L’Anarcho-Syndicaliste n ° 222 – January 2021

Download the publication: as_222.pdf

N ° 222 – January 2021 – The number: 2 €



Continuing their critical analysis of the economic, social and union situation, as well as their actions to put unionism back on its founding bases – particularly the Amiens Charter, UAS activists draw up and provide, through this exclusively dedicated number, an assessment of the betrayal of the CGT-FO mandate since 2017.

We call on all activists aware of the struggle to be waged for the emancipation of workers, both the CGT-FO and other organizations, dumbfounded or victims of iniquitous positions and organized violence against social movements (Yellow vests , Resistance committees, caregivers, restaurateurs, independents, etc …), revolted by class collaboration, to read this entire text.

If they share the analysis and the desire to continue a commitment in the search for the improvement of the material and moral conditions of all workers and in the fight against all oppressions, and, in complete freedom with regard to their conviction and in dependence on the logics of parties, churches and sects, to participate with us in the concrete perpetuation of the unionism of the Charter of Amiens .

Evidence of union functioning: we will ensure complete confidentiality of any discussions.

Union of Anarcho-Syndicalists,
January 17, 2021.


By treason, we mean, at the trade union level, the non-respect of the statutes, the general resolutions and the resolutions of the Confederal Congresses, the non-respect of the history of the trade union organization. Labor Force in all its commitments, non-compliance with the mandate.

For example the Preamble of the Statutes is very clear:

«  Considering that workers’ unionism should not link its destiny to that of the State, nor be associated with any political groupings, the objective of which is the conquest of this State and the strengthening of its privileges, the trade union organization will carry out its program and its perspectives in complete independence …

… To this end, it can engage, as an extension of its own action, in coalitions with trade union and cooperative organizations, provided that these organizations have a democratic character and that their objectives are similar to its own. The aim of these coalitions will be to improve the condition of workers in all fields and to move towards a generalized democratization of the economy. « . And article 1 of Statutes :  » The General Confederation of Labor Force Ouvrière governed by these statutes, aims to bring together, without distinction of political, philosophical and religious opinions, all organizations made up of employees aware of the fight to be waged against all forms of exploitation, private or state, for the disappearance of Employees and Employers and wishing to defend their moral and material, economic and professional interests « .

Which obliges FO to claim within the framework of «  his program »Independent.

Which excludes everything «  support unionism », Which is limited, like the CFDT, to amending the employer or government program.

This makes it necessary to claim and fight only to obtain the improvement of the working and living conditions of the workers.

This excludes signing agreements that degrade the working and living conditions of workers.

This obliges an internal democratic functioning, whatever the opinions, provided that it is, together, to go towards «  generalized democratization of the economy « .

Which excludes any «  witch hunt « Internally at FO and to have as a program the disappearance of » all forms of private or state exploitation « , either «  exploitation of man by man « .


This small assessment, of course, would have made no sense with Bothereau, Bergeron and Blondel, at the General Secretariat of the CGT-FO. With the acceptance of Macron orders by Mailly, in 2017, for the first time, the Secretary General of FO stopped practicing free and independent trade unionism in order to practice support unionism, in the company of the CFDT The logic of support unionism is to congratulate ourselves to avoid the worst, even if the Macron orders fall under the most brutal social damage.

For FO, Mailly had the obligation to respect the mandate, to refuse the practice of Ordinances as is. Because Bothereau had condemned this practice in 1958 and Bergeron in 1967 and 1981, because a liberticidal practice. Mailly was to do the same. But we could read this kind of report: “ First observation: the consultation, which began on June 9 as part of the enabling bill to take measures by ordinance to strengthen social dialogue, was « loyal and sincere ». It has enabled the CFDT, but also the other trade union organizations which have played the game of consultation (the CFTC and FO) by doing their union work, to challenge or influence a number of points which were originally in the government plans: the threshold for triggering employment protection plans, from 10 employees, has not been raised, for example, as the government wished; the hypothesis of authorizing collective bargaining without a union representative in companies from 50 to 300 did not resist the firm opposition of the CFDT; the time limits for appeal before the industrial tribunal, currently 24 months, will be reduced to 12 months, but these are not the 6 months announced at the last consultation meeting on August 23. On the articulation between branch and company agreements, the CFDT considers that it has been heard, with a new area reserved for the branch, on the management and quality of employment, which will determine in particular the modalities for using fixed-term contracts (but not the reasons, which remain in the law) and permanent work contracts « .

This is the kind of remark Mailly made for months to justify his approval of the Macron orders. Except that the above comment is made by the CFDT ( https://www.cfdt.fr/portail/actualites/emploi-/-formation/-video-ordonnances-laurentberger-pointe-une- Occasion-manquee-srv1_511385 ). But very clever who could and who can make the difference!

For the unionism of treason, it suffices to pass in silence and that the ordinances are a liberticidal practice, which denies the principle of collective bargaining (at the end of the alleged discussion, the government decides alone) and the destruction of social rights that let pass, in 2017, the CFDT, the CFTC and Mailly, for FO By way of example: merger of all the staff representative institutions, which causes the loss of 200,000 union mandates, ban on representing oneself after three mandates; which delivers the elected union representative to the goodwill of the employers, without protection. Which trade unionist can approve of the planned destruction of trade unionism in companies? Unsurprisingly, the employers’ newspaper Challenges of August 30, 2017 wrote: “Jean-Claude Mailly, the general secretary of Force Ouvrière (FO), does not seem very worried. And for good reason, this 64-year-old trade unionist has become the key man in the reform ”. But the CCN of September 2017 was to deny Mailly as well as the Confederal Secretaries who had approved the Macron, Veyrier or Souillot ordinances (and others who are no longer in office).

The Confederal Congress of April 2018, in its General resolution , had to put things right, that is to say, had to respect the statutes, the history, the mandate:  » To the delight of employers, the merger and regrouping of institutions are facilitated with the ordinances of September 22, 2017 known as « Macron » consecrating the merger of all the IORPs into a Social and Economic Committee (CSE) and resulting in the planned disappearance of 200,000 elected mandates, synonymous with a considerable attack on local representation « .

The Resolution specifies the sentence: «  Congress calls on business activists to reject the creation of such a body « .

And even : «  Congress calls for a full restoration of the hierarchy of standards which will necessarily result in the removal of the new architecture of the Labor Code and therefore the repeal of the labor law and Macron ordinances ”.

