expressed in money would be $1750 to $3,000 of which owners of capital claim half ($875 to $1,500) and workers claim the other half ($875 to $1,500), with governments clawing back half of what workers claim ($437.50 to $750).

Governments also claim some corporate taxes and income tax on the amount claimed by owners of capital but those amounts have almost disappeared in the neoliberal mania "to make global corporations competitive." In addition, owners of capital who are the personification of monopolies, receive tax monies in the form of grants and other pay-the-rich schemes and concessions, which offset most taxes they may pay. Public monies these days mostly come from governments clawing back the claims of workers rather than claiming added-value directly from enterprises.

Not one of the claims on added-value at each step of the production process or particular ownership group is a cost of production. A cost of production is a necessary capitalist accounting item because of the division of the socialized economy into privately owned parts. For example, steel from U.S. Steel is sold to Ford. An equivalent of the added-value produced by steelworkers when sold to Ford is claimed by U.S. Steel workers, owners of capital and governments. Once claimed and sold, the added-value is transformed into transferred-value and cannot be claimed again as added-value at the next stage of production and ownership group. The added-value produced by steelworkers becomes transferred-value at Ford. The steelworkers' added-value and transferred-value from previously-produced-value is embedded in the steel. At Ford, the entire value of the steel, which includes added-value and transferred-value from U.S. Steel, becomes transferred-value or a cost of production. The value in the steel bought by Ford is transferred into the vehicles produced by Ford workers along with the new added-value of active workers at that level of production and ownership. The cost of the steel or transferred-value paid by Ford is recouped when the vehicle is sold but no more than its transferred-value. It replaces the amount paid for the transferred-value. No social force can claim any more from that transferred-value than what they paid unless they manipulate the price in their favour, which monopolies do all the time causing chaos and crisis in the economy.

In contrast with transferred-value, which is a cost of production, added-value cannot be considered a cost nor can any claim on added-value be considered a cost. The added-value is supplied by the work-time of the working class. Only transferred-value is a cost of production. The fiction that the claims of workers on the added-value they produce are costs of production is repugnant self-serving propaganda to put workers on the defensive and dissuade them from organizing and fighting for what is theirs by right. Even though the "op-ed" and "letter" appear to be arguing, they both take an anti-worker position on the side of owners of capital and turn economics into an anti-worker sham.

In defence of their rights and progressive enlightenment within society, workers should grasp that at no time nor under any circumstance within the production process are they a cost of production. Workers and their work-time to transform the bounty of Mother Earth into use-value are the producers of all wealth necessary for themselves, the reproduction of the socialized economy, the well-being of the people and general interests of society.

A cost of production for machinery, steel or raw material in the form of transferred-value arises from the division of the production process into competing groups of private owners of capital. The owners of the assembly plants buy already-produced-value (transferred-value) from others such as owners of steel plants or auto-part manufacturers. One thing is certain, not one penny of the $35,000 value of a vehicle is a cost incurred from those who produce the vehicle in the first place, the working class.

Workers are standing up for themselves and their productive work-time. They are the creators of all wealth and providers of all services in the modern socialized economy; they have a rightful first claim on the value they produce. The Workers' Centre of CPC(M-L) calls on all Canadians to raise their voices in defence of the rights of workers, the well-being of the people, socialized economy and general interests of society. Join the Workers' Opposition as active advocates and tribunes of the working class and public right. Let us together organize for a new direction for the economy that guarantees Canadian-standard livelihoods, security for all and reproduction of the socialized economy on which all people and society depend!

Autoworkers Firmly Defend Their Claim
on What They Produce

TML Daily is posting below Part Two of "Autoworkers Firmly Defend Their Claim on What They Produce" by K.C. Adams. Part One was published in TML Daily, January 26, 2012 - No. 7.

Part Two: A Basic Problem in the Auto Industry

This item in the series on the auto industry presents a basic problem and the divergent responses from the two classes in the social relation or dialectic: owners of monopoly capital and autoworkers.

A significant problem affecting the auto industry is associated with productivity, which is generally considered its historic success. Productivity, especially the use of machinery, has advanced to a stage where it has given rise to a permanent crisis between the amount of newly-produced-value (added-value) and the expectations of owners of monopoly capital for a certain rate of return on invested capital.

