Revista
de
Administração
http://rausp.usp.br/ RevistadeAdministração52(2017)392–402
Human
Resource
and
Organization
Resistance
and
organized
counter-resistance
in
conflict
areas:
an
ethnography
with
Embraer’s
workers
Resistência
e
contra-resistência-organizada
em
espa¸cos
de
conflitos:
uma
etonografia
com
trabalhadores
da
Embraer
Resistencia
y
contrarresistencia
organizada
en
contexto
de
conflictos:
una
etnografía
con
empleados
de
Embraer
Marco
Antonio
Gonsales
de
Oliveira
a,∗,
Arnaldo
José
Franc¸a
Mazzei
Nogueira
aaUniversidadedeSãoPaulo/PontifíciaUniversidadeCatólicadeSãoPaulo,SãoPaulo,SP,Brazil Received21September2015;accepted13June2016
Availableonline7September2017 ScientificEditor:MariaSylviaMacchioneSaes
Abstract
TheaimofthispaperistoanalyzethespecificityoftheconflictbetweencapitalandlaborinthecontextofaglobalcompanylikeEMBRAER thathasastronginfluenceintheregionwhereitislocatedinSaoJosedosCamposinSãoPaulo,Brazil.Sincetheresignationmassheldby Embraerofmorethanfourthousandworkersin2009intensifiedlaborconflicts,resistancemovementsofworkersasstrikes,labormobilizations, labor,dissatisfactionsandunioncomplaintsagainstthecompanythathadadoptedaflexibleparadigmorganization.Interestingly,theseareasof conflictisexplainedinanunprecedentedwayacounter-resistanceorganizedmovementofemployeeswhoseculminationwasadecisioncontrary tothecontinuationofastrikeeruptedin2014.Itwasthoughtuntilthenthatthecounteractiontounionresistancemovementofworkersoccurred onlyideologically,personalorsmallgroupsdespitebeingbeneficiariesoftheshares,neverparticipateinsuchmovements.Thistimeparticipated, managersandtechnicianswereorganizedagainstunionresistancemovementindefenseofthevaluesofthecompanytosettlewiththemovement andunseatunionleadersseekingtoaddresslabordissatisfaction.
InthecontemplationofthisstudywascarriedoutanethnographicapproachtomoldastudyofextendedcasereasonedbythePublicSociology (seeBurawoy,2005).Theethnographyoptionwasduetoitsabilitytoidentifyhowthecontemporaryglobalcapitalismprocessesaremediated locallywithvariouseffectsonthelivesofworkers,adifficultrealityforthefoundationofanoppositionunionsandtheleftinBrazil.Theresearch processbeganintheMetalworkersUnionofSãoJosédosCamposandRegionandapproacheswiththeworkersofEmbraerwereheldfortwo years.Themainconclusionofthearticlepointsoutthatthereisadialecticofconflictincontemporarycapitalismthanthesametimepromoting theworkers’resistancemovementsalsorevealstheeffectivenessofconsentpoliciesofthetypicalbusinessofpost-Fordism,whichinthiscase wasmanifestedifasanunprecedentedmoveagainstresistance-organized.
©2017DepartamentodeAdministrac¸˜ao,FaculdadedeEconomia,Administrac¸˜aoeContabilidadedaUniversidadedeS˜aoPaulo–FEA/USP. PublishedbyElsevierEditoraLtda.ThisisanopenaccessarticleundertheCCBYlicense(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Keywords: Resistance;Against-resistance-organized;Post-fordism;Embraer;Union
Resumo
Nesteartigo,analisa-seaespecificidadedosconflitosentrecapitaletrabalhonocontextodeumaempresaglobalcomoaEMBRAER,sediada noEstadodeSãoPaulo,Brasil.Em2009aEMBRAERdemitiumaisdequatromiltrabalhadores,oqueprovocouacirramentodosconflitos
∗Correspondingauthorat:AvenidaProfessorLucianoGualberto,908,salaE-196,CEP05508-010,SãoPaulo,SP,Brazil.
E-mail:professormarcogonsales@gmail.com(M.A.Oliveira).
PeerReviewundertheresponsibilityofDepartamentodeAdministrac¸ão,FaculdadedeEconomia,Administrac¸ãoeContabilidadedaUniversidadedeSãoPaulo –FEA/USP.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rausp.2016.06.018
trabalhistas.Curiosamente,aoladodessesconflitossurgiu ummovimentodecontra-resistência-organizada defuncionáriosdaempresacujo pontoculminantefoiumadecisãocontráriaàcontinuidadedeumagreveeclodidaem2014.Ocontraomovimentoderesistênciasindicalse posicionavaemdefesadosvaloresdaempresa.Tendocomopanodefundoessesconflitos,apesquisarealizouumaabordagemetnográficaaos moldesdeumestudodecasoampliadofundamentadopelaSociologiaPública.ApesquisafoirealizadanoSindicatodosMetalúrgicosdeSão JosédosCamposeRegiãoecomostrabalhadoresdaEmbraerdurantedoisanos.Aconclusãoprincipaldoartigoapontaqueháumadialética doconflitonocapitalismocontemporâneoquenomesmotempoquepromoveosmovimentosderesistênciadostrabalhadoresrevelatambém aeficáciadaspolíticasdeconsentimentodaempresatípicasdopós-fordismo,que,nestecaso,manifestou-secomoummovimentoinéditode
contra-resistência-organizada.
©2017DepartamentodeAdministrac¸˜ao,FaculdadedeEconomia,Administrac¸˜aoeContabilidadedaUniversidadedeS˜aoPaulo–FEA/USP. PublicadoporElsevierEditoraLtda.Este ´eumartigoOpenAccesssobumalicenc¸aCCBY(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Palavras-chave:Resistência;Contra-resistência-organizada;Pós-fordismo;Embraer;Sindicato
Resumen
EnesteartículoseanalizalaespecificidaddelosconflictosentrecapitalytrabajoenelmarcodeunaempresaglobalcomoEmbraer,consedeen elEstadodeSãoPaulo,Brasil.En2009,Embraerdespidióamásdecuatromilempleados,loqueprodujounrecrudecimientodelosconflictos laborales.Curiosamente,enparaleloaestosconflictos,surgióunmovimientodecontrarresistenciaorganizadadeempleadosdelaempresaque tuvocomopuntoculminanteunadecisióncontrariaalacontinuacióndeunahuelgainiciadaen2014.Apartirdedichosconflictos,sehallevado acabounanálisisetnográficoconbaseenunestudiodecasoampliadoyfundamentadoporlaSociologíaPública.Seharealizadoelestudio enelSindicatodeMetalúrgicosdeSãoJosédosCamposyRegión,yconlosempleadosdeEmbraer,durantedosa˜nos.Laprincipalconclusión apuntahacialaexistenciadeunadialécticadelconflictoenelcapitalismocontemporáneoque,almismotiempoquepromuevelosmovimientos deresistenciadelostrabajadores,revelatambiénlaeficaciadelaspolíticasdeconsentimientodelaempresa,típicasdelpostfordismo,yqueen estecaso,sehamanifestadocomounmovimientoinéditodecontrarresistenciaorganizada.
©2017DepartamentodeAdministrac¸˜ao,FaculdadedeEconomia,Administrac¸˜aoeContabilidadedaUniversidadedeS˜aoPaulo–FEA/USP. PublicadoporElsevierEditoraLtda.Esteesunart´ıculoOpenAccessbajolalicenciaCCBY(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Palabrasclave: Resistencia;Contrarresistenciaorganizada;Postfordismo;Embraer;Sindicato
Introduction
Resistance movements and conflicts between labor and
capital in Embraer are related to processes of
privatiza-tion and restructuring that started in the 1990s. In the first
phase—between 1997 and2007—the firm experienced
busi-ness and employment expansion after its restructuring, and
conflictsinherent tolaborrelations hadlittle publicvisibility.