But Pavageau, new Secretary General of FO, has the imprudence to announce, during the CCN of September 28, his intention to understand, even rectify, the mode of financing of FO by the State, to know how the sums collected are distribute, for whom? This causes a holy alliance of those who do not want us to ask this kind of questions and the ousting of Pavageau. An election takes place under singular conditions, with a «  commission of wise men Which does not exist in the Statutes. Veyrier, who supported the Macron ordinances has, a priori, no chance of being elected, since the General resolution condemning the orders Macron won 96% of the vote. And all the more so since in this matter, article 6 of the Statutes obliges the heads of Federations and UDs to respect the vote of the rank and file militants, as expressed during the Confederal Congress. It seems that respect for the mandate has been supplanted by careerism in the apparatus: the 4% candidate finds himself elected with 45%!

The question is: elected to respect the General resolution of the April 2018 Congress (and previous ones) like the Statutes, or to resume the accompanying unionism with the CFDT as in 2017 with the Macron ordinances?


While no joint statement has ever been adopted by the union apparatuses to denounce the drop in APLs by the Macron government, its class policy in favor of the richest 1% (and the Macron orders would have deserved such a statement) , behold, on December 6, 2018, a joint statement was adopted.

But this is not to claim: for example the reestablishment of the CHSCT, or the freedom of the number of elective mandates, which only universal suffrage should judge. No, it is to denounce a popular social movement: the Yellow vests . Following a meeting at CFDT headquarters, this press release states:  » Today, in a very degraded climate, the mobilization of yellow vests has allowed the expression of a legitimate anger. The government, very late, has finally opened the doors to dialogue. Our organizations will engage in it, each with its own demands and proposals, together whenever possible ”.

The movement of Yellow vests would be «  legitimate « , But on the condition of being wary of it: » Dialogue and listening must find their place in our country. This is why our organizations denounce all forms of violence in the expression of demands. « . But what mandate had these leaders received to dare to say: «  The government has finally opened the doors to dialogue « . What does this act of allegiance mean in the face of a government that practices contempt for unions and “ intermediate bodies As with the 2017 Ordinances?

As we will see, for each act of allegiance, of follow-up with the CFDT, the government will respond: social disruption of liberticide.

Because it is the CFDT which is at the initiative of this press release, written at the headquarters of the CFDT Suddenly on January 6, 2019, Berger, Secretary General of the CFDT, claims that the Yellow vests are  » factious « , and  » We have in front of us, for a certain number of yellow vests, people who want to overthrow democracy, people of the extreme right and perhaps the extreme left. « . And for those who signed the December 6 press release with him, he sheds light on his thoughts: «  From the start I said that there was a form of totalitarianism in the exercise of this movement, we are there!  » (program « Political questions France Inter / Le Monde » ). Of course, as soon as the people revolt, it is the «  totalitarianism « ; assertion that is a stereotype of reactionary thinking! As for the amalgamation with the extreme right, the attempts to intrude French Bastion (a small far-right group succeeding the GUD, founded in 1968) have been so rude, in relation to the police, that it will force the government to ban this group (which will be reborn in another form).

Taking advantage of this act of allegiance, the government will be able to target the only movement of Yellow vests (which includes many trade unionists, as no trade union leader can ignore) and repress with extreme violence (10,852 people taken into police custody,  » staggering figure « , as we say Amnesty International Chronicle 401/402 of May 2020), with militants disheveled or with their hand torn off. Having no union balance of power vis-à-vis him, the political authorities will vote for Law No. 2019-290 of April 10, 2019 «  aimed at strengthening and guaranteeing the maintenance of public order during demonstrations ”, Inadmissible infringement of the right to demonstrate, including for the unions.

And this is where the betrayal lies, in the face of the mandate: the same FO-CFDT-CGT union leaders will not publish a press release to denounce the government repression, to demand justice for the demonstrators assaulted by the police forces, to demand the repeal of the liberticidal law. A complacent silence of the trade union apparatuses, without any accusation of «  totalitarianism « Against the government, no finding that the » dialogue doors »Never existed, no joint declaration of support for the victims of police violence organized by the government (with some particularly complacent prefects). The press release of December 6, 2018 requested dialogue from a power that does not want employee unions, taking advantage of the mobilization of Yellow vests . For the employees this posture has given nothing, except for one more freedom-killing law and a police repression so violent that it calls into question the right, for all, to demonstrate.


The CCN’s position statement of March 27 and 28, 2019 on pensions is clear and well-founded: « The CCN rejects any attempt by the government to further lower the retirement age, as it denounces and rejects any desire by the government to extend the duration of activity or to encourage delaying the retirement age, ie. – saying to finance dependency. The CCN recalls that this risk must be borne by Social Security and financed by a contribution on all income, including capital income ”.

Hence a basic question: how a few weeks later, the FO confederal leadership was able to sign the ANI (National inter-professional agreement) of May 2019 which brings the discount to 64? While the discount has always been condemned by all the resolutions of the Confederal Congresses and this signature betrays the principle enshrined in the FO statutes: «  Improve the condition of workers in all areas « .

  • The General Resolution 96% adopted at the Confederal Congress in April 2018: “ Congress … reaffirms its condemnation of the 2015 ARRCO-AGIRC agreement that FO has not signed. This agreement extends a lower revaluation of pensions, reduces pensions paid from 2019 by 10% for 3 years. This iniquitous measure will force future retirees not to leave at age 63 so as not to lose rights « . And this General Resolution of 2018 commits FO until the next Confederal Congress.
  • The 2015 General Resolution of Congress condemned the “ counter-reforms of 1993, 2003, 2008, 2010 and 2014 « , because they «  not only deteriorate retirement conditions, but also pension levels « .
  • The 2011 General Resolution of Congress claimed (p.245), “ the removal of haircuts « .

So, by what right, this signature of FO for the discount at 64, instead of claiming the «  removal of discounts « , And to denounce a measure considered by all at FO, as » iniquitous »In April 2018?

This is the betrayal of the mandate, since it means forcing the working world to work until the age of 64, under penalty of a heavy financial penalty.

Which amounts to «  to degrade the condition of workers And not to improve it.

Apart from the Macron ordinances, finally condemned by the FO Confederal Congress, in April 2018, FO had never stooped to betraying the interests of workers.

The CFDT, which had signed the ANI of 2015, signed again: “ The only downside is the bonus-malus mechanism put in place in 2015 and which began to apply in 2019, called the solidarity coefficient, will continue to apply. The social partners did not get Medef to reverse its position. The employers have made it a position of principle, remaining inflexible during all the discussions ”. (https://www.cfdt.fr/portail/actualites/protection-sociale-/-solidarites/-video-retraites-complementaires-ce-que-contientl-accord-srv1_681298 ).

