Whatever Happened to Trade Unionism? The Role and Limits of Labour Unions in Contemporary Copper Governance in Chile

Abstract

Where does labour fit in the contemporary copper governance in post-authoritarian Chile? To answer this requires a broad view of the nature of the Chilean state, institutions, and policies as well as an analysis of the responses of labour movement towards neoliberalism. This paper offers an empirical discussion of the evolution of neoliberal reforms (and some contradictions generated) and links this to the effects of the model towards union mobilisation. First, mining policy demonstrates a mixture of both productivist and regulatory agendas, which means that the form and substance of copper governance does not fit in the idealised neoliberal model. Second, labour unions in copper mining have faced precarious working conditions and less conducive atmosphere for mobilisation. Based on the fieldwork done in Chile, I argue that mining unions remain important actors in contesting neoliberalism but that serious limitations persist in allowing the unions to perform this role. The institutional constraints, embeddedness of neoliberalism in state-labour relations, and lack of strong cross-labour political identity make mining unions less effective agents of social change. To demonstrate the second part of the argument, the paper explores the tensions that Chilean mining unions face when they perform two functions. First, they maintain their traditional role as guarantors of social welfare of the working classes. Second, they deliver political critiques to what they characterise as neoliberalised copper mining. With a state that has employed neoliberal strategies in most instances, labour mobilisation is weak in strength and its role to reconstitute the model seems limited.