Withthe2008globalfinancialcrisis,whichdirectlyinterfered
with the firm’s market, the logic of productive restructuring
showed its darker side with the mass redundanciesof
work-ers.Embraercanbeunderstoodasaglobalneo-capitalistand
post-Fordistfirm,despitethespecificconditionsand
peculiar-itiesofperipheralBraziliancapitalism.InBrazil,inconclusive
or peripheralFordismmoved toincomplete formsof
partici-patoryand socio-technical management(Alves, 2000; Braga,
2015),andproductiverestructuringstronglyappearedwiththe
intensificationofglobalization,laborflexibilization,andrising
unemployment,especiallyinthe1990s.
Embraer—aswellasotherlargenationalcompanies—began
to restructure in the 1990s with the impact of the domestic
market opening to international competition under the aegis
ofprivatizationpoliciesandthereductionofstateintervention.
ThisdemonstratedthatBraziliancapitalismleftanationaland
developmentalperspectiveaside,integratingintoglobalflexible
capitalisminasubordinatedanddependentmanner.Embraeris
asymbolofsuccessinthisprocess,becomingoneofthemost
competitivecompaniesintheglobalaviationindustrywiththe
productionofbusiness andhighperformanceaircrafts,which
aremainlysoldoninternationalmarkets.
Post-Fordist restructuring processes congregate objective
aspects, such as new flexibletechnologies, cellular
manufac-turing,laborflexibilization,andreducingsupplyinaccordance
todemand,aswellassubjectiveaspectssuchasteamwork,
self-control,versatility,andcommitmenttothefirm.Theeffectsof
thisincludeddisruptiontothelabormarketandjobinsecurity.
Post-Fordism,flexiblecapitalaccumulation,andflexible
capi-talismaretermsthat—inthe criticalliterature—denounce the
profoundchangesanddisruptionstothelabormarketcausedby
productiverestructuring,whichalsogreatlyreducesthepower
ofunionsandpressuresforsocialandlaborlegislation
flexibil-ity(Antunes,2002;Faria,2004,2007;Harvey,1994;Heloani, 2003;Nogueira,2007;Sennett,2004;Vidal,2013).
InEmbraer,themostexplicitconflictsinthefieldoflaborand
unionrelationsarosewiththefirm’scrisisintheinternational
marketfrom2008onwards.Itsramificationsweretheobjectof
study of thisarticle, whichis basedon anethnographic case
study.
In this context, metallurgical trade unionism in São José
dosCampos,whichisnotableforitsleft-wingideology,
under-tookradicalactionagainstso-calledfirmabuses.Itcondemned
Embraerforsacrificingtheworkforcethroughcullsand
redun-dancies,harshnegotiationsonwagesandworkingconditions,
andseekingtomaintainanaboveaveragereturnoninvestment
for shareholders. It was therefore placed in an
institutional-izedconflictbetweenlaborandcapital,unionandfirm.There
wasadisputeofpowerinfluence,leadership,andsubjectivity
over the Embraer’s workers betweenthe trade unionand the
Withtheuseofcriticaltheoryinorganizationalstudies,
mani-festationsofresistanceand“organizedcounter-resistance”bring
thefollowingdiscussion:Howdoesoneanalyzetheincreasein
conflictandtheparticularformofworkermobilizationobserved
in Embraer, with special attention to the year 2014? And:
Howdoesoneunderstandthefactthatleaders,managers,and
techniciansorganizedthemselves againsttheunion resistance
movementindefenseof the firm’svalues anditshegemony?
Thereisnorecordintheliteratureonresistanceinorganizations
forthephenomenonof“organizedcounter-resistance”.Thisnew
configuration of social and labor conflict that pits employee
againstemployeewillbereflectedon.
InEmbraer,thesubjectiveappealofadheringtofirmvalues
provestobemorevaluableandeffectiveforgroupsof
interme-diateemployeesinthesocialpyramid,whethertheyareblue-or
white-collarworkers,ormembersofthenewmiddleclass.Those
whotendtodisseminateandprotectfirm’svaluesaremanagers,
leaders,andproductionsuperiors,whoexplicitly and
deliber-ately organizedand mobilizedagainst the union’s resistance.
Supportfor vindicatoryactionandunionresistanceisusually
foundatthebottomofthesocialpyramidinareaslike
produc-tion.Theunionweakenedunderprivatizationin2000,buthas
experiencedagradualrevival,mirroringthemoregeneraltrends
of tradeunion movements inBrazil(see Boito&Marcelino,
2000;Nogueira&Basilio,2012;Nogueira&Oliveira,2015).
Post-Fordisthegemony
According to Gramsci and his seminal article
American-ismandFordism,capitalisthegemonyintheUnitedStateswas
born from the Fordist factory model, inthe context of
flexi-blecapitalism.Post-Fordism,wherehegemonyandthe power
ofdominationarebasedonacomplexcombinationof
neolib-eralism and organizational Toyotism. This model of flexible
production is driven by demand and commitment to work.
Reorderedsubjectivity andself-coercionestablished the rules
ofthegame,wheremanagementofproductionprocessesis—as
wellasbeingatechnique—aclearmanipulationofthe
uncon-scious(Heloani,2003;Nogueira,2007).
The arrival of the great crisis of fordism model in
1973—whenalltheadvancedcapitalistworldfellintoadeepand
longrecession—combinedlowgrowthrateswithhighinflation
forthefirsttime,changingeverything(Vidal,2013)and,“since
then, neoliberalideasbegan togainspace” (Anderson,1995,
p.10).Contemporarycapitalismsupportsitselfbythegrowing
assimilationofitstheoreticalconceptsandneoliberalpoliticians,
whichwasavehementreactionagainststate interventionand
socialwelfarepolicies.LedbyFriedrichHayekin1947,liberal
theoristssuch as MiltonFriedman,KarlPopper, Lionel
Rob-bins,LudwigVonMises,andothersfoundedtheMontPèlerin
SocietyinSwitzerland,whichwas“asortofneoliberal
freema-sonry.ItspurposewastocombatKeynesianismandthereigning
solidarism,aswellastoprepareforanothertypeofcapitalism
(Anderson,1995,p.9).
Atthis time,deregulation and constantdisconnection
pre-vailed between traditional social welfare, industry,and labor
marketpolicies,betweenthelaborprocessandlaborrelations.
Employers did not compromise with employees because of
the pressuresfromcreditmarkets,thedogmaticconcernwith
shareholders, and, in particular, the competitive environment
(Thompson,2003).“Aperiodofinstitutionaldisorderprevailed,
whereeventsintherealworldwereambiguous,diverse,and
dis-connected”(Vidal,2011,p.276),wherethepubliclostground
totheprivate.Thepost-Fordistcontextcreatesasetofclosely
relatedandmutuallyreinforcingmaterialtransformations.These
includedinternationalization,thegrowthintheservices
indus-try, flexibility,outsourcing,andsubcontracting.Consequently,
itproducedaworkingstructurewithalargepercentageoflow
autonomyjobs,apolarizedlabormarkets,andincreasingly
cre-atedaclassofpoorworkers,whosewageswerekeptlowbythe
existenceofanarmyofunemployedreserves(Cappelli,1995;
Vidal,2013),wheretheveryopportunitytobeemployedwas
alreadyaprivilege(Zizek,2012).
In flexiblecapitalism,duetotheprogressive abandonment
of traditional institutional forms of identificationand
protec-tion,thefirmisestablishedasthemainauthorofcontemporary
society. Itexternalizesandratifiesvalues(of competitionand
economicsuccess)anditspragmaticvisionoftheworld,its
effi-cacynormsforcombatandself-defense(Alvesson&Willmott,
1992;Motta,1990).Acommon-sensemanagementtechnology
wascreated,whereprotestdoesnotfit,showingthepeoplethat
they“havebecomethemselves”,theonesresponsiblefortheir
own success,in line withthe competitiveand individualistic
lifestylefoundinfirmenvironments(Aktouf,2004).