What the CFDT recognizes is that only the bosses are there when it comes to making employees pay. The discount, that pleases only the Patronage. So why not claim to make pay the income of Capital, whose share continues to grow? Impossible to know, because at the CFDT, we are not making demands: we are amending the government-employer text. But it is ironic, in the same statement:  » Even FO, who was not a signatory in 2015, could endorse the deal. For once, this agreement on pensions is almost a consensus. A sort of feat in the period « .

Except that, if the National Bureau of the CFDT approved the ANI of May 10, 2019 unanimously, the Executive Committee of May 2019 could only request the cancellation of the FO signature for the discount.

Instead, and while this provision does not exist in the Statutes, there was a vote: 15 for the discount and 14 against.

However, article 7 of the Statutes is clear: “ The Executive Commission ensures, with the Confederal Bureau, the management of the General Confederation of Labor Force Ouvrière under the control of the National Committee in the interval between its meetings. « . Management, that is to say the application of the resolutions taken in this matter. And, as the resolutions of 2011, 2015 and 2018 are against the haircut, and the haircut does not improve the condition of workers, the EC could only manage the cancellation of the signature for the discount, illegitimate and dishonorable signature.

Moreover, where the 15 signatories for the discount, who are, ipso-facto, on the position, both CFDT and Medef, can they say that they respect the mandate and «  improve »The condition of workers? We can rightly consider that they betray him by betraying the workers. Admittedly on May 16, 2019, the declaration of the EC assures that it is opposed:  » to any form of device, known as bonus-malus, including that envisaged by the government as part of the pension reform, leading to force employees to work until 63-64 years of age « .

As the government announces the discount up to 64 years, and no one can ignore that the  » standard »European is at 67 years old – it has already been applied in several countries – it is not acceptable to sign the discount with one hand, while writing with the other, that it might not be done. The only way to be against it is to cancel the signing of FO at the ANI of May 2019.

What does this comedy mean, in October 2018, where it was necessary to be scandalized for a kind of file not applied (inapplicable and inept), in October 2018, and to question the maintenance of the Secretary General, Pavageau, for, a few months later, not to be scandalized by the discount at age 64, and not in any way raise the question of maintaining the Secretary General?

The most damaging thing is that the CCN of September 2019, forgetting its demands of September 2017 and its Resolution of March 2019 refusing the discount, was going to remain silent on this signature contrary to the unionism of the Charter of Amiens , validating, ipso-facto, that FO is aligned with the CFDT

That is to say that defending the interests of workers for its improvement is no longer the raison d’être of FO.It is to maintain the apparatus of the trade union organization, even if it means signing texts that flout the statutes and resolutions of FO, while showing complacency with political power and the State, which has become, it is true, the first financier.

Allegiance and betrayal, for nothing!

It should be remembered that the Moreau report of 2013 proposed (p.88):  » Old age insurance contributions are in fact the main resources of the schemes. An increase in the uncapped contribution of 0.1 point per year for 4 years, from 2014 to 2017, shared between the employee’s share and the employer’s share, would bring in 2.6 billion euros for the general scheme « ?

Except that Medef is against the increase in contribution, already in 2013, to send everything back to the employee, then there would only be the discount! As a free and independent organization, it is a question of claiming on its program: the increase of the contribution, including for the employer, and to make pay the income of the Capital. It is a choice of society.

Or, behind the CFDT, Force Ouvrière makes corporatism by giving the employer-government text a version «  Less bad  » provided that. But we are betraying the mandate. And we allow the government to go to the end of its logic favorable to shareholders and bosses: liquidate the pay-as-you-go pension for the points-based pension.

The signing of the ANI in May 2019 not only worsened the condition of workers, it facilitated the fixed idea of Medef: to make all the funding of pensions weigh on workers alone. In addition, the CSG, which puts social protection on them. FO was, with Blondel, against the CSG and with good reason.

But the Macron government, assured of union allegiance, is not proposing a reform to lower the level of dividends, which has doubled in thirty years! No, it is the workers who must pay, the railway workers (and others) treated with frightful privileges! Also, encouraged by the duplicity of the union apparatuses for the discount, the government could announce the following episode of social breakdown: the retirement by points!



On June 12, 2019, during his general policy statement to the National Assembly, Prime Minister Édouard Philippe announced the introduction of a pivotal age of 64 in the universal pension system currently in preparation, for, according to him, encourage the French to work longer, then the High Commissioner Delevoye in charge of pension reform, announced the liquidation of the pension by pay-as-you-go, for the retirement by points. If FO declares itself against, the CFDT recognizes that the logic of the discount goes towards the liquidation of the retirement by distribution, and approves the retirement by points, not surprisingly, since the treason, within the trade union movement, is its function, several reiterated since E.Maire. While point retirement is a disaster for the employees and a boon for the bosses. This is the case in Sweden. The results were published by Release of October 11, 2018:  » In a points system which ensures the same rights for all according to the time that one has worked, choppy or incomplete careers are necessarily penalized. Those who have used part-time work a lot, as is often the case for women, have experienced periods of unemployment, have completed long studies or have been in training for a long time, have mechanically accumulated fewer points . Despite the compensation mechanisms put in place and which will be at the heart of discussions in France, there have therefore been many losers in Sweden. A study published in March 2017 showed that 92% of Swedish women would have had higher pensions in the old system and 72% of men ”.

It is therefore necessary, against this reform which is a change in the model of society, to put in place the compulsory national unitary balance of power against the Macron government. Hence a certain perplexity, reading the General Resolution of the CCN of September 26 and 27, 2019, because it is less about actions against the government than «  a vast campaign of public meetings « . Which results in the fact that FO is «  ready to strike  » and «  FO submits the proposal to join, through an inter-professional appeal, the united strike of the RATP and transport unions as of December 5 « . Since when FO « submits the proposal of … « ? And why not : «  the proposal to propose While we’re at it! But the end is more direct: «  prepare the interprofessional strike in the largest unit « … Except that it is practically a question of supporting the categorical strike of December 5, as indicated beforehand.

Now the function of the Confederation is to confederate, to «  group »Demands and struggles, not to follow a categorical strike. Against the retirement by points more than ever, in unity of action, it is, clearly, with the CGT that we must create the balance of power for, at the national level, a national inter-professional general strike … to the exclusion of the CFDT and the supporters of the retreat by points who are opponents. What goes through the organization of the convergence of struggles, at the same time. And there are many, starting in the public hospital. In 2019, it is visible that the arguments of Delevoye-Macron and others do not hold water, the Medef has just declared ( Figaro of November 19, 2019):  » There are three solutions to solve the problem: increase contributions for employees and for employers, I believe that is not possible. The second, which is unacceptable, is to lower pensions, and the third, which is the right solution, is to make employees and civil servants work longer … « . The problem is posed. But, contrary to what the Medef says, it is possible to increase contributions, as the Moreau report indicates, and to perpetuate the pay-as-you-go system, by improving it. In addition, pensions are much lower, with the discount!

