Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-g8jcs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T02:59:55.929Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Division and Cohesion in the Working Class: Artisans and Wage Labourers in Ecuador

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

Alan Middleton
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is through the organisation of labour that class interests and class antagonisms become manifest. A major problem with recent debates about the informal sector, petty commodity producers or the marginalised labour force is that their structural positions in the economy have not been translated into class analysis, whereby the social position of the sector of the labour force under discussion is clearly identified in relation to other groups in society. As a result, conflicting interests are not fully discussed and the capacity of the urban poor for organising and working towards the amelioration of their condition is ignored.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Latin American Studies , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , May 1982 , pp. 171 - 194
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1982

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 Hill, C., Reformation to Industrial Revolution (Harmondsworth, Penguin Books, 1969), p. 91.Google Scholar

2 Ibid., p. 266.

3 Marx, K., Pre-Capitalist Economic Formations (London, Lawrence and Wishart, 1964), p. 129.Google Scholar

4 See Hill, , op. cit., p. 90.Google Scholar This view contrasts with the emphasis Lenin puts on the development of capitalist concerns out of small enterprises and is later apparently contradicted by Hill himself when he says that, although large sums of capital for the Industrial Revolution came from overseas, family and group savings of small producers were the most significant source of capital financing. Hill, , op. cit., pp. 245–246;Google Scholar and Lenin, V. I., The Development of Capitalism in Russia (Moscow, Progress Press, 1974), pp. 546–50.Google Scholar

5 Marx, , op. cit., p. 316.Google Scholar

6 Hill, , op. cit., p. 266.Google Scholar

7 See Hammond, J. L. and Hammond, B., The Town Labourer (London, Longman, 1978), p. 80.Google Scholar

8 See Thompson, E. P., The Making of the English Working Class (Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1968), pp. 277–8.Google Scholar

9 Ibid., p. 285.

10 We would contend that the differences to which we shall refer should have a certain consistency across most economies based on the export of primary products and which formed part of the British world market for manufactured goods in the nineteenth century.

11 Robalino, I., El Sindicalismo en el Ecuador (Quito, INEDES, 1977), pp. 34–41.Google Scholar

12 See Elliot, J. H., Imperial Spain, 1469–1716 (Harmondsworth, Penguin, 1970), p. 122.Google Scholar

13 Robalino, , op. cit., p. 36.Google Scholar

14 See Hurtado, O. and Herudek, J., La Organisación Popular en ci Ecuador (Quito, INEDES, 1974), pp. 59–60;Google ScholarRobalino, , op. cit., p. 34.Google Scholar

15 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 59.Google Scholar Guilds for blacksmiths, locksmiths, tailors, gunsmiths, painters, sculptors, stonemasons, slaughtermen, swordsmiths, hatmakers, carpenters, shoemakers, silversmiths and bakers were set up in the sixteenth century. Rate-fixing is recorded as early as 2537, three years after the arrival of the Spaniards. It seems, however, that the rates fixed by the council did not correspond to the needs or desires of the artisans and that the whole organisational structure was no more than a method of maintaining low-cost production in a situation of a shortage of skilled men. The first strike in Ecuador dates as far back as 1550, when tailors presented a list of grievances to the council and then withdrew their labour. Robalino, , op. cit., pp. 34–5;Google ScholarHurtado, O., El Poder Político en el Ecuador (Quito, Universidad Católica, 1977), p. 59.Google Scholar

16 Robalino, , op. cit., p. 39.Google Scholar

17 Such as agriculture, mining, construction and transport. Robalino, , op. cit., p. 40.Google Scholar

18 Ibid., p. 41; Hammerly, M. T., Historia Social y Económica de la Antigua Provincia de Guayaquil, 1763–1842 (Guayaquil, Archivo Histórico de Guayas, 1973), pp. 145–146.Google Scholar

19 Robalino, , op. cit., p. 43.Google Scholar

20 Ibid., p. 66.

21 Ibid., p. 70.

22 The Sociedad Protectora de Artesanos was set up in 1872. Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 60.Google Scholar