Similarly,OakesandBerry(2009)viewmanagerialism(the
subjectivationofthefirm’svaluesbeyondtheworkenvironment)
as afundamental process for the legitimation of power
rela-tions,sharingthemeaningof“truth,reason,andprogress”with
peopleallovertheworld,definingtheissuesthat arerelevant
andsuggestingthe bestwaytotreatthem.Socialidentityand
organizationalexperiencesarealignedwiththeinterestsof
busi-ness(Alvesson&Willmott,1992),whereformsofmanagement
influenceindividuals(Alcadipani&Tonelli,2014).
Subjectiveappealinflexiblecapitalismgoesbeyondoffices
andfactories.Thereisanewkindofworker:the“bossworker”.
Itseemsclear,therefore,thatthecurrentbossworkerisapolitical
productofstrategiccapitalactionasmuchastheold“standard
worker”was(Mota,1994,p.116).“Thebehavioralliterature,
forexample,seemstoseeorganizationsasonehappybig
fam-ily,withbenevolentmanagersgivingrationalordersandworkers
whofaithfullyobey”(Fleming,2001,p.191).The“social
fac-tory”conceptextendsthisanalysis,observinghowprocessesand
workingrelationshipshave“goneoutofthefactories’walls”to
the wholeofsociety, increasingthe controlof theproduction
process.Thisdoes notmeanthatthedistinctionbetween
pro-ductiveandunproductivelaborisoutdatedorthatMarx’svalue
theoryisobsolete;“[n]orisittosaythatthelaborrelationsare
becomingirrelevant.Farfromit”(Beverungen,Böhm,&Land,
2015,p.477).
There is an evengreater antagonism in post-Fordism and
“financializedpost-Fordism”withregardtothediscourse
pro-posedbyfirms. Theyposition themselvesasprotagonistsand
majoreconomicandsocialreferencesforfamilies,butin
conditions.Atthisjunctureofsubjectiveappealandcontempt
forlabor,resistanceinorganizationsgainsground.Therearea
numberofstudiesshowingfirmsthatareunabletorestructure
themselvesaccordingtotheflexiblesmodels ofmanagement,
whicharefreeofreactionsandindividualandcollectiveforms
ofworkerresistance.
Resistanceinorganizations
Therightofseniormanagementtomanagedoesnotguarantee
thelegitimacyof their politicalactions.Resistance in
organi-zations is the irreducible expression of relations of opposed
interests between owners and employees, between managers
and workers, and between capital and labor. Resistance in
organizations—or “misbehavior” in the words Ackroyd and
Thompson (1999)—comes from this assumption and covers
any form of reaction, be it individual (see Kosmala &
Her-rbach,2006)orcollective(seeAckroyd&Thompson,1999),
spontaneousororganized,orinconfrontation(ornot)withthe
hegemonic valuesof the workingenvironment. Resistanceis
conflict,fromworkercynicismtocollectiveandorganizedaction
in opposition to firm values and standards. The firm brings
peopleofdifferentclasses,values,anddistinctculturescloser
together.
Post-structural or post-modernresearch oncritical
organi-zational studiesmostlyemphasizesbehavioral andindividual
resistanceinorganizations.Ithighlightscynicism,humor,and
irony as forms of resistance in contemporary organizations.
Oneof the pioneersinresearch on individual resistancewas
Collinson(1994),whoidentifiedhumorasaformofresistancein
organizations.FlemingandCostas(2009)calledthesebehaviors
“dis-identifications”, which are responses to “emotional
bar-gains”offeredbycompanies.Cynicismprovidestheemployee
withakindof temporary relieftotheir subordinateposition,
whichhelpsthemstayinthisposition(Fleming&Spicer,2003).
Inthesamevein,AlvessonandKärreman(2009)identifyina
consultancy firmhow resistance is contained andneutralized
(thoughnoteradicated) intheroutine ofwork.They usedthe
termcounter-resistancetoshowhowresistanceiscounteredand
neutralizedbyfirm.Weaddedtheideaofcollectivityand
sug-gesttheexpression“organizedcounter-resistance”todefinehow
Embraeropposeandneutralizetheworkers’sresistance.
Ourcritiqueisbasedonlaborprocesstheory(LPT),which
hasbeenpioneeredincriticalorganizationalstudies(Alcadipani,
2005;Thompson&O’doherty,2009),inauguratedbythework of Braverman (1974) (Adler, 2007, 2011; Beverungenet al.,
2015).LPTisaMarxist-basedsociologyresearchprogramthat
buildsananalysisbasedonresistanceinorganizationsfromthe
perspective ofrelations between classes.LPT’sinconsistency
isinitsviewofthemodeofproduction,sinceitestablishesan
oppressivecharacterbetweenemployerandemployee,arelation
thatpervadesthesocialandsubjectivespheresof individuals.
Ittriestorelate thelaborprocesstothecondition that
imple-mentsit,eitherthroughacoerciveprocessthat“incapacitates”
workers’reaction(Weil,1996)orthrough“voluntary”worker
collaborationaspartofateam(Burawoy,1982).
LPT understands that in modern industrial societies,
hegemony—andthereforeattemptatsubjectivization—are
per-formed by institutions of education,government, health, and
employment, inordertoobserve, measure,monitor, evaluate,
compare, contrast, examine, andsubjectify all of us as
indi-viduals.AyoungMarxclaimedthattheisolatedmandoesnot
exist: all of us are shaped by the existing society (Giddens,
1971,p. 13).However,LPTunderstands that “overtime, not
onlythenecessitiesofmaterialsandservice,butalsopatternsof
emotionallifearechanneledthroughthemarket”(Braverman,
1987,p.231).Thesecondgenerationofthinkers—inaugurated
byMichaelBurawoyin1979—aimstounderstandhow
orga-nizationsbenefitfromcommon-sensefragmentedsubjectivity.
Burawoy(1982)baseshisperspectiveonethnographicresearch
conductedinafactoryintheAmericaduringthe1970s.Forthe
researcher,the organizations did not subjectifyworkers from
nothing,norweretheyhegemonic;theyusedworker
subjectiv-ity(alreadypre-designedandfragmented)foraconstructionof
subjectivitythattheyconsideredappropriatefortheirrequired
laborprocesses(Burawoy,1982).Theauthorrejectstheideathat
theworkingprocessreducestheworkertoapassivevictim.The
reproductionofthelaborprocessasaresultoftheexclusionof
workersubjectivitywasnotsupported,butworker’ssubjectivity
wasincorporatedintotheproductionprocess(Burawoy,1982;
Wray-Bliss,2002).
Gramsci’stheoryofhegemonyoffersusinterestingresources
fortheunderstandingofresistanceinorganizations.Theconcept
ofhegemonyisbroadandgoesbeyondtheconceptofideology
andculture;itinvolvesalllivingsocialprocesses,seeingthem
asapraxis:representations,norms,andvaluesaresocial
prac-ticesand,therefore,areorganizedbydominantanddeterminate
socialpractices.Gramsci’sconceptseescultureasaglobalsocial
process,whichisthe“worldview”ofasocietyandperiod,and
ideologyas asystemofrepresentations,norms,andvaluesof
thedominantclassthathidesitspeculiarities,whichareinserted
intoanabstractuniversality.Itisimpossibletoseparatetheideas
ofthedominantclassfromthedominantclassitselfbecause,to
achievetheir objectives,theytendtopresenttheir interestsas
everyone’sinterestsandthereforetheyareuniversallyaccepted
(Burawoy,2014;Chaui,2014).
Resistance isconceptualizedby Gramscias the “cries” of
non-hegemonic subaltern classes, a social phenomenon that
seekstheachievementofasocio-politicalidentity.Itspurpose
is to denounce and try to reverse conditions of oppression,
marginalization,andexclusioninsearchofnewwaysof
think-ing and a critical and coherent conception of world. These
need to be overcome in order to make subaltern classes
capable of producing non-sectarian “counter-hegemony” in
society.