In fact, the FO Confederation will support more morally than practically the categorical strike of December 5. Then the confederal leadership will decree a «  truce of sisters “, Leaving the strikers to exhaust themselves in an unequal struggle, not to resume support, more symbolic than effective, on January 9. It must be recognized that the Confederal Direction CGT is doing the same thing: Martinez betrays the transport workers and the RATP, by practicing the truce which, in fact, breaks the movement. It is true that the CGT apparatus has the same problem as that of FO: defending the workers first or defending the apparatus first, the friends of the apparatus first? All this leads to the failure of the strike initiated on December 5, without the confederations organizing, as was theirs, the convergence of struggles.

In this little game, the CFDT regains control. She will propose a «  fundraising conference », While she is for the retirement by points! The CFDT declares:  » On long-term governance, it would seem that the points of view of all the social partners are not so far apart with the exception of the CGT … All the participants reaffirmed that the bill as it stands is not did not trust the representatives of employees and employers enough, who were nevertheless the main funders of the system ”. (https://cfdt.fr/portail/actualites/protection-sociale-/-soli-darites/reforme-des-retraites-premier-round-de-discussion-pour-la-conference-de-financement-srv1_1097263 ).

Does that mean that the FO confederal leadership would be in favor? The fact remains that, within the governmental framework of this conference, on February 13, the Secretary General of FO, Veyrier, declared:  » I would nevertheless like to underline, unfortunately I deplore it from the point of view of our attachment to social dialogue and collective bargaining, that we had to wait for the strike to start on December 5, for there to be significant mobilizations. , so that we really open these discussions « . So the «  finance conference « Would be, for FO the possibility of opening » truly  » discussions ? Untenable position, because this conference was explicitly requested by the CFDT, opposed to the movement of December 5!

We could expect a clarification, in the name of freedom and independence, during the Confederal Executive Committee of February 19, 2020. The EC describes this conference as «  dead end « And » therefore mandates the Confederal Bureau to decide to exit at the appropriate time ”. What delicacy in the expression that «  right moment « !

Since when, in the history of FO, has this kind of verbiage been used, with class collaboration, integration into the state apparatus, to come back  » the right time « … while the government, in 2020 as in 2017, mocks the » discussion And ignores this type of collaboration.

He proves it by announcing, on February 29, that he will refuse 49-3, a practice denounced by the Council of State which declares:  » the Council of State underlines that the fact, for the legislator, to rely on ordinances for the definition of structuring elements of the new pension system causes the loss of the overall visibility which is necessary for the assessment of the consequences reform and hence its constitutionality « . The members of the Council of State are not comrades, but, as of January 23, they questioned the «  constitutionality Of the process.

Hence the absolute obligation to condemn the Fundraising conference and not to participate. While relying on the opinion of the Council of State to condemn both the practice of Ordinances (it is also the tradition at FO!) that the retreat by points.


We are closer, in the face of Covid-19, to the methods of the police state than to a national health policy. From his speech on March 12, Macron removed the mask and revealed the real issue. He stated :  » All European governments must take decisions to support activity and then revive whatever the cost … I do not know what the financial markets will give in the next few days, and I will be just as clear. Europe will react in an organized, massive way to protect its economy. I also hope that we can organize ourselves internationally, and I appeal to the responsibility of the powers of the G7 and G20. Starting tomorrow, I will discuss with President Trump to offer him an exceptional initiative among the members of the G7, since he is the president. It is not the division that will allow us to respond to what is today a global crisis, but our ability to see correctly and early together and to act together. « . This is the end of the story: hide «  a financial and economic crisis », With an act of allegiance to Trump! The specter has been present for several years. Everyone knows it.

Because the 2008 crisis, known as the subprime crisis, did not lead to any measure against derivatives, funds «  vultures », The financialization of the economy. It was not decided that central banks would henceforth only pay public money to states and no longer to private banks, causing the «  debt  » States. No, the ECB paid the private banks 1,000 billion euros in 2012, it started again in 2015, it continues. Instead, people were toasted by destroying health systems, pension systems, public services in general. We privatized in all directions … And that without settling for a single moment the crisis of the capitalist system with a financialized economy.

A health crisis becomes a pretext to hide a real financial crisis. So the peoples, under the pretext of public health, are required to be domesticated for a noble cause, masking, with great difficulty, a cause which primarily concerns the interest of 1% of humanity, the exploiters and profiteers of humanity. Suddenly, we understand that all the measures announced are first and foremost security and authoritarian.

Especially since, rather than declaring a state of health crisis, the government chose to declare a state of emergency, referring to its own law officially of  » fight against terrorism », In fact integrating the law of war (that is to say the law of April 1955, concerning the Algerian war) in the common law. Consequently, it is a repressive and punitive logic that is put in place, with the curfew, a measure of war, as a major measure and of population control.

But we have the right to be perplexed by reading the press release of the Secretary General of FO, of March 19:  » FO takes note of the announcements of the President of the Republic regarding the arrangements required to deal with the health, social and economic crisis due to the Coronavirus epidemic « . Why «  take note « ? Why not: challenge and make your own demands?

It is the opposite, because it is noted, in addition, for FO, that with his speech, Macron «  tends to break with a strictly budgetary and accounting reading that has prevailed for too long « . However, there has been no announcement to abandon this «  reading From Macron!

We cannot follow the FO press release which asks, in addition, to «  monitor the economic and social situation in each department with trade unions and employers « . Is it the role of the unions of employees to co-manage the follow-up of measures never negotiated, beforehand, with the unions, but imposed by a government whose anti-social policy is beyond doubt? This way of disguising social reality by inventing a government that would break with an accounting reading, this desire to do government monitoring with the Patronage, it is class collaboration: no more.

A few days earlier, on March 16, the President of the Republic had launched an appeal citing «  the sacred union « . The only pies that were taken in by this masquerade of this virile and warlike vocabulary were the pies. Because, in law, France is not at war, Paris was not bombed, the government was not a refugee in Bordeaux, Alsace was not invaded by enemy troops. Rubbish, as Blondel would have said!