23 The Artistic and Industrial Society of Pichincha was set up by more than 200 artisans, artists and industrialists in 1892. Its aims were to liberate workers and artisans from certain oppressions to which they were being subjected and to promote the arts. It included the following guilds: musical art, painting, sculpture, tailoring, silverwork, carpentry, hairdressing, metalwork and mechanical trades, saddlemaking, armoury and hat-making (Robalino, , op. cit., p. 71). This was the forerunner of the modern Confederación de Trabajadores del Ecuador (CTE) and was to become Marxist-dominated and representative of factory wage labour. The following are some of the orgnisations for which dates are available and which were set up between 1874 and 1908: 1874* Sociedad de Artesanos, ‘Amantes del Progreso’. 1875 Sociedad de Maestros Sastres, ‘Luz y Progreso’ de Pichincha. 1884* Sociedad de Tipógrafos de Guayas. 1892 Sociedad Artística e Industria de Pichincha. 1894 Circulo Católico de Obreros. 1895* Sociedad de Vivanderos. 1896* Sociedad Hijos de Trabajo. 1898* Unión de Panaderos. 1904 Alianza Obrera de Azuay. 1904* Sociedad de Carpinteros. 1905* Sociedad de Benificiencia de Peluqueros. 1905* Sociedad de Sastres, óLuz y Progreso’ de Guayaquil. 1906 Centro Católico de Obreros. 1908 Liga Nacional, ‘Obreros de San José’. * These organisations formed the Confederación Obrera de Guayas in 1905. El Comercio, Jan. 29, 1972;Google ScholarRobalino, , op. cit., pp. 71–3;Google ScholarAlbornez, O., Del Crimea dcl Ejido a la Revolución del de Julio de 1925 (Guayaquil, Claridad, 1969), pp. 92–5.Google Scholar

24 This congress, which went on every Sunday for two months, was mainly arranged by the Artistic and Industrial Society of Pichincha and was attended by the following groups: The Municipal workers of Tulcan, Latacunga, Riobamba, Alausi, Chimbo, Sigsig, Saraguro, Babahoya, Portoviejo, Sucre and Bahia de Caraquez; The Society of Artisans of Ibarra; The Artistic Society of Ibarra; The Artistic and Industrial Society of Pichincha; The Printers Society of Pichincha; The Union of Drivers of Pichincha; The Don Bosco Institute; The Catholic Workers Centre; The Workers Circle of San José, óLa Tola’; The Society of Workers of San José of Ambato; The National League of Workers of San José of Riobamba; The Workers Mutual Aid Society of Chambo; The Artistic Society of Bolivar; The Workers Alliance of Cuenca; The Workers Union of Loja; The Workers Confederation of Guayas; The Society of Chemist Workers of Guayas; The Railway Union; The Secretariat of the People of Guayaquil; The Retailers Cooperative Society of Guayaquil; The Mutual Protection Society of Food Retailers; The Maternal Bar Society of Guayas. See Robalino, , op. cit., pp. 736.Google Scholar

25 Ibid., p. 74.

26 From 1909 to the formation of the CTE in 1944, the following are the most important dates for the organisation of Ecuadorean workers: 1909 First National Congress of Workers. 1920 Second National Congress of Workers. 1926 Congress of Indigenous Workers of Cayambe (forerunner of the Ecuadorean Federation of Indians). 1935 National Confederation of Workers in Guayaquil. 1936 Persecution of Union Leaders. 1937 Trades Union of Pichincha and Guayas formed. 1938 The Ecuadorean Confederation of Catholic Workers formed (CEDOC). 1938 The Workers' Confederation of Ecuador formed at the Third National Congress of Workers. 1943 Fourth National Congress of Workers. 1944 First Congress of the Confederation of Workers of Ecuador (CTE).

Saad, P., La CTE y su Papel Histórico (Guayaquil, Claridad, 1974), pp. 18–59.Google Scholar

27 Saad argues that a majority of the organisations were artisanal (Saad, , op. cit., pp. 18–19).Google Scholar In addition to the Artistic and Industrial Society of Pichincha, the Catholic Workers' Centre and the Bar Society of Pichincha, there were delegates of the societies of tailors, printers, shoemakers, blacksmiths and mechanics, carpenters, metal workers, coachmen, bakers, stonemasons and bootblacks. Robalino, , op. cit., pp. 76–7.Google Scholar

28 Robalino, , op. cit., p. 77.Google Scholar See also Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 15.Google Scholar

29 The principal strikes were those of bakers (1897), carpenters (1897), painters (1897 and 1904), leather workers (1908), cocoa workers (2908) and urban transport (1916). However, the most militant group of workers were the railway workers who struck in 2906, 2907, 1908, 1909 and 1912.

