Social Democrats in BC Announce Hiring Freeze for Public Sector

In December, the leader of the governing British Columbia New Democratic Party, the honourable David Eby, assured the B.C. Chamber of Commerce that “there is currently a hiring freeze among the public sector.”

The announcement of the hiring freeze coincides with sectoral bargaining this year between the provincial government and the BC General Employees’ Union (BCGEU) representing over 95,000 workers in the public sector. 

Paul Finch, president of the BCGEU, said that the union was not told about the freeze ahead of time. Finch said the government should be hiring more public sector workers as the ratio of non-union managers to front-line workers has reached one to three after being one to four 15 years ago. This change in the worker to manager ratio shows us not that there are more managers, but rather that there are fewer frontline employees.

It is clear that the social democrats in B.C. are preparing for austerity as their answer to uncertainty among the monopolies over tariff threats from the south. Only months after being pushed into an election victory by the labour movement, the ‘orange order’ is turning its back on workers. This hiring freeze is an attack on both those employed in the public sector and on all young workers who use the social services the public sector provides. Social democracy once again betrays the class that props it up to demonstrate to the monopolies that they are capable of ‘fiscal responsibility.’

There is no magic button that can be pushed with social democracy. A metaphysician or an idealist would say: if only the NDP elects a left leader or adopts a certain set of policies, it will do things differently. Of course, the objective conditions can make the base of reform parties more militant, and this can be reflected in their leaders or policies. However, we know that social democracy ultimately plays a role in class society to dampen or divert the working-class movement. 

We know the only time that the social democrats have played a progressive role is when they have been pushed by a strong and independent communist party. The so-called ‘Nordic model’ was only possible because workers in those countries were compelled to struggle by the example of the neighbouring USSR. Similarly, Italy in the 20th century had right-wing governments that were forced to introduce social programs because of the strength of the working-class movement and of the historic Communist Party of Italy.  

In different organisations and struggles, especially in the labour movement where we will encounter many social democrats, we need to know how to build unity in action and avoid the sectarianism we see so often from the immature ultra-leftists. Recognizing this, we still need to combat both opportunism and adventurism. We as the youth must always be on the lookout for reformist or movementist elements that can try to poison the historic mission of our class. 

As Tim Buck said about Lenin, “he was unequivocally opposed to any element of sectarianism, but he fought without quarter for the party; to keep the party united and protect it from penetration by bourgeois ideology or non-Marxist organizational ideas.”

As the YCL-LJC stated in its last political report, we must “agitate among the young workers and students for a public monopoly on social services, with universal, not tiered or qualified, access. We call for public monopolies on all social services to create new full-time quality jobs for young workers, push for democratic control over state expenditures and to raise the social wage: education, healthcare, childcare, transportation, culture, recreation, and more.” We young communists issue the battle cry: not only defence against privatizations, now is the time for socialization! This is our answer to the ruling class demands for austerity measures.