"Kommersant (Moscow)": "TRADE UNIONS BEHOLD MIRACLE"
Vladimir Putin meets with trade unions, reverses economic downturn
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin on Wednesday met with representatives of trade unions for what would be the first public discussion of the government's anti-crisis programme. Kommersant's special correspondent Andrei Kolesnikov reports on the impressive launch of a nationwide public debate on stimulus and bailout policies.
Prime Minister Vladimir Putin met with about 20 trade union members representing a range of industries, including defence, engineering, housing and utilities industries and others.
They gathered at the Small Hall on the sixth floor of the Government House for a public discussion of the Government bailout plans. The Hall came to be known as the Gas Hall after it hosted the long and draining negotiations between Vladimir Putin and Yulia Tymoshenko on Ukraine's gas debt.
Russians far and wide are discussing the Government's anti-crisis plan for companies, plants and mines as enthusiastically as in Soviet times they discussed the draft Soviet constitution. This nationwide debate alone must have a psychotherapeutic - tranquilizing - effect on modern Russians. That is, if anyone still doubts whether the Government will be able to overcome the economic downturn, the broad discussion of bailout policies should remove all doubts: it certainly will, because the people and the Government are combining their efforts, making plans together in a unified and animated manner.
This programme is much more effort-consuming than the draft constitution had been, because the country has only two weeks to finalise the proposals. Earlier, it would take several years to prepare and develop such ambitious projects. This shows how much life has changed in Russia over the past 30 years - not an inch.
Wednesday's discussion was the first one to be chaired by Mr Putin. On entering the room, he greeted each of the 20 participants, incidentally starting with Deputy Transport Minister Sergei Aristov, who is not a union member. But he was sharing a table with union members, so Mr Putin shook hands with him first.
What is more, after circling the table, the Prime Minister came back to Mr Aristov who gave another smile and extended his hand eagerly once more. Mr Putin nearly took it again but caught himself with his hand in midair and smiled sadly: "We have already greeted each other...," seemingly implying that one man cannot be entitled to this kind of preferential treatment twice in a minute.
With his hand rejected, Mr Aristov had nothing to do but shrug with resigned understanding and even a sense of gratitude.
The Prime Minister explained to the audience that the unions were above all responsible for preserving jobs. The participants admitted this without argument. About half of them quickly scribbled down every word the Prime Minister said, the other half watching his mouth intently, as if to catch every word with their eyes.
Mr Putin reminded the audience that the Government had allocated 47 billion roubles towards resolving employment issues and planned to arrange 1 million new jobs in due course. He added that heads of major companies should not forget those they still have to dismiss. Former employees must be taken care of. For example, small businesses could be set up "around" big ones for them. Even those quitting on their own accord should receive severance pay.
This new Government decision is good news for those still undecided on how to document their termination of employment in the best possible manner. They can afford to relax now, as it no longer matters anymore, with their severance pay guaranteed in any case.
Mr Putin also pointed out recent cases of "pension rights abuse," as employers are back to "grey" payroll schemes and cash wages "in envelopes." It is possible that this public discussion will bring out a circumstance that might surprise the Prime Minister: people do not object to their pension rights "abused." There may be a time in a person's life when he or she prefers money right away in any way possible, not thinking of such a distant future as Mr Putin does.
"Whatever [noble] motives the employer has, it is inappropriate to simply fire an employee," Mr Putin said. "It is not too difficult and not so expensive in the end, and will pay back a hundred later," he added.
I took this as a sign of his concern about possible social outbursts. The Government must certainly be considering this possibility, but most likely behind closed doors. Kommersant in fact has information confirming this option. The Government is especially worried about students who will be unable to repay their college loans, and workers unable to make a living.
However, Mr Putin apparently thought of a different problem, because later, when he returned to this idea, he talked about highly qualified professionals who will be unavailable when the crisis ends and growth begins.
"And growth will by all means begin," the Prime Minister assured. But this optimistic statement somehow brought a sense of gloom into the conference hall, not unlike that caused by the most pessimistic forecasts issued by the Communist party, which became more active in the face of the crisis.
Mikhail Shmakov, head of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions, took over the discussion, saying that the bailout plan "should more specifically define points of economic growth."
"Or provide guidelines at least..." he suddenly finished in a rather sombre tone.
Mr Shmakov said that unions were more interested in higher labour productivity than anyone else. This statement, in fact, is in contradiction with the Marxist theory which young Shmakov must have studied thoroughly before he grew up to become the union activist we know today. In fact, Karl Marx and later Vladimir Lenin wrote that growing labour productivity leads to personnel cuts, something trade unions work to prevent.
Isn't this the "unity of opposites," one of the central laws in Marx's theory? Mr Shmakov apparently thinks it is.
"Some see improved labour productivity simply as enhancing a worker's efficiency, while forgetting about technological modernisation," he explained.
But again, he failed to add that modernisation leads to the same situation, unwelcome by unions, at an even faster rate.
"And they shouldn't be cutting salaries!" Mr Shmakov urged. And Vladimir Putin certainly should have agreed with him, being himself employed for a salary. But he didn't.
On the contrary, the Prime Minister lectured Mr Shmakov on the impossibility of preserving jobs and salaries simultaneously.
"Well... yes," Mr Shmakov agreed softly.
"Well, yes, there is a contradiction here," Mr Putin firmly repeated.
Here on this point, Mr Shmakov argued with the Prime Minister. Apparently, he didn't like being caught out with a controversial rationale. Who would think that Mr Shmakov would ever argue with Mr Putin. But it happened. He said there was the 47 billion-rouble allotment, which could be used to maintain old salaries. As for jobs, they have already agreed that no one should be fired.
"But I haven't finished yet!" Mr Putin interrupted indignantly.
It turned out that he was intending to cite the 47 billion roubles himself at that very moment, and propose roughly the same idea. What's more, the amount was allocated by the Government and not thanks to Mr Shmakov's efforts; his contribution was minimal at best. Mr Putin should be of course given all the credit for this. But Mr Shmakov not only dared to interrupt the Head of Government but (one could say) "steal" the 47 billion from him.
The meeting went on for another hour and a half behind closed doors. Mr Shmakov finally emerged from the Prime Minister's office, looking entirely satisfied, which he probably was, as he eagerly went on to talk to the media afterwards.
Mr Shmakov was not surprised when asked whether he was planning to instigate street protests like union leaders do in other countries - in France, for example.
"True, the forms of protest and union action do not differ very much across the globe - demonstrations or mass meetings... But a difference exists, nonetheless. In France, their kings were guillotined, while in Russia, our tsars were shot dead," he said.
Mr Shmakov's graphic comparison added an unusual piquancy to the situation. It remained unclear which tsars he was referring too, with the current economic downturn at hand.
But he refrained from specifying, although God knows that he has gone too far already.
"In France," Mr Shmakov continued, "they begin with meetings, then the National Council of French Employers (Conseil National du Patronat Francais) meets for discussions with the unions. In Russia, a three party commission gathers and resolves all issues on the spot!"
That is, he meant that there is no need for street protests in Russia.
"But in any case, we'll march on May 1. There'll be a demonstration of protest!" he promised.
Mr Shmakov did not think twice when asked about the potential slogans for the demonstration. "Certainly we'll have slogans!" he stated. When a Ren TV correspondent asked him to cite one of them for the camera, Mr Shmakov agreed somewhat mechanically, and then suddenly yelled: "WE WANT JOBS! DOWN WITH WAGE CUTS!" And banged his fist on the table.
He has rapidly assumed his new role, I thought. But then I remembered he had done it long ago.
Andrei Kolesnikov