The “organized counter-resistance” is a peculiar form
of protest observed and recorded at Embraer in 2014,
where—unlike the traditional concept of resistance in
organizations—leaders and managers organized themselves
against the resisting union movement in defense of consent
(asadherenceandcommitmenttothefirm),the firm’svalues,
andhegemony.Incriticalliteratureonorganizations,thereisno
Ackroyd and Thompson (1999) divided resistance
move-mentsinorganizationsintodifferenttypesofaction:theaction
ofresistingwhentakingownershipofthetimeofwork(strikes
andstoppages);products(damagingorinterruptingits
produc-tion),and firmidentity(demonstrations that are harmful toa
firm’simage).Weproposetheadditionofacollectivity
dimen-sioninordertoidentifyresistanceinorganizationsthatseparates
individualandbehavioralresistancefromorganizedand
collec-tiveresistance,likethecaseof “organizedcounter-resistance”
presentedhere.
Restructuring,labor,andsubjectivityinEmbraer
Embraerwasfoundedin1969asastate-ownedfirm.Itwas
partofanimportantstrategyfornationaldefenseandsecurity,
whichweresymbolsofthemilitaryregimeestablishedin1964.
The firmexpanded its activitiesinto aeronautics andbecame
oneoftheleadingcompaniesinthisnichesector.Theoriginof
Embraerresemblesthatoftheoilandsteelindustry,whichalso
countedontheactiveparticipationofthemilitarygovernment
foritsinstallation(Forjaz,2005).Thefirmhasmorethan19,000
employeesspreadacrossfourmajorcontinents;ithasproduced
over5000aircraft;itisthethirdlargestmanufacturerof
com-mercialjetsintheworld;itssharesareoftenhighlyvaluedby
stockbrokers.Theglobalfirmhasadiversified,heterogeneous,
andflexiblebusinessnetworkandisrunbyprofessionalbusiness
people,who,firstandforemost,solveproblemsintheinterest
ofshareholders.
Like other largenational companies,Embraer onlybegan
itspost-Fordistproductionrestructuringinthe1990s,withthe
impactoftheopeningofthenationalmarketandtheNational
Pri-vatizationprogram.Immediatelyafteritsprivatizationin1994,
the firm began a series of strategic programs in its finance,
production, andpersonnel management sectors, based onthe
then-hegemonicJapaneseschoolofadministration.Inthelate
1980s,thefirmalreadyhadnumericalcontrollathes,fiveaxis
milling machines, and CAD-CAMsoftware for projects and
automatedoperations.However,arationalizedmodelof
produc-tionthatwasclosertotheconceptsofToyotismonlyappeared
aftertheproductionoftheERJ-145jet,whichhadalreadybeen
designedandconceivedinitsperiodofstateownership(Moraes,
2013).
Restructuring wasdirectlyrelated totheprivatization
pro-cessofEmbraerandtheadoptionofaneoliberalmanagement
modelthat ensuredreturnoninvestmentforshareholdersand
its global competitive position (Nogueira & Oliveira, 2015).
It is with privatization that a new organizational paradigm
startstobeimplementedbasedonglobalcompetitiveness,
high-performance technology, and strong management of human
relations andhuman resources.This creates arelationshipof
work dependency and certainly influences commitment,
cre-atingan atmosphereofconsentthat prevailsoverthe conflict
that isinherenttolaborrelations.From here, wewill lookat
thishistoricalprocessinthefirmandtheexistingdynamicsof
conflict.
MajorrestructuringofEmbraeroccurredimmediatelyafter
privatizationin1994,andagainin2006and2009.The
injec-tionofcapitalafterprivatizationenabledtheimplementationof
newtechnologiesthatreshapedtheproductionofthefirm,like
computer-aideddesign(CAD)andcomputer-aided
manufactur-ing(CAM).Othersoftwaresuchassystems,applications,and
products (SAP) improved communication with suppliersand
contractors impactedtheenvironmentoflaborrelationsinthe
firm.In1995,1200workersfromtheadministrativesectorand
500fromproductionweremaderedundant.In2006,thefirm
pul-verizedcapitalandchangeditsnamefromEmbraertoEmbraer
S.A.Inthatyear,allsharesbecamecommonstockand,therefore,
thefirmdidnothaveacontrollingshareholder.Thecapital
pul-verizationdecreasedthecostoffinancingandincreased
liquid-ity,whichenabledthe developmentofnewcutting-edge
tech-nologiesaswellastheintensificationofwork(Moraes,2013).
There had already been outsourcing before
privatization—one of the key tools promoted by the
flexi-ble productionmodels inEmbraer;however, salariespaidby
the firmtoits registeredemployeeswerethesame. Just after
privatization, restaurant services, security, building
mainte-nance,computermaintenance,transportation,cleaning,andthe
printing sectorwere outsourced,reducingcostsby80million
dollars. Also,the administrativebodywasre-engineered,and
multi-purposeteamswereformed,whichconsequentlyreduced
wagesbyanaverageof25%(Bernardes,2000).
Itwasnowtheturnofthesectorsdirectlyrelatedtothefirm’s
productiontobeoutsourced.Thesectorforengineeringprojects,
softwareproduction,plasticmolds,andstamping,bending,and
machining services (among others) were outsourced. Firms
dependentonEmbraerform,inlargepart,theproductionchain
of theBrazilianaircraft industry.Asthemarket isglobaland
restricted,thesecompaniesclaimtohavedifficultiestoexport,
affirming that their demand depends almost exclusively on
Embraer,which—accordingtoPinho(2002)—reachesbetween
80and90%.
The majorrestructuring of its production areacame next.
Under the justification of the global crisis of 2008–2009,
EMBRAER made more than 4274 workers redundant in
February2009.In thesameyear,the firmbrokeaproduction
record,delivering244aircrafts;andin2010,itproducedeven
more(281).Forthepurposesofcomparison,thecompany
pro-duced 169 aircrafts in2007 and 204 in2008. Onlywith the
introductionofnewtechnologiesandtheintensificationofwork
wasitpossiblefortheorganizationtohavesuchgainsin
pro-ductivity.
There wasaqualitative leapinthesense of taking
owner-ship(thoughnevercompletelyorofall)ofworkersubjectivity
(Moraes, 2013).All these organizational changes also led to
transformations in the human resources department, which
developeditsmainprojectfromtheToyotistperspective.“[T]he
transformation program’s purpose was toimprove
communi-cation between the firm andemployees in orderto meet the
objectivesoftheactionplan”(Moraes,2013,p.180).Fromthis
angle,theprojectGoodIdea(basedontheToyotistphilosophy
of kaizen) is highlighted for saving1 million dollarsfor the
firmbetween1995and1997(Bernardes,2000).Thegoalwas
tomaketheemployeeacontributor,andgivethemafeelingof
Embraer’s subjectivation capacitywas noticed on the first
daysoffieldresearch.Weobservedinthelargestmallfoodcourt
inSão JosédosCamposcitythat manyemployeeshadlunch
wearingthewhitecoat(similartothoseusedbydoctors)from
thetechnicalareaofthefirm’sproduction.Whenweaskedoneof
theemployeeswhyhehadlunchinhisworkclothes,wereceived
thefollowinganswer:“Ifeelcomfortablewithit—Idonotsee
anyreasontochange”(Respondent09).Wethinkthatworking
atEmbraerismorethancomfortable.Itbrings,formany,asense
ofmeaningtolife;ajobthatissynonymouswithhappinessfor
anyBrazilianworkers,or atleast itshouldbe.Embraer hasa
respectableimageinthespecializedmedia,financialmarkets,
andgeneralsociety.Asstatedabove,producingaircraftsinthe
countryofSantosDumontandbeingpartofthemostimportant
firmsintheworld,isasourceofpridefor employees.Thisis
essentialbothforcommitment(inthelanguageoforganizational
behavior),butalsoforthemanipulationofsubjectivity(inthe
languageofcriticalstudies).
