University of Birmingham Research Archive e-theses repository This unpublished thesis/dissertation is copyright of the author and/or third parties. The intellectual property rights of the author or third parties in respect of this work are as defined by The Copyright Designs and Patents Act 1988 or as modified by any successor legislation. Any use made of information contained in this thesis/dissertation must be in accordance with that legislation and must be properly acknowledged. Further distribution or reproduction in any format is prohibited without the permission of the copyright holder. 2nd of 2 files Part Two: Chapters 5 to 7 Appendices and Bibliography THE ROLE OF SOCIALIST COMPETITION IN ESTABLISHING LABOUR DISCIPLINE IN THE SOVIET WORKING CLASS, 1928-1934 By John Russell Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Russian and East European Studies Commerce & Social Science Division University of Birmingham 1987 PART TWO -151- SOCIALIST COMPETITION Introduction Among the most striking features of the Soviet industrialisation drive during the period under review that distinguish it from corresponding developments in other countries was the role accorded to socialist competition. The importance attached to this phenomenon by the Party leadership and the speed with which it spread through Soviet society are attested to by the fact that at the beginning of 1929 the term 'socialist competition' (sotsialisticheskoe sorevnovanie) had yet to be coined, whereas by the end of that year it had already become an integral and, as it transpired, permanent feature of Soviet industrial relations. This Chapter examines the origins, aims development and characteristics of socialist competition with special reference to its role in the establishment of labour discipline. Although socialist competition has been studied only scantily in 2 the West, there is an extensive fund of material on the subject in the Soviet Union. 3 The periodisation of socialist competition most 4 favoured by Soviet labour historians is as follows: 1917 to 1928 the Maturity of the Prerequisites for Competition 1929 to 1935 the Shock Worker Movement 1935 to 1957 the Stakhanovite Movement. 1 This term is sometimes translated as 'socialist emulation', a useful distinction from 'capitalist competition' and one that embodies the notions of comparison and example. See, for example, Article 15 of the 1977 Constitution of the USSR, Constitution (Fundamental Law) of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, Moscow, 1982, p.20. However, the term 'socialist competition' has become so widespread in Western works on the subject that I have elected to use it throughout. 2 The best known work on the subject remains Solomon Schwarz, Labor in the Soviet Union, New York, 1952, although even he devotes little space to the phenomenon. See pp.188-193. 3 A good bibliography is contained in I.E. Vorozheikin, Ocherk istoriografii rabochego klassa SSSR, M. 1975. pp. 271-280. 4 See, for example, N.B. Lebedeva, 'Noveishaya istoriografiya^ sotsialisticheskogo sorevnovaniya v SSSR 1 , in Voprosy istoril, 1976, no.2, p.49. -152- Thus, the Soviet historian is at pains to stress the continuity in the development of the movement, an argument that, as will be demonstrated, does not bear close scrutiny. In this $ection I shall suggest an alternative periodisation of socialist competition that may be summarised thus: 1918 to 1920 Early Manifestations of Competition and Shock Work 1926 to 1928 the Development of Prototypes of Shock Work and Competition 1929 to 1931 the Shock Worker Movement in the Socialist Offensive 1931 to 1934 Socialist Competition aimed at Raising Skills 1935 to 1941 the Stakhanovite Movement. It should be noted at the outset that, although the shock worker movement (udarnichestvo) became a prominent feature of socialist com­ petition during the first five year plan, the two movements have quite different antecedents. Moreover, it was the shock worker movement, often referred to as the 'brain child 1 of competition, that was spreading most rapidly in the years immediately prior to 1929, the year of 'the great breakthrough' (velikii perelom). The concept of utilising competition among workers as a means of raising labour productivity was not in itself new. Such pioneers of in­ dustrial organisation as Robert Owen had tested the idea, but found it wanting. More importantly, it had been rejected as a viable component of modern industrial relations by such an advocate of scientific management as F.W. Taylor, whose theories influenced Lenin considerably. • •••»»•••••••••••••••*•• • *••••«••••••••••••••••* 5 Sidney Pollard, 'Factory Discipline in the Industrial Revolution', in The Economic Hi story Re view, vol. XVI, no. 2, December 1963, p. 267. Pollard makes the point that Owen's methods were not copied because they ran counter to the accepted beliefs and ideology of the employing class, which regarded the workers as poor due to their own inadequacies, loc. cit. Naturally, this was not the case in the USSR in the period under review. 