There are real reasons for concern. Differently from the heavy pension reform that caused society to be surprised by PT's sudden change of positions, in the case of the unionist structure PT has always defended deep modifications, such as putting an end to the unity , to the compulsory contributions and to the ruing power of Labor Justice.

Soon after the electoral victory, João Felício, president of the Unique Central of Workers (CUT), has even foreseen that the current structure would have short life in Lula's government. "The labor union movement has to be detonated, imploded. It doesn't matter if this may create a certain anarchy at first, but I believe it will be a positive anarchy", he said in a seminar attended by the of São Paulo Industries Federation businessmen.

The unfortunate statement has provoked a strong resistance among unionists - within and out of CUT - which has made President Lula himself take over the task to put out the fire. Aware of the weight (to his ballot success) of being supported by a large union basis, Lula announced during a meeting with 650 leaderships that he would not impose unionism any prejudicial measure. "My only conviction is that you won't be caught by surprise ", he guaranteed. At the same meeting, last November, he formalized his proposal to create the National Labor Forum, a tripartite instance which will "spend many hours of debate" to find mechanisms to labor valorization and the strengthening of union trades.

Attack fronts
However, after dust downs, disturbing signs are rising on various fronts. A document issued by the Ministry of Labor on March 16, entitled "Diagnosis on union and labor reform" preaches again "the necessity of overcoming nowadays' model of union trade organization - which has been being criticized for years due to its authoritarian and corporative origin, to its low representative nature and also for being little permeable to social control". He lists new government priorities; "to foster the constitution of free and autonomous union - entities"; "to grant more effectiveness to labor legislation"; and "to stimulate the self-composition of conflicts and their settlement by means of new mechanisms for conciliation, mediation and arbitration.

In the sequence, on March 18, in the first meeting of the committee on labor and union labor reform held by CNDES, the tendency to "implode" the existing union structure was confirmed. According to the report released by Diap (Inter-union Department for Parliamentarian Advisory), two work groups have approved the labor union autonomy model agreed by ILO (International Labor Organization) an only one group voted for keeping unique. There was also disagreement regarding the union trade financial support, and the majority defended the end of union trade contributions. The only positive consensus was favorable to the acknowledgement of the labor union centrals juridical personality.

But the most destructive petard against the current structure was by thrown two PT Deputies in key-positions at the Special Committee on Labor Reform in the Chamber of Deputies. The Proposal of Amendment to the Constitution - PEC number 29, whose authors are Vicente Paulo da Silva, aka 'Vicentinho', a former president of CUT, and Maurício Rands, a labor lawyer from Pernambuco, has the merit to express very clearly the liberal vision of unionism of today's hegemonic political segment within this central, at PT and in Palácio do Planalto. Coming straight to the point, the PEC defends the end of unite as well as the end of the concept of category, the gradual extinction of union trade contribution and the collection of compulsory contributions paid only by union trade registered workers.

On the PEC statement of reason, its wide-open shown the labor union model dreamed by that hegemonic stream. To its authors the criterion of representation by professional or economic categories would be authoritarian since it prevents the establishment of the "political union trade, linked to an ideology". If this criterion is kept "it is not possible founding a union trade for company either, for the minimum area is a county. Neither it is possible the creation of more than one union trade for category", say the Deputies in straight-forward criticism. Following the liberalizing rules of ILO's Convention 87, they argue in defense of plural unionism: "In a labor union system, there can be many union trades to represent workers".

Unionism pulverization
To a reader less familiar with the issue, this discourse may even seem an appeal for democracy, the search for the ancient oasis of union trade autonomy and freedom. But in fact it contains serious risks for the workers' organization. Not for least though for other reasons the same discourse is made by renowned ideologists of capitalism. Sociologist Leôncio Martins Rodrigues, one of the mentors of the unionism elite, does not cease to repeat that the country "must put an end to union trade contribution and to the monopoly of representation unity. Both measures would make a storm over the union trade movement.

