Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-t6hkb Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-13T12:42:22.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Union Locals in Mexico: the ‘New Unionism’ in Steel and Automobiles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Ian Roxborough  and
Ilan Bizberg
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

For more than 40 years Mexico has experienced sustained and rapid economic growth. Until the recession of 1976–7, GNP grew at an annual rate of 6%. By 1977 there were some four and a half million industrial workers in Mexico and the growth of modern industry was proceeding apace. The Mexican economy began to experience serious problems in the second half of the 1970s and, by 1982, despite (or because of) an attempt to use oil exports to promote recovery, had plunged into a severe crisis. Together with the development of this economic crisis, the 1970s also witnessed the emergence of a sustained increase in industrial conflict and in working-class militancy in general. This upsurge of militancy involved the formation of ‘independent’ unions not affiliated with the official party, and the development of militant factions within some of the larger national industrial unions, affiliated with the official party. It has been suggested that the development of union militancy has been connected with the growth of modern industrial establishments. While this claim cannot be accepted without serious reservations, it is certainly the case that there have been upsurges of union militancy in modern industrial sectors. This article will examine the nature of union militancy in two industries which can be regarded as modern in the context of Mexican development: steel production and automobile assembly.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Latin American Studies , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , May 1983 , pp. 117 - 135
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1983

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 NAFINSA, La Economia Mexicana en Cifras (Mexico, 1978).Google Scholar

2 Contreras, E. and Silva, G., ‘Los recientes movimientos obreros mexicanos pro independencia sindical y el reformismo obrero’, Revista Mexicana de Sociologla, vol. 34, nos. 3–4 (06–12 1972).Google Scholar

3 On Mexican incomes policies, see Zazueta, C. et al. , ‘Salarios Contractuales y Salarios Mínimos en México, 1979–1981’, mimeo, Secretaria de Trabajo y Previsión Social, 1982;Google ScholarSchlagheck, J., The Political Economic and Labor Climate in Mexico (Philadelphia, University of Pennsylvania, Wharton School Multinational Industrial Relations Series, 1980);Google ScholarReyna, J. L., ‘El Movimiento Obrero en una Situación de Crisis: México 1976–78’, Foro Inlernacional, vol. 19, no. 3 (1979).Google Scholar

4 On the political reform, see Bayoumi, O., ‘State, Society and Development: Theoretical Considerations and a Mexican Case Study Focussing on the Current Political Reform’, Ph.D. Thesis, London School of Economics, 1981.Google Scholar

5 There is a vast, but imprecise, literature on the mechanisms of state control over the labour movement. See, inter alia, Leal, J. F., México: Estado, Burocracia y Sindicatos (Mexico, El Caballito, 1975);Google ScholarAlonso, A., El Movimiento Ferrocarrileroen Mexico (Mexico, ERA, 1972);Google ScholarCórdova, A., La Política de Masas del Cardenismo (Mexico, ERA, 1974);Google ScholarMoro, M. et al. , Control y Lucbas Del Movimiento Obrero (Mexico, Nuestro Tiempo, 1978);Google ScholarCamacho, M., La Clase Obrera en la Historia de México, vol. 15 (Mexico, Siglo XXI, 1980);Google ScholarAnguiano, A., El Estado y la Politica Obrera del Cardenismo (Mexico, ERA, 1975);Google ScholarStevens, E., Protest and Response in Mexico (London, MIT Press, 1974).Google Scholar

6 In addition to the SNTMMSRM, there are five other major industrial unions in Mexico: railways, petroleum, teachers, telephones, and electricity. All these unions have a single employer - the state - and a single contract, in contrast with the many contracts negotiated by the miners' union.

7 On local level elections in the SNTMMSRM, see Thompson, M. and Roxborough, I., ‘Union Elections and Democracy in Mexico’, British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 20, no. 2 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8 On the history of the Lázaro-Cárdenas complex, see Zapata, F. (ed.), Las Truchas (Mexico, El Colegio de Mexico, 1978);Google ScholarBizberg, I. and Barraza, L., ‘La acción obrera en las Truchas’, Revista Mexicana de Sociologla, vol. 42, no. 4 (1980);Google ScholarBizberg, I., La Acción Obrera en Las Truchas (Mexico, El Colegio de Mexico), 1982.Google Scholar

