Metal workers strike. Bilbao Metro. Residences of Gipuzkoa. The three examples are the most obvious strikes that have been launched in the last month, highlighting the willingness of staff to improve their working conditions. Faced with them, the employers and the public administration, who denounce the violence and intransigence of the workers, want to silence the class conflict.

Émile Pouget clearly defined the main fighting methods of the working class: strike, boycott and sabotage. These are examples of direct action that powers have wanted to relate to violence. Sabotage is highly criminalised and the administration has tried to dismantle the boycott legally. By way of example, in 2014 the Basque Competition Authority imposed a fine of EUR 800,000 on carriers of the port of Bilbao for the promotion of the boycott. The High Court of Justice of the Basque Country suspended the fine, but at a time of conflict, the shock affecting promoters and participants may paralyse the action. The right to strike is also very limited. In the case of Spanish legislation, rotating strikes, liability strikes, which are carried out in strategic sectors, among others, are illegal. Strikes are illegal for political, solidarity and other reasons. To this should be added the use of minimum services by public administrations to break strikes.

Despite the obstacles, strikes occur in our territory: In 2021, 47% of the strikes in the Kingdom of Spain occurred in the peninsular Basque Country. How can we explain the exercise of such a limited right? Strike strategies are fundamental, as Las Heras and Rodríguez discussed in a 2020 article (Striking to renew: Basque Unions’ organizing strategies and use of the Strike Fund). The authors pointed out, among other factors, that the counter-union model is an important factor that places conflict at the centre of innovation strategies and that it can be representative of the number of strikes. This organizational strategy does not want to mobilize workers to “create an illusion of strength”, but to achieve a mobilization that moves towards a more cohesive and dynamic union model. In this competitive strategy, the resistance fund is a decisive resource of organizational power that gathers from the purchasing power of union members to help the militant members most in need.

Thus, the trade unions that follow the counterpart model have the resistance boxes in force or are under discussion for their implementation. Companies use strategies to avoid any kind of responsibility to workers and, in a violent process of precariousness of working conditions, it is essential to have as many tools as possible; the resistance box can be fundamental to resolve conflicts in favor of workers. Even more so in a context where the cost of living is rising and the endless crisis we are experiencing is hardening.

The endurance box is not a magic remedy, but it can be an essential element to cope with the deterioration of working conditions. Also to maintain employment, and why not, to extend quality employment. These issues are excluded from conventional economic analysis, but they contribute a great deal to the welfare of society, as most of us are workers.