And yet, on March 19, like one man, they stood to attention and the workers’ unions forgot everything in a quarter of a second. Oblivion of the anti-social rascality of the Macron-Philippe government, champion of the retirement by points, spitting in the face of the striking health personnel, 90% of emergency physicians for months and 1,200 service heads resigning, administratively, in January 2020. Two months later, everything is forgotten: the elimination of 4,200 hospital beds, that is to say of the nursing teams and equipment, by Macron in 2018; the closure of the main mask production plant (200 million) relocated to China in 2018; the catastrophic 2022 Health plan which fantasizes about telemedicine to continue to organize the lack of resources for the public hospital. Forgotten the class opponent Medef, fully for the point-based retirement and the Macron orders of 2017 and the Labor law of 2016. Everything is forgotten and that is the problem, including the mandate, starting with the mandate.

Since when have the secretaries general of FO (and the CGT) received a mandate to make a pact with the Medef? What does mean : «  call public authorities and businesses « ? While it is a question of defending public services, in particular health. We give in the ecumenical genre with the classically holy water unions, the CFTC and the CFDT

The pretext of the communique of sacred union of March 19, 2020 is: «  in the context of a major health crisis « . The gap is so total between aid to businesses (300 billion) and aid to public health services (no investment in masks or tests, even for caregivers) that the hour, from March 19, 2020 , should be at the denunciation. In no case to legitimize the action of the government and to follow suit by calling it to «  implement the essential means « Without naming or quantifying any, and pretending to believe that it is necessary » to suspend  » class struggle.

And FO, in all this? The Executive Commission stands with a Declaration April 20, 2020. The grassroots activist, for lack of minutes, does not know anything about the content of the debates. We still have to hope that the document signed with the Medef on March 19, 2020 has been criticized and disowned, because it is contrary to both the mandate and the Statutes. But no disapproval, no trace in the Declaration of the EC Does this mean that the EC approves the collusion with the Medef of March 19, 2020? Or else, by a general amnesia operation, would the EC have «  forget it »Support union practices for both Fundraising conference that with the Medef in «  the sacred union « ? So since the EC does not take its responsibilities and lets it happen, of course the drift towards the CFDT and corporatism can only continue.

Except that there is one rule: as usual this behavior of compromise and collusion, on March 19, 2020, leads the government to take advantage of it and to pass in force with its Law of March 23 (then Ordinance), and its article 11:  » Allow a company or branch agreement to authorize the employer to impose or modify the dates for taking part of the paid leave within the limit of six working days, by deviating from the periods of notice and the terms of taking this leave defined by the provisions of Book 1 of Part Three of the Labor Code and by collective agreements and agreements applicable in the company; – allow any employer to impose or unilaterally modify the dates of working time reduction days, rest days provided for by fixed-price agreements and rest days allocated to the employee’s time savings account, by derogating the notice periods and the terms of use defined in Book 1 of Part Three of the Labor Code, by collective agreements and agreements as well as by the General Civil Service Statute; – to allow companies in sectors that are particularly necessary to the security of the Nation or the continuity of economic and social life to derogate from the rules of public order and the contractual stipulations relating to working hours, weekly rest and Sunday rest ”.

How does this relate to the means to be implemented to fight against a virus? No ! But why not take advantage of the windfall of such a submission from the union apparatuses to question the taking of paid holidays and the weekly week. The Medef dreamed of it; thanks to the joint communique with him, he got it! Of course, the trade union apparatuses immediately had and have the obligation to demand, collectively, the repeal of this «  Emergency Law n ° 2020-290 of 23 March 2020 to deal with the Covid-19 epidemic », Which came under social provocation and to cancel the communique of sacred union. But, there, nothing!

Nevertheless, meeting on May 19, 2020, the FO Executive Committee issued a press release which includes a part with which we can only agree:  » The Executive Board confirms its attachment to union independence and contractual practice. It denounces the government policy which leads to the assumption of public policies in economic and social matters to trade unions through so-called social conferences, charters or pacts under the supervision of the State or its representatives and the regions. « .

The problem is that everyone knows that participating in the conference on the financing of pensions, as in January 2020, under the aegis of the government and at the initiative of the CFDT, is very exactly to find oneself, for trade unions, « Under state supervision « . Likewise with the press release of allegiance to public authorities and companies of March 19. We therefore expect, in this press release from the Confederal EC  » unanimously adopted », That participation in this Fundraising conference. Except that there, not a word: because the confederal leadership, the Secretary General, participated in this Conference « under State supervision », Early 2020! Ditto for the explicit class collaboration of the March 19 press release!

So what is the point of this condemnation, in principle, if it does not lead to a condemnation of confederal policy and «  pact Of March 19, in practice, demanding the repeal of the law of March 23? This press release, valid in principle, accepts, in fact, collusion with the employers and the government. The question becomes: how long will this double talk, this posture last? It is untenable for the very future of the Confédération Force Ouvrière.


Suddenly, the Secretary General of FO, Veyrier, having seen his practice condemned in principle, but not its actual practice, what happened?

On RFI, this May 22, 2020, to the journalist’s question:  » The Minister of Health will bring together the social partners next Monday for a Health Segur; It is the former Secretary General of the CFDT, Nicole Notat, who was responsible for directing and channeling the work. First of all quickly is it a good choice? « …

… the Secretary General of FO replies:  » I do not want to judge, or people based on their past, where, obviously, there is union closeness which means that this can stir up tensions or questions. But I won’t go in there, I don’t care « .

Responding to this means both being outside the FO mandate and resolutions, which oblige the FO Secretary General, and being outside its history. Because no one has forgotten the strike initiated by FO (under Marc Blondel) for the defense of Social Security, in November-December 1995. With, opposite and together, Notat and Prime Minister Juppé; hence the slogan that all the FO militants sang: «  Down with the Juppé-Notat plan! « . And that «  does not interest »Veyrier? But, by what right?

Except that once engaged in the compromise, without sanction, it is class collaboration.

It is done, on May 20, 2020, by a joint declaration of all the French trade union apparatuses and of the German Confederation, DGB, which affirms:  » The Franco-German initiative for European revival, presented by the French President and the German Chancellor on May 18, must be implemented through the modernization of European economic models, by placing the ecological transition at the heart of the new growth strategy of the ‘European Union (EU). It is a long-standing demand of European trade unionism, we can only congratulate ourselves on it. « .

It is specified:  » We need an effective recovery strategy, which must go beyond the 500 billion euros announced by France and Germany. The recovery plan must be accompanied by an ambitious new multiannual financial framework raised to at least 2% of European gross domestic product (GDP) « .

