You will certainly be elected Secretary-General on 5 April. I am convinced that you are the only candidate. Why aren't there ALS primaries to choose leaders?

ELA is characterized by working internal cohesion with the union project. It's deeply rooted, it's part of our political culture, and for that to be possible, it forces us to share, to compare and, ultimately, to strengthen and value collective work beyond each other's footprint. Perhaps primary education processes can be sold more easily, but it is true that what is behind it is often not a strategic debate, but a debate based on personal interests. The incorporation of this dynamic to many primaries ends up destroying the organizations that promote these processes. When an organization talks more about internal problems than about its project… Bad thing.

You are the first secretary general in Navarre. Is there a political reason behind that?

No, absolutely. There is no territorial quota and nothing like that. ELA is a union that is established throughout the Basque Country, and there are thousands of Navarros in this project and in the management teams. I think the question shows that Navarre is still a peripheral reality in our country, and not just a geographical one. This reality of the Basque trade union is precisely a fact that is to be contested or denied, which has wanted to do what we have called the regime in Navarre for years.

You will go from coordinating the union in Navarre to coordinating that of the whole of the Basque Country. Does that jump make you dizzy?

I don't think that vertigo is the most appropriate word to define how I deal with a challenge of that size. It is an intermediate feeling between greater responsibility, invention and the sensations of being part of a well-supported project and with very solid and contrasted bases.

Txiki will be replaced in office, and they have worked together. What would you point out to him?

A lot of things. First of all, it has a great tensile capacity. He is a person who develops his work with enthusiasm and determination when he embarks on a subject or an issue. I would also highlight their ability to work. It is very constant, systematic and rigorous, reaching the smallest details in all the reflections. I've learned important things from him. He is not a friend of the easy roads, but of the most consequential. He has been in contact with the union for his whole life, and he has been in close contact with him. Logically, he has been in a job that has been shared a lot in a group, but he has certainly been a key person in dealing with the toughest years of the crisis.

Do you worry that the feminist wave that has swept through the world does not understand that the Secretary-General is once again a man?

To begin with, I believe that this level of mobilization and awareness that the feminist movement is reaching is one of the best possible news in a world where authoritarianism, machismo and lack of democracy are advancing. Secondly, the fight for equality and against gender discrimination, as the union has been calling for in recent years, is a fundamental, absolutely strategic issue. This wager is collective and should be made by all women and men of ALS. A clear example of this is the mobilizations and strikes that ELA is pushing in the feminized sectors. The imaginary and leading role of trade union struggles is changing. It is an unstoppable process, as women are the ones who suffer most from precariousness.

It should also be stressed that the new women are continuously coming closer to the trade unions, to the management positions and to the National Council. In the latter case, women are more than men. In addition, there are also women with important responsibilities in the sindicato.Dije in the National Committee when I was proposed to be a secretary-general: “I’m not a woman, I can’t help you. But I try to be a feminist, that’s right, it’s in my hands.” Given all that the organisation is doing and the commitment it has made, I think it would be a simplification to reduce the debate to the gender of a person. This would not coincide at all with the firm commitment that ELA is making for equality and transformation into a feminist union. This commitment implies a change in the organization of the trade union and in our entire trade union culture.

The feminist wave is also aimed at demanding trade unionism. At ELA we are clear that transformative syndicalism must necessarily be a feminist and we are working. We're a feminist union under construction. One of the main concerns and challenges we have as a union is to think about how we can get our organization to value women’s demands more and better. Our green has to be more purple every day.

How will you combine your personal and work life? The Confederation is in Bilbao, you live in Pamplona…

The historical conception of Bilbao as the centre of decision does not correspond to the current reality: currently, the activity is more decentralized. However, I know that it will not be easy; it is a question of finding a balance between Pamplona, Bilbao and the rest of the country, so as not to fall into contradictions from day one. The work of militancy and care, proper and of our environment, is an increasingly present topic of debate in the organization.

What is ELA’s main trade union challenge today?

We have put the fight against precariousness at the centre of our trade union activity. This job and social precariousness is the result of an economic and political strategy of impoverishment of the majority of the population. When we talk about putting life at the centre of policies to certain interests (banking, employers, large companies, etc.) we are sending a message of coping that involves intervention, mobilisation and organisation.

Those who defend these interests repeat that we have emerged from the crisis, as if everything that has happened since 2009 was a nightmare. The effects of the crisis are long-lasting and, unfortunately, very obvious. They show that wealth is even worse distributed and that labor reforms are made that maintain public policies that do not question inequality and that give companies more power. It is now easier for a person to lose his or her job than before the crisis, to have a worse salary or to be in more precarious conditions. These low wages are characteristic of precariousness. Another feature is the great job instability that we're experiencing, not knowing if you're going to work next week. The third characteristic is everything related to insecurity and occupational health, related to toxic and painful work.