TheMetalworkers’Union
Since2004,Brazilhashadaparadoxicalrecoveryofunion
activity,whichisgaininggroundandpower;however,therehas
beenpoliticalaccommodation.Theimpetusofneo-development
hascooptedmanyofthemovements,whicharepositionednext
to the government and its social-liberalist project. However,
this policy accommodation has not meant the disappearance
of struggles, since strikes have continued to grow in recent
years(Boito,Galvão,& Marcelino,2009; Trópia,Galvão, &
Marcelino,2013).
TheworkersofEmbraer’s headquartersarerepresentedby
the Metalworkers’ Union of São José dosCampos eRegião
(SMSJC),whichisconnectedtoaunioncalledCentralSindical
ePopular(CSP-Conlutas). InMarch2004,CSP-Conlutas
fol-lowedfromacurrent that,bythen, formedthemainunionof
BrazilcalledCentral ÚnicadosTrabalhadores (CUT),which
is linked to Partido dos Trabalhadores (PT); Movimento de
TendênciaSocialista(MTS),linkedtothePartidoSocialistados
TrabalhadoresUnificados(PSTU);andsomecurrentsofPartido
doSocialismeLiberdade(PSOL)(Trópiaetal.,2013).
AspointedoutbyBaccaro,Hamann,andTurner(2003)
CSP-Conlutas—aswellassomeEuropeantradeunionsoftheearly
twenty-firstcentury,haveexpandedtheirpoliticalactionsinline
withtheneed for alternatives tothe currentmarket dynamic.
Theyareorganizationsthatseektoadvancenewpolitical
sub-jects,inadditiontotraditionalactivitiesofcollectivebargaining
andseekingregulationsintheworkplace.CSP-Conlutasisan
innovativepracticethatcoversnotonlytradeunions,butalso
grassroots organizations and urban social, rural, and student
movements(Trópiaetal.,2013).BesidesEmbraer’semployees,
theSMSJCalsoservesotherglobalfirmsandsubsidiarieslike
GeneralMotorsdoBrasil(GMB),PanasonicdoBrasil,
Erics-sonTelecomunicac¸ões,Hitachi,andCheryBrasil,amongothers.
GMB’sindustrialcomplexislocatedinParaíbaValley,SãoJosé
dosCampos,whichwasestablishedin1959(tenyearsbefore
Embraer)andhas7000employees,oneofthelargestfacilities
ofthefirminthecountry.
Theaeronautical segmenthasnoemployer tradeunion,so
allthearrangementsaremadeviatheFederationofIndustries
of StateofSão Paulo(FIESP).Oneofthe workers’demands
is thatagreements are madedirectlywiththe firm’s
manage-ment.Embraer—aswellasotherfirmsintheindustry—arepart
ofanon-organizedcategory,asmall groupcomparedtoother
categories.
Researchmethodology
Basedon public sociology(see Burawoy,2005, 2014), an
extendedethnographiccasestudyapproachwasundertaken.The
choiceofextendedcasestudywasduetoitsabilitytoidentify
howprocessesofcontemporaryglobalcapitalismaremediated
locallyineverydaylife.Theextendedcasestudyallowsonetogo
deepintothepoliticaldichotomiesofcolonizerandcolonized,
whiteandblack,metropolisandperiphery,andcapitalandlabor,
inordertouncovermultipleprocesses,interests,andidentities.
Itisareflectivemodelofscienceappliedtothetechniqueof
par-ticipantobservation.Theextendedcasestudyappliesreflective
sciencetoethnography, inordertoextract theuniversal from
theparticular,movefromthemicrotothemacro,connect the
presenttothepast,andanticipatethefuture—allofthisbuilton
pre-existingtheory(Burawoy,2003,2014).
Theattempttoknowwhatitistobesomeoneelseisthemain
claimof ethnography,withtheintentionof reachingthe
sym-bolicandculturalmeaningsbehindhumanactions.Ithasnever
beenasimplematter, buttoday itseemsanalmostenormous
question,consideringtheproblematicnatureofidentityinthe
contemporaryworld(Cavedon&Lengler,2005;Geertz,1978;
Maanen,2006;Rocha,Barros,&Pereira,2005).Theresearch
processis developedandfragmented bythe diversity, almost
a carnival profusion of methods. Understanding how people
thinktoobservethe worldthroughthe lensofthosesurveyed
assumesatangleofinformationthatrequirestimeresearching.
Nevertheless, theperspective of theresearcher isvalued,
tak-ingintoaccounttheirbiases,values,andpersonalbackgrounds
(Alcadipani,Westwood,&Rosa,2015;Alcadipani&Tonelli, 2014;Atkinson,Coffey,Delamont,Lofland,&Lofland,2001).
Thegrowinginterestinethnographyhasbeenvitaltodevelop
athoroughunderstandingof the worldofmanagement,
orga-nizations,andwork(Alcadipani&Tonelli,2014;Cavedon&
Lengler,2005;Cavedon,1999).
Theextendedcasestudyenablesustounderstandthemacro
forcesthat influencepeople’slives. They are determinantsof
our behavioras people,whichconstantly change. There
can-notbemicroprocesseswithoutmacroforces,normacroforces
without micro processes. The question is how we deal with
therelationshipbetweenthem.Theextendedcasestudyallows
us toidentify thoseassumptionsin ourobjectof study.
Peo-ple’sideology—wayinwhichweinterpretreality—donotget
identified withqualitative or quantitative questions, we must
observeandhearthemovertime.Inourview,thebestwayto
empirically obtainsomething closetorealityistoexperience
this reality (Burawoy, 2014). “Through intensive knowledge
of asmall universe,wideinterpretations andabstract analysis
thelivesoftheinvestigatedsocialactors”(Rochaetal.,2005,
p.123).
Robustethnographicresearchfeaturesdetailsthat are
con-vincing and allow readers to recognize patterns and make
connections between personal problems and public issues.
Ethnographyisparticularlysuitablefortheresearchofcomplex
social relations,exposing the intersectionsof history,
institu-tional efforts, culture and structure, as well as being related
to daily interactions and the meaning of individuals’ social
life(Vaughan,2005).“Interpretations(developedprovisionally)
should always be passive, questioned, and/or reconstructed”
(Junior,2002,p.78).
Choiceoftheresearchobject
TheextendedstudycasewasconductedbytheauthorMarco
A. Gonsales during 2014 and 2015. Rather than following
theethnographicaltraditionofmanysociologistsinside
facto-ries, I performed extensivefield researchin areasof conflict
(e.g.strikes,movements,andassemblies)betweenEmbraerand
workersfortwoyearsinSãoJosédosCampos.WhileBurawoy
(2014)attendedfactoriesfor30yearstounderstandconsentin
capitalismandstatesocialism,Iwenttoareasofconflictinthe
contextoflaborrelations(resistanceandconsent)andperipheral
Braziliancontemporarycapitalism(Braga,2015).
I met the Metalworkers’ Union of São José dos Campos
(SMSJC), called Sindmetal, after several attempts to
com-municate with Embraer. Then I discovered how closed the
firm’s doors are to any researcher who is not needed by
it. As all attempts were denied, I went to SMSJC, where I
could interactandparticipateinvariousactivitieswith
work-ers. Among them were participants of strikes, assemblies,
andmovements, which created openings for communication.
Iresearchedunionizedworkers,unionleaders,unionofficials,
non-unionizedworkers,managers,andleadersofEmbraer,in
order to discover areas of conflict between the firm and its
workers.