At no time does this document make the slightest reference to antisocial Europe which, for thirty years, has been asking by successive directives or annual interventions by the Commission to

Brussels, – with the system «  two pack, six pack »Since 2013 – the governments of EU countries blindly apply liberal dogmas: everything for multinationals and banks, and nothing for the people and almost nothing for public services. Our  » leaders « Unions have » forget it « The Greek people, whose social tragedy has publicly signified the truth of this » Europe »Multinational lobbies, with an excessive privatization plan (ports, airports …) in exchange for loans granted, not for the people, but for the Greeks to reimburse the banks, while destroying, in exchange for the loan, democratic and social gains, starting with pensions. Since our «  trade unionists « Welcome the 500 billion euro plan for EU countries, one may wonder: » is 500 billion enough for the countries, for the peoples of Europe « ? However, as underlined, this for the professional amnestics, the Tribune of June 6, 2012, under the title:  » Where have the 1.000 billion of the ECB gone? « , It is indeed 1,000 billion euros that the ECB had granted, in 2012, to private banks, and this, contrary to the case of the Greek people, without demanding anything in exchange! We had to trust the private banks so that these 1,000 billion would go, as was the justification, to «  the real economy « . The result was the following, summarized in the same article of the Tribune :  » It was the Spanish (308 billion), Italian (265 billion) and French (146 billion) banks which took nearly three-quarters of the 1.019 billion granted by the ECB in December and February. Contrary to popular belief, this money has not been used to finance the real economy. He followed a very complex circuit, which ended up making him return to the accounts … of the ECB « .

So 500 billion is nothing and does not call this system into question! And if «  debt There is, at the state level, because of this crisis, there is no question of making workers pay for it. And if workers’ unions there are, it is to claim it on their class program in favor of workers … not to pledge allegiance to governments and the EU This is integration  » under the supervision of the State »Condemned by the FO EC, but without internal consequences for FO!

Therefore the betrayal can continue. As proof, the signature of Health Segur by FO, still behind the CFDT, and under the control of Notat! However, the General Resolution adopted at the Confederal Congress in April 2018 and which is binding on all activists, starting with the Secretary General, is clear: “ The Congress denounces the rationing of the healthcare offer induced by the implementation of a regionalized state control of the health system via the creation of regional health agencies (ARS) and the savings of several billion euros achieved by the ‘Health insurance on the backs of hospitals and medico-social establishments. Social insureds are unfairly suffering the consequences … The Congress calls for the recognition of health insurance as the guarantor of access to rights and care, and therefore its role of coordinating the methods of exercise and guidance of the insured in the health process. Reaffirming the four fundamental functions of the public hospital which are diagnosis, care, teaching and research, Congress recalls the need to break with the logic of a closed envelope, calls for the end of plans to return to hospital ‘balancing and wiping out hospital debt. It requires fair recognition of health establishments – public hospitals but also health and social and medico-social establishments such as EHPADs and UGECAMs – as well as a strengthening of the means and recruitments necessary to ensure quality care ”.

However, there is no questioning of the ARS, or of the closed envelope, or of fee-for-service pricing in the Ségur agreement. Because the signatories did not come with their plan of demands (that is to say the Resolution above, for FO): they have “ accompanied »The government text! They did not demand, as a prerequisite, the definitive abandonment of the tense flow management of the public hospital.

While the minimum wage demand was € 300 (which corresponds to the differential noted by the OECD between the average nursing salary in France and the average nursing salary in the rest of the European Union ), they accepted the government’s proposal: € 183! € 183 not included in the salary, because it is an index bonus notification given twice! As it is not on the salary scale, only some were able to have it, while on the salary scale, all would have had a real increase … Clever, right? How can we accept this petty sleight of hand for those presented as the «  Hero of the Nation »(It does not eat bread!) During confinement?

Of course, on July 10, 2020 the CFDT welcomes: «  Ségur de la santé: the CFDT signs a historic agreement for nursing and support staff ”:

 » We can be proud of what has been achieved. When you are a trade unionist, when you have fought, you commit to it », Proclaims Laurent Berger ( https://cfdt.fr/portail/actualites/fonctions-publiques/segur-de-la-sante-la-cfdt-signe-un-accord-h historique-pour-lespersonnels-soignants-et-accompagnants-srv2_1127642 ).

And at FO, too, we should welcome the 183 €? While in October, we learn that the German unions, with carers better paid than in France, obtained, as part of the collective agreement for the public sector, a wage increase of 8.7% for caregivers with special coronavirus premiums, between 225 and 600 euros. This is to say the insufficiency of 183 €!

Following its anti-union rule, the government, with the CFDT-UNSA-FO signature, takes the opportunity to despise patients and caregivers. Thus the decree of August 29 (n ° 2020-1098) which modifies, on September 1, the criteria for «  vulnerable employees « , refusing «  partial activity « To employees living with a vulnerable person, parents of disabled children and » caregivers « . Budget cuts make f health and disability! Decree n ° 2020-1106 of September 3, 2020, signed O.Véran, allows hospital workers to be dismissed, removing the guarantee of employment.

In this context, the position of the OF CCN on September 23 and 24 is more than unique: “ The CCN is contesting the terms of the allocation of a « Covid bonus » of a variable amount awarded to certain staff without consultation with the trade unions representing staff « . The CCN lists all the health professions excluded from Segur and  » supports the Federations which continue to claim To put an end to their exclusion … So why and by what right could the Confédération Force Ouvrière be able to sign a plan so clearly open to criticism and insufficient? Especially since in October, Prime Minister Castex, will refuse to invest in resuscitation beds which are only 5,000 in France and 28,000 in Germany. Once again, respect for the mandate could only lead to a claim on the OF program and not to claim, in imitation of the CFDT, that what the government granted, while maintaining its plan Health 2022 and tense fiuxes, is a victory for unionism. It is to support a government adrift, after its failure in the municipal elections and that we had to fight.


Regarding the ANI of November 26, 2020 on teleworking, it starts from a diagnosis following meetings between «  social partners « (That’s the term) and it says: » The conclusions of this diagnosis received a favorable opinion from the CFDT, CFE-CGC, FO on the one hand, and from Medef, CPME and U.2.P. on the other hand « .

This poses, a priori, a problem for the unionism of the Charter of Amiens : it is not a question of sharing a diagnosis with the Patronage, but of bringing its own demands and to confront them with those of the Patronage. If the discussion has as a prerequisite a «  shared diagnosis », We are, a priori, in a logic of integration of the unions of employees in the field of the Patronage, as if class antagonisms did not exist. Containment and the pandemic have a good back, since there was already the ANI of 2005 on teleworking and that the text of November 26 specifies that it is also  » Articles L1222-9 et seq. of the French Labor Code, amended by Ordinance No. 2017-1387 of September 22, 2017 ”. So FO would agree again with the Macron Orders of 2017?