Precariousness does not only affect the private sector.

That's it. Public administrations are at the forefront of precariousness in this country. In Osakidetza or in Osasunbidea there are staff with up to 200 contracts a year. It's amazing. ELA has launched a campaign in the CAV and Navarra to denounce this situation of the public sector and socialise the proposals we have to reduce precariousness to 6%. Our administrations have a direct responsibility. It is no good to say that Madrid does not leave us, because it is not true.

Labor reforms of PSOE and PP directly attacked the flotation line of the collective bargaining model of ALS. What diagnosis do you make today of collective bargaining?

The reforms are the result of governments taking on the demands of employers. The scheme is very simple: they try to implement as many measures as possible in a state of “shock” that remains in any crisis, to increase the lack of protection of the working class and increase its benefits. In order to facilitate this, trade unions are also attacked. In part, the reforms that have been made have been made to close us as many doors as possible. They shut us down and hamper the possibilities that were previously possible through agreements that guaranteed minimum standards. In the past, companies were obliged to comply with these conventions and did not disappear when they lost their strength. To this must be added the impact that the reforms have had in order to prevent our sectoral agreement being negotiated here.

Thanks to the abstention of the PNV, a reform was approved that allows UGT, CCOO and CEOE to assume in Madrid the conventions and contents we negotiated here so far. It is a very serious fact that shows people who do this, but above all it leads to a worsening of working conditions. In the face of such an aggression, the work of ELA must be valued so as not to despair at every door that has closed us. Almost instinctively, we have sought alternatives, opening gaps that have allowed us to continue to defend the right to collective bargaining. We have succeeded in arming many conventions against reform, even unlocking the sectoral conventions that have been pending for many years, although we must bear in mind that half of the workers in our country do not have a renewed agreement. This remains one of the main challenges of our union in terms of collective bargaining.

Because it gives it everything or almost everything that political power demands with an employer who doesn't need to negotiate ... What is left of the union?

First, to turn away despair and to depart from honesty. It is not an easy situation, but we are not here to participate in fictions, nor to feed solutions that do not go through the involvement of the people. The trade union is an instrument that has value insofar as it is used by workers. That is why we underline the importance of organising so many workers from each workplace. After all, it is to raise awareness, to get involved and to join together to be stronger and to increase the chances of a better agreement.

Throughout this journey, sometimes the strike is not an option, sometimes it is our only option. It's bad news to know that last year strikes started at 80 percent. We defend the strike without complexes, because it brings great benefits to the working class. It is not only the improvement of working conditions, it is also a matter of unity, recognition, learning and awareness, among others. The strike is hard, it is not a path of roses, but the emotion it generates does not have the same for the trade unionists. It is essential for the working class that is constantly defending its identity. Strikes help to build a better, more democratic and more supportive society.

We are in the middle of the electoral campaign, both in the CAV and in Navarre. What would you highlight about the public policies of this four-year period?

Unfortunately, I believe that the governments of Iñigo Urkullu and Uxue Barkos have based themselves on similar economic and social policies. This makes the union critical of both governments. Having said that, we must underline a characteristic feature of the Urkullu government, which has refused to meet with ELA. Whether you like it or not, this is the majority union in the CAV. The possibility of concluding partial agreements or dealing with issues on the basis of their content is suddenly closed. This decision very well describes its conception of power and politics. I think pride and democratic capacity are all the more important. It is unacceptable that the relationship with ALS should be conditional on it no longer being critical. It is as serious as calling for us to give up our autonomy.

Some informants claim that the only political opposition of the PNV is that of ALS.

We are a union. No more and no less. And let us not get into the fight between the political parties. It is clear that the Urkullu Government does not accept the criticism, among many other reasons, because it certainly does not have any real political opposition. Or, at least, that is the perception of the union: this government approved not so much the PP budgets in Madrid, governs with the PSE in Lakua and is able to confuse EH Bildu in the process of budgetary negotiation and sign an agreement on a new status that claimed to be "Historical"... Simply, I think the PNV is wrong, and that gives more visibility to ALS. This government’s policy has a negative impact on the lives of many of us who defend it and, of course, ELA is not paralysed in the face of this situation. Many conflicts and strikes are open (housing, cleaning, home help, school canteens, education...), establishing minimum services and dealing with public subcontracting processes the competence of the Foreign Ministers of the CAV Government and the PNV, among others. The rejection of the reform of the unfair tax system or the debate on the impact of the IRT on the IGR and housing benefits is far from the union’s conception of what a public policy should be.

Has the government of change in Navarre really meant a change?