ForFook(2002),itisimportanttousedifferentapproaches
todatacollectiongiventhemultiplicityofresearchersfocused
on the practice. The author suggests that it is necessary to
findtheobjectthroughatleastthreeperspectives:ethnographic
andobservationalmethods;existingdocuments,suchasdiaries,
files,andrecords;andaccounts of experiences through
inter-viewsandconversations.ThisapproachissimilartoMarcus’s
(1998),whosuggestsamulti-siteethnographyinwhichthesame
peopleorgroupsofpeoplearetrackedthroughdifferentsettings
thatmakeuptheirworld.
Ethnographicdatacollectioncanbediversified,whichmeans
thattheuseofdiariesisimportantinthedevelopmentofresearch.
Severaltimes,whenre-readingmydiary,Ifoundsubjectsand
informationthatIhadforgotten—detailsthatcontributetothe
endresultoftheresearch.Keepingadiaryhelpsusmap
arrange-mentsand processdata, whichguides thefuture narrativeof
research. Without a diary and the organizing of data, field
research is affected. For this particular study, an average of
eight diarypages were written per day. A totalof 68 weeks
of field research during a year and a half was carried out,
withweeklyvisitsonnormalweeksandnumerousvisitsduring
weeks withassembliesandstrikes.Atotalof89diaryentries
werewritten,whichequaledalmost700diarypages.Atotalof
22 interviewswere conductedwithnon-unionworkers,union
members,unionleaders,managers,andothers,mostofwhom
wereEmbraer employees.Interviewsweresparinglyrecorded
innotepadsinsteadofusingtaperecordersorotherdeviceasit
wasmypreferredoption.Igavemostattentiontoimportantand
distinctspeechesand,whenalone,Isummarizedtheinterviews
andwrotetheday’sresearchinthediary.
Noteswithdates,times,andtitlesweremostlytakeninmycar
afterconversations.Attheendofmostdays,Ireviewedallthe
notesIhadmadeandtranscribedtheminMicrosoftWord,along
withothernoted impressionsthat werestill freshinmemory.
Graduallyovertime,thefielddiarywasconstructedaccording
totheritualofmostethnographyresearchers(seeSanjek,1990).
Afterthisprocess,Isavedthefilewiththedateoftheresearched
dayandatitleonthemainsubjectoftheday,inordertofacilitate
theorganizationofresearchandfuturedataprocessing.
Organizedcounter-resistance
TostrikingatEmbraerisalmostimpossible.Then,ifyouare
allowed,thesepeopleagainstthestrikewoulddigatunnelto
enterthefirm.Youcloseagate,theyenterthroughtheother.
Someofthemsleepinthefirm,sleepover,onlytoflatterthe
bosses(Participant15).
Since2009,withthedismissalof4273employees,the
rela-tionship between the firm and its workers has been marked
by an increasing rate of strikes and stoppages. Almost 40h
of stoppages,anda24-hstrikethat alsoincluded
administra-tiveworkers,occurredintheturbulentyearof2013.Aftertwo
decadeswithoutunifiedstrikesoftheadministrativeand
produc-tionsector,Embraersawitshangarsandofficesstoppedthree
times.Therewasafour-hourshutdownonOctober8atthe
fac-toryonFariaLimaAvenueandanotheronOctober23atEugênio
deMelodistrict’splant.Followingthese, a24-hstrikestarted
onOctober31(JornaldoMetalúrgico,2013).
However, itwasin2014that thelackof consentforwork
tooknewproportions,whichwasperhapsconsidered
unthink-ablebytheorganization’sdirectors.Afive-daystrikeatEmbraer
withfourconsecutivedaysbetweenNovember6and10took
place. The first strike tookplaceon October 21,when about
7000 employeesinan assemblyapprovedastrikethat would
lastfor24h.Theyparalyzedactivitiesinprotestagainsta
pro-posedwagereadjustmentandthevalueoftheProfitandResults
Participationprogram(PLR)offeredbythefirm.
Onthedayafterthestrikeannouncement,apageonFacebook
entitledIamEmbraerandIamnotonstrikewascreated.Inthe
firstsixhours,2000employeesenteredthegroup,whichreached
4000membersintwodays.Onthepage,therewereposts
com-plainingthattheuniondidnotlistentotheadministrativestaff
when votingfor the strike.Inturn,the unionsaysthat ithad
listened to factorypersonnel andinvitedthe restof the staff,
who,nevertheless,didnotgetinvolved.Asstatedbythe
notusedtoparticipating.”Engineers,managers,andtechnicians
accountforhalfofEmbraer’semployeesinSaoJosedeCampos.
Fromapproximately14,000workersinthisfactory;halfarein
managementpositionsandthe otherhalf arefromtheareaof
production.
The organized resistance movement grew on the fourth
daywiththe helpfrom socialnetworks. Leaders rose
“spon-taneously”, and employees were mobilized and agreed to
participateinthe assemblyscheduledfor Monday November
10,wearingthe blueEmbraer shirtsused duringworkhours.
On that day, the assembly would proclaim the end of the
strike and one of the biggest clashes between workers and
managers of this organization began. The movement started
at 5:00 am in front of the main entrance of the firm. At
9:00 am, union leaders, workers, and students, as well as
steelworker(theso-called“sound truckof theunion”)began
the assembly for the potential continuation of the stoppage,
whichthistimelastedfor120h.Thelocalpolicereportedthat
FariaLimaAvenuewasfilledwithabout10,000workers,who
remained on guard, watching withouttroubling the gathered
crowd.
Earlyon inthelastassembly, therewas anunprecedented
movementagainsttheunionresistance,whichwasorganizedby
leadersandmanagers.Around300peopledressedinthe blue
managementstaffshirtputthemselvesinfrontofthesteel
work-ers’protesttruckandproceededtoswearandboo throughout
theunionleaders’speeches.However,manyothermanagement
employeesdressedinblue—asrequestedbymanagersonsocial
networks—stayedawayfromthetruck,participatingonlyinthe
votingthatwasalsounderway.Speechesstartedagain,andnew
protestsbyexaltedblueleaderstookplace.Withouttheproper
environmentformoretalksandspeeches,votingwasproposed
andled byHerbertClarosafter makinghislastspeechofthe
day.Hekissedandhuggedtheblueshirtoftheproductionteam
andtoldtheworkers:
Thisblueshirtisnotonlyusedbyyouall,”referringtothe
bosses,“allofusfromEmbraerusetheblueshirt,andweall
useitbecauseeveryonehereisproudofworkinginthisfirm.
Eachoneof ushereinthisassemblyisproudtomakejet
planes,andeachoneofushereinthisassemblyisdedicated
tothisobjective,wenttoSenai,university,or/anddidanMBA
course.”Hewasinterruptedbyboos.“Here,therearenotthe
4000peoplefromthesocialnetworkingwebsites usedthis
movement,youareleaders—butwealsohaveourblueshirt
andwedeserverespect.Wehavetobeproudbecausesince
lastWednesday,wehaveshownthatitisnotlikethis;wewant
respect,wewanttobeheard—thisiswhateachcolleagueis
sayingwhenparticipatinginthisstrike(Respondent02).
Boos,cries,andshoutsof“gotowork!”rangout,followed
bymanyswearwordsthatimpededandthenstoppedthespeech
of the union’s vice president. He went on to start the vote,
leadingittotheend.Withabout70%approval,thestrike
move-mentlostthevoteofthefirstassemblyand,thus,thousandsof
workerswenttothefirmandreturnedtotheirjobs.Although
the main demand of the workers was not met, salaries were
increased.
Speechesandperceptionsfromthefieldwork
Observations and interviews are key strategies of
ethno-graphicworkasdatacanberelatedandnewconclusionscanbe
obtained(Hammersley&Atkinson,1995).Iattendedmeetings
andunionevents,listenstoworkers,participatedinthedelivery
ofnewspamphlets,accompaniedtheprotestbeforeandduring
the strikemovements,andinterviewedworkersfromthe
pro-ductionandmanagementsectors of Embraeras wellassome
othercompaniesintheregion.