Fernando Henrique Cardoso's government has tried to achieve this goal several times. FHC's last shot, the PEC 623, only failed due to the unitary unionism contraposition. At that time, even PT's bloc technical advisory board was astonished. "The PEC removes from the Constitution text any limit to plurality. If it is adopted, more union trades would be founded at first, and then there would occur predictable 'bankruptcy' of big part of the Brazilian union trades", he warned at end of last year. Maybe that would be the case of deputies Vicentinho and Rands, both in their first legislature, consult again that wise advisory.

In practical terms, PEC 29 - which counts on CNDES' and Ministry of Labor' support - follows the same path towards that 'bankruptcy'. In case there will be no reaction from CNDES, at the National Labor Forum, in Parliament and in the unionism as a whole, that will really cause a radical change in the labor union structure... to worse! The medicine to cure the distortions and vices in unionism will end up causing contrary effects, as if it were poison. That explains the enthusiastic compliments on the PT's parliamentarians proposal made by influent business leaders and bourgeois media.

A close analysis on the PEC, divided into parts, enlightens this apparent nonsense. In the case of the end of unity, which would extinguish the current constitutional rule that establishes a county as the minimum basis to found a union trade, it would result a total fragmentation of workers' organization. Since we still live in a capitalist society, marked by conflicts among classes, not only the workers would have the right to organize new entities. Businessmen would also take advantage of this legal gap to set up hundreds of fragile and tamed union trades, fostering the division of the exploited people.

In Japan, where OIT's Convention 87 has been in force since the 50's , the patronage has assembled various entities for companies, called 'union trade home'. Nowadays there are more than 78,000 'labor union organizations' in that small country; in most part of the great corporations, there are at least two organizations disputing a position ... for the joy of the capital!! Besides allowing this kind of pulverization, the PEC also admits the creation of entities guided by political and ideological orientation. Thus, Brazil would live the tragic experience of Europe's partisan union trade - exactly when those countries struggle for labor union reunification. Furthermore, the many religious sects would be free to set up their confessional entities.

Devastated land
Considering the elimination of the concept of economic and professional category, it effects are even more destroyer. At first, this change would make possible setting up various entities in the same company, assembling the different occupations. But, what is worst, that would provoke a brutal distinction among the workers themselves. By this proposal, union trades would represent only their associates and no longer the categories. This way, the agreements and collective wages increase would not benefit the whole basis. As Antônio Augusto de Queiroz, Diap's technical director warns, this "will mean the end of collective convention, because if the company is not affiliated to the owner's association, then its workers will not be benefited by the convention's clauses, even if they are affiliated to the workers' union trade.

Last, regarding the financing system support of unionism, the risks are also huge. The problem is not the gradual extinction of union trade contribution, the former union trade tax. Studies indicate this item doesn't burden too much most union trade's finances. Due to its evident distortions, progressive sectors of society have long defended its gradual extinction. The graveness about the PEC is establishing the contribution only by the associates while revoking the concept of category. This measure will reduce drastically the union trades incomes, overburdening even more the worst financial crisis ever faced by unionism - arising out of unemployment boom and wage shrinkage.

As it may be observed, deputies Vicentinho's and Rands' PEC, with the sympathy of Minister Jacques Wagner and the CNDES, will have devastating effects on unionism. In despite of the alleged good intentions - which hell is full of - this "autonomy and freedom" proposal will weaken even more the already staggered Brazilian unionism.
The PEC is so inconsequent that doesn't even include transition rules that protect the existing entities ant their associates' rights. In this case, it is worthy mentioning some of the inciting questions made by Edésio Passos, lawyer and former PT's federal deputy :

"If the constitutional amendment is approved, the entities registered by the Ministry of Labor cease to be representatives of the economic or professional category and become only their associates' representatives, regardless of their statutes dispositions? Will these entities still be granted the right to collect compulsory union trade contribution within the four years following the amendment promulgation? Will the rules in agreements and labor collective conventions that sanction rights and benefits to professional categories keep prevailing?