Active autoworkers produce newly-produced-value or added-value. Other workers at an earlier stage in the production process produce added-value that when sold and used, such as robotic machinery, transfers its value to new commodities. The already-produced-value from machinery is called transferred-value. All value originates as added-value but changes its quality when sold and used as means of production.

The problem arises not from productivity per se but from its clash with the relations of production within the capitalist system and the refusal of the ruling elite to address the problem with social responsibility. Owners of monopoly capital, who control the system, do not want commodities for their use-value but for their exchange-value. They do not build vehicles to use but to sell and that brings productivity into its historic clash with the capitalist system itself and the two main social classes.

Productivity, and the growth of transferred-value and the relative decline of added-value and the number of productive workers, negatively affects the owners of capital and workers in different ways. For workers the loss of livelihoods is a big concern. For owners of capital, productivity results in a fall in the rate of return on invested capital. Both problems could be overcome in a socially responsible manner but this is not done because owners of capital control the economy and state and operate impulsively to defend their capital and expand their respective empires. Owners of capital push productivity to defeat their competitors and attack the rights of the working class.

Active workers produce added-value and both are reduced with productivity, which anti-consciously pleases owners of capital but comes back to haunt them and cause crises in the end. Transferred-value or already-produced-value such as machinery in an auto plant is now far greater in relation to added-value or newly-produced-value at each stage and level of ownership of the production process. The value transferred from machinery into new commodities does not produce any new value that owners of monopoly capital can claim as profit, owners of debt as interest, workers as wages or governments as taxes. The value consumed in the production process as machines function and depreciate is transferred to the new commodities. The transferred-value within the new commodities when realized (sold) replaces the cost of the machinery as it depreciates.

Any added-value within commodities comes from the work-time of active workers at the plant and not from machinery. Only active workers at a particular stage of production produce added-value that when realized can be claimed as revenue by workers, governments and owners of capital. Under capitalism, this sets off multiple problems within the overall economy as it becomes starved of enough realized added-value or revenue to purchase the mass of available social product causing crises usually attributed to "overproduction" or "overcapacity" rather than its root cause of who controls and decides when confronted with problems in the economy: the actual producers (the working class) upholding the human factor/social consciousness or owners of capital upholding their narrow destructive drive for the biggest return on invested capital in the shortest possible time.

The actual producers since the beginning of class society produce more than their basic needs allowing for a division into social classes and ultimately idle rich such as slave-owners, feudal lords and today's owners of monopoly capital who control the economy and state. The long journey of the actual producers to regain control over their economy and eliminate class privilege, which has traversed various class systems and levels of the productive forces, has brought humanity to the cusp of victory under the leadership and organized struggle of the modern working class.

The Need for Equilibrium and a New Direction for the Economy

Owners of monopoly capital own and control parts of the socialized economy, such as the auto monopolies, and from this traditional legal position of authority claim a portion of the added-value produced by the actual producers, the working class. The three main social forces that claim a portion of what workers produce are firstly workers who are the actual producers, secondly governments representing society and lastly owners of capital.

The division of the added-value amongst the three main claimants could result in equilibrium (and has during various periods) if owners of monopoly capital would accept the reality that productivity has diminished the size of added-value not in its absolute form, as the absolute size of the socialized economy has grown, but in its relative form in relation to transferred-value and the total invested capital. Equilibrium demands owners of capital approach issues such as productivity and the fall in the rate of return on investment with recognition of the rights and concerns of the working class, which includes the right of Canadian standard livelihoods for all. For this to occur a Workers' Opposition must be strong and forcible enough to demand equilibrium and an economy geared to serving the people and the general interests of society.

The shrinking of the relative size of added-value compared with transferred-value is of great concern for the working class. Productivity gives rise to more social product but in the process destroys livelihoods, and for the working class and society that is a problem that must be considered and resolved through upholding the human factor/social consciousness. Using their expertise and hard work combined with the actual and potential capacity of modern production, workers are more than happy to produce use-value in a planned manner to meet the needs of the people and the general interests of society but this necessarily includes the social responsibility to provide Canadian standard livelihoods for all.