Wehaveorganizedourselvestoshowwedonotagreewith
thisstrike.The unionforbidsus towork, thisisnonsense.
They are taking our right to work, they are opportunists.
They did not talk to the administrative staff and went on
strike anyway. Ifthey wantto protest, do it—let us work
(Respondent19).
Wedecidedtocreatethismovementbecausewebelieveinthe
firm—welikewhatwedo.Embraerisadmiredforitspeople
management;theyarealwaysseenasoneofthebest
com-paniestoworkforinBrazil.Idonotseewhysomeworkers
standagainstthisfirm,thisnationalsymbol(Respondent16).
Istudied alotto enterEmbraer. HereI canthinkabout a
betterfutureofmychildren,myfamily,andmyself.Idonot
wanthalfadozentradeunionistshinderingmycareer.Ifyou
wantbetterwages,youneedtostudyandworkhard—donot
disturbthepeoplewhoalreadydothis(Respondent23).
Productionrelationsarelinkedobjectivelybysuchthingsas
formallaborrelations,contracts,andsalaries,butalsoby
sub-jectivelybyfeelingsofbelonging,affiliation,recognition,and
thefulfillmentofdesires(Faria,2007).Embraer—aspreviously
mentioned—wasoneofthefirstBrazilianfirmstohaveamodern
humanresourcesdepartment(Moraes,2013),andisalignedwith
theflexibleproposalsofcontemporarycapitalism(seeHarvey,
1994).Theseareresponsibleforpromotingthevalues,culture,
andbehaviordesiredbythefirminaconstantattemptto
compro-misetheirworkersthroughsubjectivity.However,weemphasize
thattheprocessofsubjectivityisnothomogeneous.“The
sub-jectis nevercoeval with language,because of the historicity
of itsconditionofenunciation. Eachstatement—whether itis
toexpresspowerortoconfrontit—isalwaystheresultof the
waythattheotherinterpretsthestatementissuedbythesubject”
(Carvalho,2001,p125).Withhigherwagesandmoreworker
benefits,managementworkersand/ormorequalifiedindividuals
tendtobetterabsorbthesubjectiveproposalofthefirm.
Iamnotpartoftheunion,butifyouhearwhattheyhaveto
say,theyareright.They arefightingforpeoples’jobs.We
seehowthingsare.Thefirmmakesmillionsandoursalary
islowerthanthatofmanycolleaguesworkinginotherfirms
intheregion.Myson,amotorcyclecourier,receivesalmost
thesameasmeatEmbraer(Respondent17).
Whatishereinthenewspamphlet[thattheuniondelivered
onthedayofthestrike]istrue.Thefirmisnotincrisis,it
isselling alot—look here. Buttheywant todecrease our
thesamething.Ihavebeenhereforsixyears,andthefirm
haveneverofferedasalaryreadjustmentorsomethingbetter.
Itisalwaysworse.Smallbusinessesintheregionpaymore
thanEmbraer(Respondent14).
Embraer is known inthe ParaíbaValley for payinglittle,
verylittleindeed.AnyParaíbaValleyfirmpaysmorethan
Embraer. You do not need to go to Boeing, no. Gamesa,
Embraer’ssupplier,paysalmostfourtimesmore—Kawasaki
aswell. Liebherr,whichis closetohere, isfullof former
Embraer employees. Even the highly skilled are going to
othercompaniesindroves(Respondent7).
Thenewdream,buttheolderemployeesarealreadyjaded
andresignedtothesituation.Theyoungrealizetheywillnot
getoutoftheproductionsectorforadministrativepositions,
andfewerstill reach the position of director. That is why
manygiveup.Theproduction-sectorwage isgoingdown.
ButtheworkatEmbraerisnotbad.Iwastherefor25years
thenfiredduringprivatization.Iampartoftheunion,butI
understandthatitisagoodplacetowork(Respondent11).
Duringthesedaysofstrikeandmanyothersinthefieldof
researchfield,fromonerespondentandanother,Irealizedthat
forsomeworkersthejobinsecurityandlowpayoutweighthe
subjectivecharms of theorganization. Icameacross workers
withmanyconcerns,includingjobsecurity:“Wehavenothingto
losebutnothingisstillalot”(Respondent26),saidaproduction
sectorworkerattheendofthe2014strike,whowasnotpartofa
unionandcelebratedtheendofthestrike.Shewasmoreworried
aboutherjob,whichshedespised,criticizingitsabilityto
guar-anteeherwell-being.Theveryopportunityofbeingemployed
isalreadyaprivilegeincontemporarycapitalism(Zizek,2012).
Aftertwomonths,somerespondentsduringthe2014strike
werespokentoagainaboutthedaysofconflict.Theyreiterated
thatthe strikeresistancemovementandtheunionwere
spon-taneousandorganizedlittle bylittle bysomeemployees.For
onerespondent,themovementmustgainstrength,“especially
afterourmovementappearedinmajormediaoutlets”
(Respon-dent21).ForHerbertClaros,the vicepresidentofthe union,
the movementwas induced bybosses andcanbe considered
collectivemoralharassment.
In2009,wehadmorethan4000employeeslaidoff.These
weregeneralandaffectedalldepartmentsofthefirm.Ifthe
uniondoesnotletuswork, wewilltaketherisk oflosing
ourproductivity.SeeGeneralMotorsnextdoor,becauseof
thevariousprotests,thefirmwantstomovefromhere.More
thanhalfthestaffhavealreadybeendismissed.Wedonot
wantthesameforEmbraer.Ithinkitisfairtodemandbetter
wagesandsuch,butitdoesnotneedtostopthefirmfrom
working.Doitinadifferentway—likethistheydisturbthe
wholefirm(Respondent25).
Increasingly, the union radicalize, and we will organize
ourselves.Ourblueshirtshavejoinedtogetherbecauseof
dis-satisfactionwiththeunion,whichcausesmoreproblemseach
year.Ifnoonedoesanything,theywillendupdestroyingthis
firm,theprideofSãoJosédosCampos.Thefirmhasmoved
jobsout ofBrazil. PhenomandLegacy jetproductionhas
alreadyleftthecountry.Ourgoalistoconfronttheunionto
savethefirmandourjobs.Foreverystriketheypromote,we
areheretopreventthemfromdisallowingusintothefirm.The
problemofunionisminBrazilisthatitislinkedtopolitical
partieslikePSTUandPSOL,whichstillliveinthetimeofthe
dictatorship.Theunionhastostandalongsidetheemployees
whowanttowork,nottheotherway(Respondent27).
WhileEmbraer proposed structural reformsto production,
personnelmanagement,anditscorporatemodel—mainlyinan
efforttopromoteboss–employeecollaboration—thetradeunion
movementhasalsoreconfigureditself.Thisisrepresentedby
CSP-Conlutasthroughitscloserpositioningtotheworkerand
greaterconfrontation—twocompetingproposalsthatcomeinto
collision.
Conclusion
Embraer has adopted the values and concepts of
finan-cialized post-Fordism that guides the focus of essential
competencies—in the sense of strategically focusing on a
smallclassofobstinateemployees—whichgenerateresultsfor
shareholders through manufacturing consent. Resistance—as
a social phenomenon—isa moment of consciousnessof
dif-ferences and boundaries of relationships between classes,
probablysharpened—amongothercomplexities—byeconomic
andsocialpolarization,givenwagedualizationandtheworking
conditions of Embraer’s post-privatization flexible
organiza-tionalmodel.
Collective resistance in the sphere of work—within
organizations—hasnotyetessentiallychangedlaborrelations,
buthaverelivedtheburdenimposedbytheflexible
organiza-tionalmodel.However,indirectcontroloverlaborprocessesin
contemporarycapitalism, basedontheir abilitytogive
mean-ingtoworkers’identityandvaluetowork—whatBolton(2008)
calls“emotionalbargains”—stackupagainstthechallengesthat
resistanceposes.