6 F.W. Taylor, Scientific Management, New York, 1947, p.37. For detailed analyses of Lenin's views on Taylor see Robert Linhart, Lenine, Les Paysans, Taylor, Paris, 1976, especially Part Two 'Lenine et Taylor'; Charles S. Maier, 'Between Taylorism and Technocracy: European Ideologies and the Vision of Industrial Productivity in the 1920's', in Journal of Contemporary History, 1970, vol 5, no.2, pp.51-60; Kendall E. Bailes, 'Alexei Gastev and the Soviet Controversy over Taylorism, 1918-24', in Soviet Studies, vol. XXXIX, no.3, July 1977, pp.373-394; Zenovia A. Suchor, 'Soviet Taylorism Revisited', in Soviet Studies, vol. XXXIII, no.2, April 1981, pp.246-264. -153- This notwithstanding, in the very first months of Soviet power Lenin had perceived a potential application for competition in Soviet industry. As early as January 1918 he had written an article entitled "How to Organise Competition" 7 in which he elaborated his views on the concept. The work was not published at the time however, probably due to the o fact that it was never completed, but its subsequent publication in January 1929 was instrumental in the launching of the nationwide campaign for socialist competition (a term, it should be stressed, that Lenin did not use himself). However, in an article that was printed at the time, "The Great Beginning" (Velikii pochin) published in July 1919, g Lenin welcomed r warmly the fijfcst manifestation of competition in Soviet Russia: the subbotnik (voluntary labour day) at the Moscow Sorting Station on the Moscow to Kazan 1 railway on 12 April 1919. Moreover, the 9th Party Congress in April 1920 passed a resolution, clearly bearing Lenin's influence, on the role of competition in raising labour productivity: "Alongside agitational and ideological influence on the working masses and repressive measures directed at persistent idlers, parasites and disorganisers, a powerful force for raising labour productivity lies in competition." Although Lenin's hopes for competition were not realised in his lifetime, his concept of competition as a force was utilised from 1929 by Stalin, not initially, as will be shown, for raising productivity, but as a means of establishing within the work force a level of labour discipline that would be commensurate to the raising of labour productivity. It will ::::::::::::::::::::::::: 7 V.I. Lenin Polnoe sobranie sochinenii, 5th edn., vol.35, M. 1962, pp.195-205. 8 L.S. Rogachevskaya, Sotsialisticheskoe sorevnovanie v^SSSR; istoricheskie ocherki, 1917-1970, M. 1977, p.6n. Another source indicates that the work was discontinued due to the Brest-Litovsk negotiations. See E.H. Carr and R.W. Davies Foundations of a Planned Economy, 1926-1929, vol.1, London, p.515. 9 V.I. Lenin, P.d noe Sobranie, vol.39, M. 1963, pp.1-29. 10 D. Ovcharov, 'V.I. Lenin o vsemirno-istoricheskom znachenii pervykh kommunisticheskikh subbotnikov' in Kommunisticheskaya partiya - vdokhnovitel' i organizator vsenarodnogo sotsialisticheskogo sorevnovaniya v SSSR, M. 1961, p.10. 11 Resolution dated 3 April 1920 'Ob ocherednykh ^adachakh khozyaistvennogo stroitel'stva' in Resheniya partii i pravitel''stva po khozyaistvennym voprosam, vol.1, M. 1967, p.164. -154- be argued that in this political and economic task socialist competition proved as effective a weapon as either propaganda or labour legislation. Indeed/ in some respects/ socialist competition incorporated and displaced the role of both during the early years of the First Five-Year Plan. CHAPTER FIVE THE SHOCK WORKER MOVEMENT IN THE SOCIALIST OFFENSIVE The separate evolution of the shock worker movement and competition is most evident in the initial development of 1919 and 1920. As noted above/ the point of departure in the development of competition was the subbotnik on the Moscow to Kazan 1 railway on 12 April 1919 in which 13 communist and two nonparty workers voluntarily worked a Saturday for no pay. This velikii pochin spawned similar labour demonstrations the following year and eventually became an annual event. The most notable development of this movement in 1920 was the Labour Month (trudovoi mesyats) that was organised in the Urals from 28 March until 1 May. 2 This was supposed to incorporate Lenin's three basic principles of competition: ;repeatability (povtvorenie)/ publicity (glasnost 1 ) and the comparability of results. 3 It is instructive to note that/ from the beginning any 'voluntary 1 principle was breached: those that failed to turn up for the two to five hours daily overtime without pay were branded as deserters from the labour front/ were expelled from the Party/ suspended from their union/ displayed on 'black 1 boards of disgrace or sent before Comrades' Courts/ 4 features of competition that were all to re-emerge when the movement became nationwide in 1929. 1 Sotsialisticheskoe sorevnovanie v SSSR/ 1918-1964 - dokumenty i materialy profsoyuzov/ M. 1965/ pp.23-24. 2 A. Fadeev/ 'Kommunisty - organizatory ural'skogo trudovogo mesyatsa 1 in Kommunisticheskaya partiya - vdokhnovitel'/ pp.60-71.