Owners of monopoly capital are not happy with the size of the realized added-value in relation to their invested capital but they are happy with the growth of constant unemployment that accompanies productivity. Unemployment is a scourge that owners of capital use to extort concessions from workers and drive down the standard of living as they try to reverse the trend of a falling rate of return on investments.

Owners of capital are not content with their claim on added-value because in relation to transferred-value and the total investment it has shrunk. The capital they invest in machinery and other means of production gives rise to greater transferred-value but because fewer workers are necessary to run those machines producing ever greater social product, the remaining workers produce less added-value in relation to transferred-value, the social product and total investment.

The rate of return on investments for owners of capital in the auto industry and other modern industry is on a steady downward trend. Amongst the people this should be cause for celebration as more goods and services are available through the modern socialized economy than could ever be imagined at the beginning of mass industrial production. However, this celebration is gripped with concern at the recurring economic crises, mass unemployment, and destruction of livelihoods and means of production euphemistically called "overcapacity." The concern of the working class is compounded with the reality that owners of monopoly capital, who control the economy and state, use the crisis, mass unemployment and other means to extort concessions from workers in a destructive effort to defy the law of a falling rate of return and save their own privileged positions and private interests.

The greater availability of social product containing less added-value clashes with the basic motivation of owners of capital for the biggest return in the shortest possible time from all their investments. Their discontent becomes a problem for the working class because owners of monopoly capital own and control parts of the socialized economy such as the auto industry and they are not willing to solve the problems arising from productivity in a constructive manner that favours the people and economy. These problems could be resolved with a new direction for the economy or equilibrium within the present situation based on the acceptance of a falling rate of return on invested capital and recognition of the rights of the working class, which includes the right to a Canadian-standard livelihood for all.

The Workers' Opposition declares that if owners of monopoly capital refuse to move the economy in a new direction towards production and provision of services for the people's use and well-being and to meet the general interests of society then at the very least for the public good they should be prepared to live with a falling rate of return on their investments and equilibrium within the economy based on recognition of the rights of workers.

At this time in history, owners of monopoly capital do not want a new direction for the economy or equilibrium within the existing economy. They feel they have the upper hand and the working class in retreat. They would rather have disequilibrium, permanent mass unemployment, constant economic crises and war than face up to the reality that basic problems within the economy have to be resolved with a new direction or by establishing equilibrium within the current situation based on accepting a falling rate of return on investments and recognizing the rights of the working class.

The arrogance of the owners of monopoly capital and their current anti-social anti-worker offensive where they think they can act with impunity calls into question the legal and traditional authority governing their ownership of parts of the socialized economy, their claim on what workers produce and their control of the state. The refusal of owners of monopoly capital to move the economy in a new direction when confronted with crisis and disequilibrium, which they are causing, mean the legal and traditional coherence of the present social, economic and political arrangements is dissipating.

Within the situation, those who work and have a stake in the economy and others whose security depends on its equilibrium are charged by history to bring into being a new legal coherence and arrangements amongst the people, socialized economy and state. To establish equilibrium and move the economy in a new direction the mass Communist Party and Workers' Opposition are strengthening the independent outlook of the people based on the human factor/social consciousness and organizing the working class, its allies, youth and seniors into thinking collectives at all workplaces, educational institutions and neighbourhoods. Autoworkers are a vital contingent within this struggle for new arrangements.

(To be continued with Part Three: "Analysis of Chrysler CEO Sergio Marchionne's speech at the recent Automotive News World Congress." Marchionne admits in his speech, "The current situation doesn't favor a business like ours -- an industry that is extremely capital intensive." As a representative of owners of monopoly capital, he sees a problem with the growth of transferred-value in relation to added-value but only in how it affects owners of monopoly capital. He refuses a new direction for the economy or equilibrium based on a falling rate of return on investment and recognition of the rights of workers including the right to Canadian standard livelihoods for all. Instead, he presents a self-serving capital-centred response: better advertising, steal the claims of both the working class and governments on the added-value workers produce, enforce more intense work at the workplace, destroy capacity and broadly trample on the rights of the working class.)

Alberta Health Care Workers Stand Up for Their Rights and Dignity!

Health Care Workers Stand Up for Their Rights and Dignity!

Mass Demonstration at Montreal Exchange Demands End to Anti-Social Measures

Capital-Centred Dispute Exposes the Missing Voice of the Working Class