30 See Robalino, , op. cit., p. 78. A society of journeymen tailors was set up which disbanded after a year and was reconstitued in 1927.Google Scholar

31 See Robalino, , op. cit., pp. 78–9. The striking workers included: station and workshop workers on the railways, dock workers, shop workers, coalmen, miners, electrical workers, plumbers and gasfitters, public service workers, cocoa workers, health workers, municipal workers, sugar workers, packers, salespersons, printers and bakers.Google Scholar

32 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 66.Google Scholar

33 Ibid., pp. 66–7. See also Moreano, A., óCapitalismo y Lucha de Clases en la Primera Mitad del Siglo XX’, in Mejia, L. et al. , Ecuador: Pasado y Presente (Quito, Universidad Central, 1975), pp. 137–224;Google ScholarSaad, , op. cii., pp. 23–2.Google Scholar

34 Hurtado, , El poder politico, p. 88.Google Scholar

35 Ibid.; Moreano, , op. cit., p. 157.Google Scholar

36 Hurrado, , op. cit., p. 88;Google ScholarMoreano, , op. cit., p. 160.Google Scholar

37 Metals and tools were mainly imported.

38 Jaramillo, C., Historia del Ecuador (Quito Lasalle, 1962), pp. 183–4.Google Scholar

39 Hurtado, , op. cit., p. 330.Google Scholar

40 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 69.Google Scholar

41 Hurtado, , op. cit., p. 90.Google Scholar

42 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 70.Google Scholar

43 Ibid., p. 70.

44 Saad, , op. cit., pp. 37–8.Google Scholar

45 Ibid., p. 37.

46 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 74.Google Scholar

47 Saad, , op. cit., p. 10.Google Scholar

48 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 80.Google Scholar

49 Hammond, and Hammond, , op. cit., p. 80.Google Scholar

50 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 75;Google ScholarSaad, , op. cit., p. 42.Google Scholar

51 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 75;Google ScholarSaad, , op. cit., pp. 55–9.Google Scholar Despite the fact that the CTE is basically a union representing wage labour, it still proposes to look after the interests of the small master. See Saad, , op. cit., pp. 52 and 64.Google Scholar

52 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 72;Google ScholarHurtado, , 1977, op. cit., pp. 238–9.Google Scholar

53 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 73.Google Scholar the Confederación Ecuatoriana de Organisaciones Sindicales Libres (CEOSL – The Ecuadorean Confederation of Free Syndical Organisations) was set up under the auspices of AFL–CIO, AID, the Labour Attaché of the American Embassy and the CIA. It also had associations with the neo-fascist party, ARNE (Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 79;Google ScholarHurtado, , 1977, op. cit., p. 239). It mainly organised the urban workers in commerce and services, but it too has followed the path of radicalisation of CEDOC. Both were promoted by the CIA as alternatives to the Marxist CTE in the early sixties, but the long-term effect of strengthening these organisations and widening their bases was to clear the way for a more radical takeover in the interest of wage labour and in direct opposition to capital. In 1972, CEDOC changed its name to the Confederación Ecuatoriana de Organisaciones Clasistas (retaining CEDOC) and in 1976–77 splits appeared in both unions, breaking up the unity of the three Centrales. In 1971, all three unions marched together on May Day for the first time; in 1975, 30,000 marched on the streets of Quito in the same procession and the three Centrales organised a successful one-day national strike. Since the splits appeared, the majority fractions of both unions have maintained an uneasy alliance with the CTE. The minority group of CEDOC is financed by the German Christian Democrats and the breakaway faction of CEOSL maintains its close links with the American Embassy. They were both encouraged and assisted by the right-wing military Government which took over power in 1976.Google Scholar

54 El Comercio, 11. 5, 1973.Google Scholar

55 This board is made up as follows: 1. A Senator or Representative, elected at a meeting of the full Congress. 2. A representative of the Executive Branch, appointed by the President of the Republic. 3. The President of the National Welfare Institute or his delegate. 4. Four elected delegates of the guilds or labour unions, elected by artisans.

56 The provincial confederations are formed by the representatives of each branch of activity at the provincial level. The National Federations, under the jurisdiction of the Defence Board, are The National Federation of Master Tailors, The National Federation of Master Mechanics, The National Federation of Hairdressers, The Ecuadorean Federation of Shoemakers, The Ecuadorean Federation of Jewellers and Watchmakers, and the Association of Wood Artisans. El Comercio, 02. 11, 1973.Google Scholar

57 The application of this Law is regulated by a Committee comprised of four voting members and three non-voting members. One of the non-voting members is a representative of the Federation of Chambers of Artisans of Ecuador, the responsibility for whose organisation lay with this committee. Initially, this committee was the Committee for the Promotion of Artisans and Small Industry, but in the decree which increased the benefits available to small industry, this was replaced by the Interministerial Committee for the Promotion of Small Industries and Artisans (Interministerial Committee). This was carried into the reformulated Development Law and is constituted as follows: Voting Members: Minister of Industry or his delegate. Minister of Finances or his delegate. Technical Director of the JNP or his delegate. Manager of the BNF or his delegate. Non-voting Members: Director of CENDES or his delegate. Representative of the National Federation of Small Industrialists. Representative of the Federation of Chambers of Artisans of Ecuador.