The framework specified (point 2) is as follows: «  Teleworking is set up within the framework of a collective agreement or, failing that, within the framework of a charter drawn up by the employer after consulting the social and economic committee, if there is « . But why not a branch agreement which is essential in the branch and excludes «  the employer’s charter « With a committee reduced to giving its » notice « ? FO cannot sign a text leaving a free hand to the Patronage, while validating the CSE and the liquidation of the IORPs. Signing this text is to validate the social destruction practiced by the Macron government. Which is confirmed in 2.2 of the agreement: «  The signatories of this agreement insist on the importance of making the implementation of teleworking a subject of social dialogue and negotiation at the level of the company, and, where appropriate, at the level of the professional branch. « . So no more class claims, but «  a theme of social dialogue « . And we understand that this comes down to bringing everything back to the company; the collective labor agreement at branch level being marginalized, « If applicable « . What is the application of article 2 of the law Job of 2016, based on the liquidation of the law of June 24, 1936, establishing the principle of favor, i.e. equality before the law.

As FO campaigned for months, in 2016, against this infamous destruction of the principle of favor, – put in place by the Popular Front -, by the Valls-Holland government, in 2020 it is impossible for FO to sign the ANI on teleworking thus conceived. Let us add that in $ 3.1.5, on the  » support for professional expenses « By the boss, it is indicated: » The flat-rate allowance paid, where applicable, by the employer to reimburse the latter is deemed to be used in accordance with its purpose and exempt from social contributions and contributions within the limits of the thresholds provided for by law ”. It goes without saying that the CFDT, “ social partner « And follower of » shared diagnosis « With the employers for ages, welcomes the ANI: » This is not a guide to good practices and this agreement provides benchmarks that employers, employees and their representatives have been waiting for for several months. », Explains Catherine Pinchaut, National Secretary and head of the CFDT delegation According to the logic specific to corporatism, it is a question of boasting not of the quality of the agreement and the advantages acquired, but of what we have avoided the worst:  » Setbacks have been avoided on two major subjects: questions of safety and accidents at work remain the responsibility of employers; social dialogue in exceptional circumstances will not be excluded « . (https://www.cfdt.fr/portail/actualites/vie-au-travail/negociation-teletravail-enfin-unaccord-srv1_1148001 ).

But what a misery to read the same ideology for the Secretary General of FO:  » If the exceptional massive teleworking set up last spring put the question back on the table, the employers’ organizations entered the discussions reluctantly. They were constrained and forced to negotiate by the environment and the perseverance, especially of FO ”, added Yves Veyrier. « If the employers’ organizations wanted from the start to impose a text that is neither normative nor prescriptive », Yves Veyrier recalled “ that an ANI, in essence, carries a normative value ”. ( https://www.force-ouvriere.fr/negociation-fo-signe-l-accord-national-interpro-sur-le ). This is the logic of the CFDT for which the unions would have succeeded in forcing the Patronage to sign, while they imposed their framework! The text prompted by the CFDT invents, like Veyrier, that:  » The last days have been essential to force the hand of the Patronage. Nothing was less certain than this deal that employers did not want « . In the same spirit on the character  » non-normative « , Imposed by the Patronage on complacent Confederations (how to sign a non-normative and prescriptive text?), The CFDT declares: » Beyond these declarations on the « non-normative or prescriptive » nature of the agreement, it is its content that counts and will bring new rights to employees. « .

All the same, the Patronage with the T. Breton report of 1994 (submitted to Balladur), and the Mettling report of 2016 (submitted to Hollande), is the historical promoter of telework, in which he sees the possibility of individualizing the contract. of work and to return (old moon requested, in its time, by Seillière, director of Medef) to work at the task. No one is unaware of it. So, either there are achievements for the employees and it is collective, prescriptive and normative and we can sign. Or it is not normative and there is a reference to the company outside the collective framework, without major achievements, but as the CFDT says of “ landmarks « … And then we don’t sign.

What did the FO Confederation do in this galley that validates the law Job and the Macron Orders? Play the game of «  social partners « , Integrated into the device and which practices, before a negotiation, the » shared diagnosis », With Patronage and government? This practice, common to the CFDT, is called, in FO, a betrayal of its statutes, resolutions, program, and mandate.


On November 19, 2020, the FO EC takes a position:  » At the same time, the Executive Commission denounces the government’s propensity to resort to exceptional measures, in particular with the extension of the state of health emergency which gives full power to the government to strictly restrict traffic, meetings of all orders. The limitation of individual and collective freedoms leads in fact to seriously hamper trade union action, which is nevertheless essential for workers’ health as well as employment and purchasing power. FO more particularly contests the provisions authorizing the government to take by ordinance any measure allowing to re-establish the possibility of derogating, unilaterally on the part of the employers, in terms of days of rest, working hours, weekly rest, work Sunday. While the debate in parliament on the proposed law « relating to global security » has just started, FO condemns this proposal « .

This is all well and good. But this poses a problem: how to sign the Segur or the ANI on teleworking with a government that only aims « Seriously hamper union action « And understands with the law » global security »Generalize the powers for the municipal police, without national logic, to monitor by drone (article 22) and call into question the right to demonstrate and report for journalists (article 24)? Moreover, in a press release of November 19, the CFDT itself declares:  » We must not take the slightest risk with the preservation of fundamental rights such as freedom of the press. A risk underlined by the defender of rights in early November. The CFDT calls on the government and parliamentarians to withdraw article 24, to quickly review their copy and to assume their responsibility ”.

Except that on November 17, Veyrier, Secretary General of FO, takes a personal position, which ends as follows:  » FO also warns about the risks of transfer of sovereign powers to municipal police officers and private security agents, or even on the use of drones which could lead to the surveillance of the population and the questioning of the freedom to go and come or manifestation. That, on such a subject, the government base itself on a bill and use an accelerated procedure in the National Assembly, at the risk of depriving parliament and society of a debate on the impact of the measures it contains that neither the CNCDH nor the CNIL are consulted beforehand, can only question, arouse fears and reservations at the very least « . Clearly, he does not say that he «  condemned « This law, as the EC does, and does not claim anything (not even the deletion of article 24!), To only express moods » at least « . While the United Nations Human Rights Council condemned the law! Nothing. And there will be no common statement from the trade union apparatuses to condemn the law «  Global security »And demand its withdrawal (no, that was only against the Yellow vests !).

