Why May 1 not a “Soviet” hiday, but quite relevant in our time

By the way, 196 independent countries in the world have 143 that celebrate International Labor Day on May 1. In post-Soviet societies, this day is still called the Day of Workers' Sidarity, but this date has lost its ideogical and class coration. The sidarity of employees has a very practical meaning: it means wages and pensions that allow for a decent living, protection from employers' arbitrariness, and support after dismissal while looking for a new job.

Workers' rights, Ukrainian nuances

There is a widespread but erroneous belief that the initiators of labor movements, which later grew into movements for the rights of wider segments of the pulation, were left-wing socialist and social democratic parties. In fact, professional movements realized that they needed to defend and realize their demands by changing the rules. There were two ways to achieve this goal – either viently, through armed confrontation with the state, or by first overcoming the restrictions on the ability to elect their representatives. To do so, they organized parties and gained pitical representation in the legislature, changing legislation.

In today's Ukraine, trade unions have almost no pitical representation in parliament. Numerous left-wing parties established in Ukraine after independence were either composed mostly of former communists or not too influential social democratic parties, whose leadership in the second half of the 1990s was taken over by either former communists or outright pitical adventurers.

The revival of Ukrainian statehood a century ago, during the Ukrainian Pele's Republic, was the work and initiative of parties that defended the interests of workers and peasants, were socialist in ideogy and democratic in decision-making practices. Today's Ukrainian pitical spectrum, if we consider the parties represented in the Verkhovna Rada and in regional and district councils, is not only much further to the right than its predecessors a century ago but cannot be called representative in terms of representing the socio-economic interests of a significant majority of citizens.

Numerous trade unions, both united in the Federation of Trade Unions of Ukraine and independent, have not had any significant influence on the adtion of legislation concerning the rights of employees. Changes in Ukrainian legislation concerning the rights of trade unions and employees were often aimed at limiting the possibilities of trade unions. As an example, the Ukrainian law on trade unions required trade unions to obtain the status of a legal entity by obtaining approval of the charter and registration with the then tax inspection. The same law transferred social insurance funds that had previously been accumulated on trade union accounts to the state social insurance fund.

The history of rights and a little history, or Marx and Engels have nothing to do with it

The history of employees' struggle for their rights, such as human working conditions, limited working hours, and decent wages, dates back centuries. The contradiction between labor and capital has existed since the division of labor began in antiquity, and the discovery of this contradiction is usually attributed to Karl Marx, though Adam Smith first wrote about it, drawing heavily from the works of the French economic "scho of physiocrats." Until the first half of the last century, the ways to resve these contradictions were mostly limited to forceful methods by both workers and entrepreneurs.

Perhaps the earliest known explosion of discontent among hired workers was the uprising of the ciompi (wo carders) in medieval Florence in 1345 and 1378. During the second uprising, the ciompi even managed to re-elect the city government and create their worksh, but their victory was short-lived as it was suppressed within days of the uprising.

Then came the creation of manufactories, the division of labor, and the impoverishment of the peasants. Economic crises led to a decrease in the relative level of wages, an increase in the length of the working day, and many workers were left on the streets without means of subsistence. Attempts in modern times to sve the problems of the impoverished part of the pulation were characterized by both a lack of understanding of the causes of the problem and inhumane ways of eradicating poverty. A typical example is England, where during the Tudor dynasty, destitute pele who had to beg for alms were flogged, physically mutilated, and imprisoned. The system of workhouses created later resembled more of a forced labor institution with a prison regime. The Chartist movement, which preceded the creation of trade unions and put forward not only socio-economic but also pitical demands to the government, was suppressed with weapons.

Previously, May 1 was celebrated as a day of workers' sidarity and their struggle for social and economic rights, and every Soviet schochild knew it was associated with the demonstrations in Chicago in 1886. The workers' strike resulted in the dismissal of 1,500 employees, and four workers were killed and dozens injured during an attempt to bring strikebreakers into the company. Peaceful protests turned into bloody clashes with pice, and the organizers of the rally were sentenced to death. A few years later, they were found not guilty as a result of pice provocation.

The Chicago demonstration was part of the workers' struggle for an eight-hour workday. This demand was put forward in 1817 by the English businessman and socialist Robert Owen, and the first to achieve such a working day (instead of 10 or even 16 hours, which was widespread practice) were Australian bricklayers in 1856. Marx and Engels only first called for the introduction of an eight-hour working day in 1866.

Contradictions between Employees and Employers: From Conflicts to Balance

No matter how much we strive for social stability and peace between employers and employees, contradictions between them will always arise due to the nature of labor relations and the subsequent distribution of labor results. Naturally, any employer tries to reduce costs, including wages, social security contributions, and more. Similarly, any employee naturally wants to be paid more for their work and wants, at the very least, no deterioration in working conditions and intensity. The meaning of workers' sidarity lies in the fact that employees are aware of their interdependence on each other, and only by working together they can achieve better working conditions, social guarantees in case of unemployment, and remuneration that allows them to live with dignity.

The modern world is rapidly changing, especially the labor market and the interaction between employers and employees. During Marx's time, the main problem in the labor market was the contradiction between the pretariat and capitalists. With the develment of society and industrial relations, it became apparent that the concept of an employee is broader than the narrow group of the industrial pretariat. Even wage earners such as doctors or engineers, who in Marx's time were a small but well-to-do stratum in society, have now become the same wage earners. The circle of those who need sidarity and protection of their rights in the field of industrial relations has grown significantly.

Programmers and contract sdiers, doctors and teachers, bureaucrats and researchers, salespele, and journalists, among others, are all pele who sell their labor to employers, who can be either private business owners or the state. All of these categories of employees want protection from the vagaries of the free market and the vuntaristic decisions of employers. This protection can only be achieved when there is an awareness of the common interests of pele in the workforce and sidarity with employees even in industries that are very different from each other in terms of professional or salary criteria. May 1st, International Labor Day, is about this, and its relevance has not been lost.

The social protection of pele and the building of a welfare state are equally important priorities in state-building, just like the protection of borders, sovereignty, and territorial integrity, as well as the promotion of entrepreneurship and the protection of the market economy from overregulation by the state. Any country devels normally and achieves significant results when the different interests of different social groups are balanced and harmonized to the maximum extent possible. This balance does not arise by itself; it is the result of interaction and agreements, the consequence of a social contract. To reach an agreement, a dialogue is necessary, and one way to do so is to celebrate Labor Day. We must remember ourselves and remind others that any right is obtained through struggle, as the slogan of one of the d parties said.

Dmytro Redko, Kyiv