Mikhail Shmakov, Chairman of the Federation of Independent Trade Unions of Russia (FNPR), spoke about the Constitution Amendments and the President term nullification.
The social part of the Amendments is very important and extensive, and social partnership is the mechanism that is being generally implemented in the world, for the workers (employees), employers and the state to reach agreement. Today in Russia we have the most developed system of social partnership, and the most effective one. This gives stability to our country, because the vast majority of unconditional contradictions – primarily in labor relations – are removed within the framework of negotiations,” Shmakov said.
So, it turns out that for the leader of the so-called “independent” trade unions the most important thing is stability! In most countries of the world, the main indicative characteristic of trade unions is the struggle and protection of workers’ interests. Improving working conditions, increasing salaries, and abolishing antisocial reforms are the tasks that trade union organizations solve. But Mikhail Shmakov tells us about solidarity, social partnership and stability.
Perhaps, he wants to squeeze out some “bonuses” for FNPR. Perhaps, he is afraid that if the union is not loyal to the authorities, it will be liquidated and someone will lose the “warm spot”. This is by no means the first case of such surrender. Take at least a campaign against the pension reform. FNPR participated in the struggle, but the actions were only ostentatious. No strikes or tough demands! The outcome of this struggle is known to all.
But Mikhail Shmakov did not stop there.
I believe that in the Constitution, in these Amendments, it was just necessary to remove the restriction by two terms. Maybe, I’m sure, there will be such people who can be equally effective as presidents in the following terms. In 10 years, in 20, in 30, in 40. Why limit if they are effective? And if they are ineffective, you don’t have to choose them for a second term, either,” said Mikhail Shmakov.
Obviously, the FNPR chairman decided to follow the footsteps of the “main oppositionist” Gennady Zyuganov, and show the loyalty to the authorities in time. After all, such power really can be effective for someone in the country. But what awaits Russia with such unions? When the crisis happens, who can protect the workers? Unfortunately, with such “working” leaders, the situation may worsen even more. We hope that not all FNPR representatives share the opinion of their leader. Remember, you can improve your situation not through persuasion and showing loyalty to the authorities, but only by fighting for your rights.