9 On industrial relations in the Mexican auto industry, see Middlebrook, K., ‘International Implications of Labor Change: The Automobile Industry’, in Domínguez, J. (ed.), Mexico's Political Economy (Beverley Hills, California, Sage, 1982);Google ScholarAguilar, F., ‘El Sindicalismo del Sector Automotriz’, Cuadernos Politicos, no. 16 (1978);Google ScholarQuiroz, J., ‘Proceso de Trabajo en la Industria Automotriz’, Cuadernos Politicos, no. 16 (1980);Google ScholarJuárez, A., Las Corporaciones Transnacionales Los Trabajadores Mexicanos (Mexico, Siglo XXI, 1979);Google ScholarBazan, L., ‘El Sindicato Independiente de Nissan’, in Memorias del Encuentro Sobre Historia del Movimiento Obrero, vol. (Puebla, Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, 1980);Google ScholarRodríguez, J., ‘Condiciones de Trabajo en la Industria Automotriz’, in CEHSMO, Memoria del Segundo Coloquio Regional de Historia Obrera, vol. 2 (Mexico, CEHSMO, 1979).Google Scholar

10 On industrial relations in section 67, see Taller del Area Industrial, Colegio de Sociología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Nuevo Léon, ‘Formas de Lucha y de organización en Fundidora Monterrey’, in Memorias del Encuentro Sobre Historia del Movimiento Obrero, vol. 3 (Puebla, Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, 1980).Google Scholar

11 The Cuidad Sahagún metallurgical complex was established in 1953. Novelo, V. and Urteaga, A., La Industria en Los Magueyales (Mexico, Nueva Imagen, 1979).Google Scholar

12 There are two major private sector steel companies, HYLSA (with plants in Monterrey and Puebla) and TAMSA (with a plant in Veracruz), that are not organized by the Miners' Union. Both have tranquil industrial relations.

13 Amador, J., ‘La contratación colectiva en la industria minerometalúrgica’, informe de investigación, Centro de Estudios Sociológicos, El Colegio de México (mimeo), 1975.Google Scholar

14 The leader of section 288 was a candidate for the PRI for a local government post. He lost to the right-wing Parlido de Acción Nacional. The candidate for the PAN, interestingly, was a worker from section 147 and is now the municipal president. Section 147 seems to be split between a pro-PAN and a pro-PRI faction. Both factions are united in their rejection of the left-wing PSUM.

15 Alafita, L., ‘Sindicalismo Independiente en Mexico’, in CEHSMO, Memoria del Primer Coloquio Regional de Historia Obrera (Mexico, CEHSMO, 1977).Google Scholar

16 The average number of strikes per year in Mexico between 1960 and 1976 was 347.

17 Why VAM should be an exception to the pattern is not entirely clear. It may perhaps be due to the fact that VAM is a fairly small operation, with government participation, and a reputation for paternalistic managerial strategies.

18 Interview with Secretary-General of VW union, Puebla, April 1982.

19 Interview, Mexico, 25 Aug. 1978.

20 For a more detailed discussion of these issues, see Thompson and Roxborough, op cit.

21 The Nissan union in Cuernavaca has ties with other militant unions in the same region, but no links with unions in Toluca, where the other Nissan plant is located. The same is true for the GM unions.

22 Several authors have argued that, in contrast to unions in developed countries, trade unions in Latin America generally orientate their actions toward the state. Payne, J., Labor and Politics in Peru (New Haven, Yale University Press, 1965)Google Scholar and Rodrigues, L. Martins, Trabalbadores, Sindicatos e Industrializacāo (Sāo Paulo, Brasiliense, 1974), are clear statements of this position.Google Scholar Cf. also Roxborough, I., ‘The Analysis of Labour Movements in Latin America’, Bulletin of Latin American Research, vol. 1, no. 1 (1981).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

23 Trejo, R., Tres Huelgas Telefonistas (Mexico, Uno Maás Uno, 1980).Google Scholar Other cases of union insurgency are dealt with in Loyo, A., El movimiento magisterial de 1958 en Mexico (ERA, 1979);Google Scholar Alonso, op. cit.; Stevens, op cit.; Pérez, R., ‘El Charrismo Sindical en la Década de los Setenta: El Sindicato Petrolero’, in Prieto, A. M. et al. , Hisioria Crónicas de la Clase Obrera en México (Mexico, Escuela Nacional de Antropologla e Historia, 1981);Google ScholarRivera, J., ‘Corrupción y Disidencia Obrera en Pemex 1918–81’, Iztapalapa, no. 5 (1982).Google Scholar

24 A similar situation appears to have been the case with the merger of two electricity generation unions into a single union (SUTERM). In the merger, the local sections which had been democractically run and which belonged to the Tendencia Democrática were purged and forced to make peace with the dominant offcial leadership. Gómez, S., Insurgencia Democracia en los Sindicatos Electrscistas (Mexico, El Colegio de Mexico, 1980).Google Scholar