When four years ago the Navarre coalition (Geroa Bai, EH Bildu, Podemos and Left-Ezkerra) published its government program, ELA had the courage to make a critical reading and we noticed that the program left behind the key points for change. In a totally polarized situation, we have put the union before a challenge related to autonomy. In the last forty years, our union, like many people and institutions, has suffered the policies of a regime governed by UPN, PP and PSN. They have been policies against the Basques and society, with cuts, superfluous spending and unfortunate management of public money. From the outset, however, we stress that change is about to be done: it is not enough to change government, it is also necessary to change policies.

I know that the reading we have made of some issues does not fit in with the coalition’s view, but we cannot turn a blind eye when tax policy has hardly changed, the spending rule has not been challenged, the investment of public services has not increased or the APR project has continued. It is unacceptable that the Government has not authorised the collection of signatures in relation to guaranteed income and the popular legislative initiative on housing. In Navarre there are people who want to make an idea: according to them, those who criticize the government promote the right. It is clear that this is not true, especially because the sense of the origin interpellation has to be differentiated, and ALS wants things to change. Therefore, the contribution cannot be based on silence or consensus, but on honesty and demand.

Having said that, other things have changed, and the union has applauded and supported some measures. First of all, this Government has set aside the distinction between good and bad Navarros, established by the regime’s parties. Instead, the institutional reality has tried to take into account the diversity of Navarre; steps have been taken towards the Basque country, important decisions have been taken in the recognition of all victims, in the historical memory, in the fight against gender violence... The debate with the Government and the coalition parties concerns the depth and scope of change and not continuity.

Are these social and labor changes possible with the current left?

We do not see a strong Left, with clear ideas, with a programme that intends to deal with a Right that has grown a lot. It's hard to understand the current left, because it doesn't run the program without complexes. Not having carried the agenda on the left is a tragedy for the working class, because we do not have speakers for our demands in the institutions. We do not understand this, because we believe that the renunciation of left-wing policies has had clear consequences for European social democracy, and today it is of no importance. When a political space is left empty, sooner or later someone will occupy that space. Beyond rhetoric, important and worrying issues for citizenship (employment, precariousness, housing, social affairs) are not part of the priority political action of the political and institutional left. It seems to us a serious mistake to base this problem on the fighting that the parties have begun to take over the political centre.

As some of the claims are paralyzing, the left ends up playing in the field on the right. That is what we have seen recently in the negotiation of the CAV budgets. For ALS, the role of EH Bildu or Podemos in the partial approval of the budget is incomprehensible, as it provides Urkullu with the oxygen from this logic of “lesser evil”. The disillusion of the people or the ideological triumph of neoliberalism are a consequence of this lack of decision by the left, which has not been able to defend references that are not hegemonic. The left should speak uncomplicated about certain issues and, at the same time, put clear alternatives and pedagogy on the table, to play in the field chosen by the left and not when the right is branded.

So, are there alternatives to the current status quo?

There are alternatives, of course: What does ALS do? What have pensioners done? What has the feminist movement done? We are fighting. We're putting those who are our rivals and our goals, and we're mobilizing people and going out into the street. It is not possible to be kind, give up the competition or follow the current that protects the “good environment” when you are on the ground and you get your neck. There is a political line (even from the left) that constantly talks about the occupation of unwaged spaces: that is impossible. Conflict is part of society, because there are conflicting interests. The key to the question is whether or not you choose to fight. If the answer is no, the only option is to join the ideas on the right.

Is the union's decision not to participate in the Social Dialogue Bureaux of the CAV and Navarra irreversible?

The idea of the Basque Government was to set up a social dialogue table without ELA and LAB. These unions represent more than 60 per cent of the working class of the CAPV. The first thought we have to make is: What are these tables for? We think that in order to curb trade unionism. The CGTP trade union, the first Portuguese trade union, joined our thinking. They're a trap with the goal of unlocking mobilization. The second point is that this social dialogue has been conducted without taking account of the trade union majority. The Government, the employers and the two trade unions (UGT and CCOO) are represented, and in total they do not account for 30%. This decision has a worrying anti-democratic component. In this respect, a further step has been taken: the signing of one of the two trade unions is sufficient to reach agreement. The Bureau is a reflection of the government’s lack of democratic sense, and we are very concerned that these kinds of decisions are taken normally and naturally.

A year has passed since ETA announced its final dissolution. However, neither the Spanish nor the French Governments have taken a step forward in the policy of dispersing prisoners or in the violation of human rights. How do you assess the current situation?

From a political, ethical and, above all, civic point of view, the attitude of the Spanish Government not to change prison policy is unacceptable. The policy of dispersion has never been justified, but now less.

There is a great difference between this behavior of the State and the opinion of Basque society in general on the closure and healing of wounds produced during so many years of political and armed conflict.

In this sense, we applaud the initiatives to recognize and alleviate the pain of each of them, leaving aside the ideology of each of them. That is the path that must be taken and that society must take on.

The trial of the Catalan procés is currently under way. What do you expect to get out of this trial? What is ELA's opinion?