58 Development Law, Article 13.

59 Ibid., Article 14.

60 Ibid., Article 15.

61 Ibid., Article 16.

62 The Chamber of Artisans of Pichincha, formed in December 1976, claims to include the following guilds: Beauty and hairdressing, marble and stone, construction, leather goods, common metals, textiles, printing, fine metals and óvarious’ – El Comercio, 12. 30, 1972. The Chambers claim to have ten guilds within their organisational structure, but the truth is that the artisans are grouped according to the United Nations classification of economic activity and are not organised as guilds in the usual sense of the word.Google Scholar

63 El Cornercio, 07 1, 1972;Google ScholarEl Comercio, 01 21, 1972.Google Scholar

64 In El Comercio of 12 30, 1971, the National Confederation of Artisans stressed this point in a statement to the newspaper.Google Scholar

65 Hurtado, and Herudek, , op. cit., p. 86. These figures can only be taken as a very rough estimate. The organisations were categorised as artisan, white collar, or manual wage labour by Hurtado and Herudek, but they recognise that there is some overlap within some organisations. The figures do not represent a cumulative number of artisans' organisations actually in existence. They come from research carried out by INEFOS, using the registration list of workers' organisations in the Ministry of Labour. This team tried to find out whether the organisations were still in existence, but they basically used a juridical definition of this. That is, if they existed in law it was assumed that they existed in fact. They also tried to determine real existence and discarded some organisations found not to be in existence. They retained all of those which could not be discarded with absolute certainty. This operation has had the effect of under-reporting the number of organisations registered over the years and over-estimating the present number. Nonetheless, they are the only figures currently available.Google Scholar

66 Middleton, A., ‘Poverty, Production and Power: The Case of Petty Manufacturing in Ecuador’, University of Sussex, D.Phil. Thesis, Table A–IV–3, p.1. i.Google Scholar

67 Ibid., p. 300.

68 A survey of 273 petty manufacturers and traders was carried out in three areas of Quito in November–December, 1975. The areas were chosen after consultation with members of the National Planning Board who knew the City and were interested in the problem of petty enterprise development, and the firms were selected by a stratified random sampling technique after all the petty firms in the area had been mapped out. The interviews were initially carried out by 5th year sociology students of the Central University, but these were checked, corrected and completed by myself and three trusted assistants. From 4,181 establishments, 300 were selected for interview and the final sample consisted of 192 petty manufacturers and 81 traders. The following information relates to one small aspect of the survey. For a fuller description of the methodology, see Middleton, , op. cit., Appendix I.Google Scholar

69 El Comercio, 11 5, 1972.Google Scholar

70 Ibid., July 26, 1972.

71 Ibid., Nov 5, 1972.

72 Ibid., Dec 5, 1972.

73 Ibid., Jan 29, 1972.

74 El Tiempo, Feb. 4, 1976.Google Scholar

75 El Cornercio, 02 2, 1973.Google Scholar

76 Although the Law stated that the members of the National and Regional Boards should serve without reward (Article 2), the new organisation pointed out that the cost of a title could be anything between 1,500 and 10,000 sucres, because of the charges made by the Boards.

77 The same people had remained on the Boards for more than the two years stipulated by the Law.

78 All of these were mentioned in the National Development Plan.

79 El Comercio, 02 4, 1973.Google Scholar

80 Ibid., Feb. 11, 1973.

81 Ibid., Feb. 16, 1973.

82 Ibid.,

83 Decree No. 1231, Nov. 7th, 1973, p. 5.

84 Ibid., Article 2.

85 Middleton, , op. cit., p. 240.Google Scholar

86 El Comcrcio, 01 7, 1972.Google Scholar

87 Ibid., Dec 30, 1971.

88 Ibid., Jan. 7, 1972.

89 Middleton, , 1979, op. cit, p. 162.Google Scholar

90 El Telégrafo, 03 9, 1975.Google Scholar

91 El Comercio, 08 25, 1976.Google Scholar

92 The new organisation responded by protesting to the Ministry of Labour that the Guayas Defence Board was holding back titles by saying that applications had not been received from non-titled artisans when they had. They also argued that, although they had been practising their trades over many years, they would be obliged to attend courses which would involve the payment of up to 3,000 sucres to the Defence Board for a tide. El Universo, 09 12, 1976.Google Scholar