Suddenly, the Macron government, as usual, goes even further in the social and democratic case. He applies his rule: for each act of union allegiance, an anti-social and anti-democratic decree or law. This time, on December 8, Veyrier wrote to the Minister of Labor, to criticize decree 2020-1511 of December 2, 2020:  » You will understand, Madam Minister, our incomprehension both on the merits – which could suggest that the simple fact of being a member of a union, or of being a union could be attached to the subject of these articles and justify a such file – only on the form (while we have very regular information meetings, in the context of the Covid19 pandemic, itself giving rise to restrictions in terms of public freedoms, we discover, through the media, this decree without even having been informed beforehand). I would also draw your attention to the fact that these provisions could be liable to be considered as infringing the principle of freedom of association recognized by European and international texts. I therefore ask you to intervene so that this decree can be suspended and withdrawn on these aspects ”.

All of this is true. Except that this openly anti-union decree, taken in full confinement and without the right to protest, is the result of three years of collaboration with the Macron government. It is undoubtedly permissible, as for the law Global security , to appeal to international texts that the political power in France ignores, for lack of balance of power to counter and discredit it. But the stronger the allegiance to power, the more the latter pursues social liquidation.

Internally at FO, there is nevertheless a distinction between the EC, which condemns the law and the Secretary General who limits himself to expressing his concerns. It is not the same thing and the letter of December 8 is insufficient. But nobody wants to draw the consequence of this distinction, to this day. It is, however, obvious.

For the decree, the government mocks FO, turns to the Council of State which will validate the decree, for the most part. Because it was not necessary to make a pact to be convincing and legitimate in the dispute and the demand.

This is the salary that the government and the employers grant to those who do not respect their historical and social mandate.

They are adversaries, and with them, no «  shared diagnosis « And no » social partners « . Because their answer is the law of March 23, the law Global security , the decree of December 2, 2020.

Because the class struggle exists and they practice it!


It is also necessary that internally at FO, the  » witch hunt », A practice unknown to FO against an entire group of anarcho-union activists, who were denied access to their own UD, that of Finistère, banned from access to the national meeting of AFOC November 3, 2020.

So why ?

Because they were and still are opposed to the Macron Orders and they did not participate in the «  holy covenant »Of October 2018 to eject Pavageau.

Because they continue to denounce the Secretary-General’s current drift towards supporting unionism.

In short, because they respect and practice Charter of Amiens .

To be limited to the public aspect of the affair, during the last CCN in September, a representative of the UD of Finistère in a new way (without the anars who had administered it for decades) was able to declare publicly:  » The current office very quickly fired a political organization, an opinion organization on religion and a philosophical organization which openly parasitized their Departmental Union ”. (Statement included in the journal of UD-FO-29, n ° 29). The exclusion of an entire group is shamelessly claimed (dealt with in the same intervention by «  ayatollahs « ), The intervention ending by denouncing these » great prophets of union fundamentalism « . So no more pretext to attack a militant alone, but, in front of the CCN, the mask is removed: it is indeed a question of «  fire  » a «  group And for his opinions. Such practices are contrary to the Charter of Amiens , the FO Statutes and its entire history.

Moreover, the very late Louis Blanc tells in his Briefs :  » And we were dealing with a guy who, in this area, knew how to do it, Bergeron. When there was a problem, he summoned Alexandre, Pierrot Lambert and me. He asked for our respective opinions. He managed to avoid the mess at the CCN It was deserving of his part, because he really acted for the union organization « . ( Activist for social justice and freedom – Papers , Louis Blanc with Gérard da Silva, L’Harmattan, p.159). It never occurred to Bergeron (any more than to Bothereau and Blondel) to lead an anarcho-unionist or Trotskyist witch hunt, on the pretext that these militants openly opposed the confederal line.

Why has the CCN, which knows its classics, let it be said and, by the same token, validate that we can «  fire « A whole group, on the pretext that they are not » blessed-yes-yes « . It is a whole drift that gangrene FO, from the betrayal of the mandate to the witch hunt, the activists who defend (and who, for many learned with Marc Blondel), free and independent trade unionism, that of the Charter of Amiens .

The moral of the story is simple. The political power, ally of the Patronage, wants to liquidate the trade union organizations of employees and return everything to the company at the goodwill of the employers. Hence the 2008 laws on representativeness, 2015 (Rebsamem), law Job (referral to the company and no more principle of favor), Macron ordinances, law «  anti-yellow vests »Which calls into question the right to demonstrate, law Global security, union registration decree of December 2 … We can see, each time, that all the attempts at allegiance to power are understood, as an opportunity to confirm that there will be no taking into account of demands of the world of work and to drive the point home with anti-social and anti-union laws. This is the framework, which is that of the class struggle

This is why we must put an end to allegiance and accompanying unionism, which is unionism of denial. It is useless and it is to disappear in dishonor, in addition. It is undoubtedly preferable to resume the struggle, since there is a struggle, and to gain respect vis-à-vis the government and employers’ power as, and this is fundamental, vis-à-vis the workers.

And there, besides avoiding dishonor, we can create a balance of power and win on our own program. It happened in the past and under no better conditions than today. We must come back to the just fight for the «  happy Days (Title of the Resistance program). This is the role of the EC and the CCN, as of all the activists.


Before it’s too late :

  1. Back to the fundamentals, to the Statutes, to the Confederal Resolutions, to the respect of the mandate, back to the unionism of the Charter of Amiens with its class program for the emancipation of workers as a basis for protest.
    The Medef program: «  the invisible hand of the market », Date of 1776. Us of 1895 and 1906!
  2. Independence and freedom , that is to say more than «  shared diagnosis »With Patronage, government, CFDT, but our own program. Never again to the CFDT trailer., But apply the Preamble statutes.
  3. Request for the repeal of anti-union and anti-union laws and decrees , which were greatly aggravated with the 2008 law on “ representativeness »(Which is an insult to Resistance as in its program), until the decree of 2 December. There is «  grain to grind », Including at the legal level.
  4. Withdrawal of the FO’s signature from anti-social texts resulting from the Macron Orders with the May 2019 ANI, the November 2020 ANI, and the Segur . Otherwise it is, each time, the government strike that follows each betrayal, such as the anti-union decree of December 2, 2020.
  5. Cancellation of press releases «  of sacred union »Between union apparatuses as with Medef or for the EU All these orientations should have and must be respected, defended, again, as for decades, by CE and CCN And the militants will find their way there. This is no longer the case.
  6. Review internal funding which must be for militant action first!
  7. Internal democracy restored to FO , with cessation of all witch hunts

All this is possible: we have all practiced it at FO for decades and it is the honor and the historical necessity of Labor Force .

And it is to respect the fight of the militants who preceded us, who conquered the gains that we have no right to sell off.

It is to maintain the just fight for human emancipation.

The Union of Anarcho-Syndicalists ,
and FO activists defending the Amiens Charter
January 17, 2021

L’Anarcho-Syndicaliste supplément du n° 222 – Février 2021