What we have seen during the trial has shown us to be a political judgment. Prisoners are held in prison for their activity or for political representation, and the prosecutor's office asks for sentences of up to 25 years in prison with "unfounded" and "fictitious" arguments and accusations.

This is reminiscent of the judgment of the Altsasu boys. The Spanish judicial system and democracy itself, if they had not previously lost sufficient reputation, are now under the eyes of a large part of the international community. The democratic quality of the Spanish State is at stake.

The State has shown that it is unwilling to use dialogue and policy to redirect problems of sovereignty and territorial adjustment. And this mindset, despite its forms and forms, is a shared mindset, from the government of Sánchez to Vox. ELA has always defended the use of democracy to channel demands for sovereignty. Leaving aside the political idea that each one may have about the procés, it is undeniable that it has been done through the paths of peace, with committed institutional leadership, and with the impetus of unprecedented social mobilization.

The trade union must join the people who are working and making an effort in Catalonia, in a democratic and civil way. That is why we have all our admiration and solidarity with the Catalan people and especially with those who sit on the bench of the accused.

We live in a complex reality and union alliances are damaged. Will one of Mikel Lakuntza's main challenges be to recover the action unit with LAB?

It's no secret. The relationship between ALS and LAB is in crisis. We have been making efforts and maintaining a mutual relationship to deal with our problems, particularly in collective bargaining. However, we have not yet found a solution. ELA and LAB agree on many things: we are sovereign class unions that criticise the social dialogue model and the public policies that apply. However, in practice these consensuses deal with various problems that prevent the integration of ALS and LAB. First of all, the LAB trade union is part of a broader and coherent movement with the strategy of a political party. This reality shapes and shapes the relationship, because we often disagree with the priorities. In other words, when EH Bildu has institutional power or negotiates with the PNV, the relationship between ALS and LAB is complicated.

The second reason is that of tools: we don't share the tools and resources we work with. The strategy and possibilities of a union with a high-coverage resistance fund do not coincide with a union that does not have such resources. In practice, LAB makes the wrong theory about strikes, because they believe they have to be short and effective. This desire clashes with reality, because it is companies that determine the duration of strikes. It is in our hands to establish the best conditions for our partners to move forward. Now, for example, in the residences of Gipuzkoa ELA has announced 19 days of strike, while LAB has announced two. If we do not agree in practice, it is difficult to carry out joint actions.

Are you optimistic in the short term?

Surely what is going to be built will be built from the bottom up, regardless of what we do in both ways. The practice of real life, in addition to giving coherence, must open up opportunities. To be real, the unit of action between ELA and LAB must be detected in concrete facts: because we are going to sign the same agreements, because we are going to have the same level of demand and, above all, because we are going to join the strikes in your case.

In recent years ELA has strengthened its alliance with different social movements. What results does the union want from this collaboration?

The union has long understood that our responsibilities and needs as a working class go beyond the scope of the workplace. We are also an instrument for social change. In this regard, we must continue to promote initiatives, it is an agenda that we must share with other organisations and trade unions. ELA can contribute a lot, share and, above all, learn a lot. It is not easy to implement joint dynamics and varied strategies with different rhythms and concepts, but every organization that does not try to work in shared spaces risks disappearing. Work within the organisation is also important: it is essential to raise awareness of our partners. The extraordinary congress of April 5 will propose the incorporation of Maialen Aranburu to the management to take charge of the department of “Social Action”. This shows that the trade union wants to take important steps towards alternatives to neoliberalism.

We are engaged in a process of union elections in which the results are being positive both in the CAV and in Navarre. What is your reading?

We have achieved the greatest representations of history (41.20% in the CAV and 22.70% in Navarra), which is excellent news. Mainly for two reasons: the first because it is the result of the daily work of hundreds of ALS militants, and the second because it is a reflection of the support for the ALS counter-defense model. The implementation of this model is not easy in our society. Many people would like to hear from us: “You pay your fee, we will take care to solve your problems.” But that’s not the case. ELA says: “The union is a tool, but it needs your participation. It is in your hands, also in our ability to organize people, to form majorities, to attract partners and to become a real power.”

We must congratulate our militants on these results, particularly in the sectors of conflict, in the sectors of high insecurity. Achieving a result greater than 41% well reflects all the work done, because it has been great. I cannot forget the results of recent years in Navarre. The black lists were drawn up with our partners, and there was an extraordinary body between the government, the employers and the UGT and CCOO unions, which until 2015 paid the salaries of more than 170 of these unions with public money. Its objective, among others, was to reduce the presence of ALS in Navarra. It is clear that they failed: today, ELA is at a distance from the CCOO trade union and two from the UGT. The latter had a 36% representation a few years ago.

This interview has been published by the journal Alda and we have brought it thanks to the CC-by-sa license.