ВЫТОКІ ВЫТВОРЧЫХ КАНФЛІКТАЎ НА ПРАМЫСЛОВЫХ ПРАДПРЫЕМСТВАХ ПАСЛЯСТАЛІНСКАГА ЧАСУ І СПОСАБЫ ІХ УРЭГУЛЯВАННЯ (ПА МАТЭРЫЯЛАХ БССР)

Abstract

The article discusses contradictions and conflicts at work on the industrial enterprises of the BSSR, including strikes, in the second half of the 1950s and in 1960s. The main reasons for the conflict were the facts of corruption, lower salaries, changes in working conditions, and the inefficient enterprise and management system. There were a lot of facts of abuse by the authorities of their service ranks by distribution of bonuses, financial aids, passports to sanatoria, apartments and so on. Although these questions were under control of party’s and trade union’s committees, the effectiveness of their work was low. The bureaucratic system of supervision and management has shown its inconsistency of practical implementation of promised social justice standards. In the face of weakening repressive legislation workers increasingly decided for various forms of protest and even for escalation of conflicts. An analysis of archival materials revealed 62 facts of refusal to work at industrial enterprises of the BSSR only during the period from 1956 till 1965. Struggle of workers for their rights including strikes of workers created no danger for the political regime, but became a factor which increased the attentiveness of party’s and economic authorities to the situation in industry. Administrative and organizational attempts to stop the rot in giving bonuses to the heads, engineers, technical personal as well as office workers were done. Party’s and economic governing bodies tried to avoid publicity in considering of conflict situations. Under the dominance of the command and administrative system, the management bodies were not ready for partnership relations with employees. They perceived conflicts in a socialist society as an accidents and used tactics of organizational and psychological pressure in conflict situations and demanded unilateral concessions from workers. In essence, this tactic was selfdeception and, in a strategic plan, did not lead to conflicts’ resolutions.