Themainconclusionofthearticleisthatthedialectical
con-flictincontemporarycapitalismawakensresistancemovements
ofmoreprecariousworkersand,atthesametime,alsoreveals
theeffectivenessofsubjectivizingconsentpolicies,wheremore
skilledandbetterpaidworkers(inthiscase)presentthemselves
asanunprecedentedand“organizedcounter-resistance”
move-ment.
This unexpected andunparalleled movement—here called
“organizedcounter-resistance”—hasdefendedtheorganization
and its values against worker resistance (those who are
dis-satisfiedwiththefirm’spolicyofpeoplemanagement),which
representsthe polarization betweenmanagement and
produc-tionworkers.Thosewhohavehigher-wages—theremunerated
bourgeoisie(Milner,2003,p.17)—differfromtheworkingclass
masses, as they assimilatethe values of the hegemonic class
moreeasily.Becauseofthis,theyentryintoconflictwithother
workers,whofear,accordingtoZizek(2012),thatthey
Acknowledgments
Supportandthanks:EAD/FEA-USP;PIPEQ/PUCSP.
References
Ackroyd,S.,&Thompson,P.(1999).Organizationalmisbehaviour.London: Sage.
Adler,P.(2007).Thefutureofcriticalmanagementstudies:APaleo-Marxist critiqueoflabourprocesstheory.OrganizationStudies,28(9),1313–1345. Adler,P.(2011).Politicaleconomy.InM.Tadajewksi,P.Maclaren,E.Parsons, &M.Parker(Eds.),KeyconceptsincriticalmanagementstudiesLosAngeles
(pp.181–185).Sage.
Aktouf, O. (2004). Pós-globalizacao, administra¸cão e racionalidade econômica,Asíndromedoavestruz.SãoPaulo:Atlas(Originalwork pub-lishedin2001).
Alcadipani,R.(2005).Réplica:Asingularizac¸ãodoplural.RAC,9(1),211–220. Alcadipani,R.,&Tonelli,M.J.(2014).Imagininggenderresearch:Violence,
masculinity,andtheshopfloor.Gender,WorkandOrganization,21. Alcadipani,R.,Westwood,R.,&Rosa,A.(2015).Thepoliticsofidentityin
organizationalethnographicresearch:Ethnicityandtropicalistintrusions.
HumanRelations(NewYork),68(1),79–106.
Alves,G.(2000).Onovo(eprecário)mundodotrabalho—Reestrutura¸cão produtivaecrisedosindicalismo.SãoPaulo:BoitempoEditorial/FAPESP. Alvesson,M.,&Kärreman,D.(2009).Resistingresistance:Counter-resistance,
consentandcomplianceinaconsultancyfirm.HumanRelations,62(8). Alvesson,M.,&Willmott,H.(1992).Ontheideaofemancipationin
manage-mentandorganizationstudies.AcademyofManagementReview,17(3). Anderson,P.(1995).Balan¸codoneoliberalismo.Pós-neoliberalismo:as
políti-cassociaiseoEstadodemocrático(7thed.).RiodeJaneiro:PazeTerra. Antunes,R.(2002).Asnovasformasdeacumulac¸ãodecapitaleasformas
contemporâneasdoestranhamento(alienac¸ão).CadernoCRH,Salvador,
37,23–45.
Atkinson,P.,Coffey,A.,Delamont,S.,Lofland,J.,&Lofland,L.(2001). Hand-bookofethnography.London:Sage.
Baccaro,L.,Hamann,K.,&Turner,L.(2003).Thepoliticsoflabourmovement revitalization:Theneedforarevitalizedperspective.EuropeanJournalof IndustrialRelations,9,119–133.
Bernardes, R. (2000).Embraer. Elos entre Estado e Mercado. São Paulo: Hucitec.
Beverungen,A.,Böhm,S.,&Land,C.(2015).Freelabour,socialmedia. Man-agement:ChallengingMarxistOrganizationStudiesOrganizationStudies,
36,473–489.
Braverman,H.(1974).Laborandmonopolycapital.NewYork:MonthlyReview Press.
Braverman,H.(1987).TrabalhoeCapitalMonopolista.RiodeJaneiro: Gua-nabaraKoogan.
Braga,R.(2015).Apulsãoplebeia:Trabalho,precariedadeerebeliõessociais. SãoPaulo:Alameda.
Boito,A.,Galvão,A.,&Marcelino,P.(2009).Brasil:Omovimentosindicale popularnadécadade2000.ENOSAL.BuenosAires:Clacso.,10(26). Boito,A.,&Marcelino,P.(2000).OSindicalismodeixouacriseparatrás?Um
novociclodegrevesnadécadade.CadernosdoCRH,23(59),323–338. Bolton,S.C.(2008).Theemotionallabourprocessandthedignityof
indeter-minacy.InInternationallabourprocessconference.
Burawoy,M.(1982).Manufacturingconsent.Changesinthelaborprocess undermonopolycapitalism.Chicago:UniversityofChicagoPress. Burawoy,M.(2005).Thecriticalturntopublicsociology.CriticalSociology,
31(3).
Burawoy,M.(2003).Revisits:Anoutlineofatheoryofreflexiveethnography.
AmericanSociologicalReview,68,645–679.
Burawoy,M.(2014).MarxismoSociológico.Quatropaíses,quatrodécadas, quatrograndestransforma¸cõeseumatradi¸cãocrítica.SãoPaulo:Alameda (Obraoriginalpublicadaem2009).
Cappelli,P.(1995).Rethinkingemployment.BritishJournalofIndustrial Rela-tions,33(4),563–602.
Carvalho,J.J. (2001).Oolharetnográficoe a voz subalterna.Horizontes Antropológicos,15.PortoAlegre,ano7.
Cavedon,N.(1999).Ométodoetnográficoemestudossobrecultura organiza-cional:Implicac¸õespositivasenegativas.Enanpad,XXIII.
Cavedon,N.,&Lengler,J.F.B.(2005).Pós-modernidadeeetnografianas organiza¸cões.SantaCruzdoSul:EditoraEdunisc.
Chaui,M. (2014).Conformismo e Resistência. BeloHorizonte: Autêntica: Fundac¸ãoPerseuAbramo.HomeroSantiago(organizador).
Collinson,D.(1994).Strategiesofresistance.InJ.Jermier,D.Knights,&W. Nord(Eds.),Resistanceandpowerinorganizations.London:Routledge. Faria,J.H.(2007).AnáliseCríticadasTeoriasePráticasOrganizacionais.São
Paulo:Atlas.
Faria,J.H.(2004).EconomiaPolíticadoPoder.Curitiba:Juruá.
Fleming,P.(2001).BeyondthePanopticon?Ephemera.Reviews,1(2),190–194. Fleming, P., & Costas, J. (2009). Beyond dis-identification: A discursive approachtoself-alienationincontemporaryorganizations.Human Rela-tions,62(3),353–378.
Fleming,P.,&Spicer,A.(2003).Workingatacynicaldistance:Implications forpower,subjectivityandresistance.Organization,10,157–179. Fook,J.(2002).Theorizingfrompracticetowardsaninclusiveapproachfor
socialworkresearch.QualitativeSocialWork,1(1),79–95.
Forjaz,M.C.S.(2005).AsorigensdaEmbraer.TemposSocial:Revistade SociologiadaUSP,17(1).
Geertz,C.(1978).AInterpreta¸cãodasCulturas.RiodeJaneiro:JorgeZahar Editora(Obraoriginalpublicadaem1973).
Giddens, A. (1971). Capitalism and modern social theory. Cambridge: CambridgeUniversityPress.
Hammersley,M.,&Atkinson,P.(1995).Ethnography:Principlesinpractice
(2nded.).London:Routledge.
Harvey,D.(1994).Condi¸cãoPós-Moderna.SãoPaulo:Edic¸õesLoyola(Obra originalpublicadaem1989).
Heloani,R.(2003).Gestãoeorganiza¸cãonocapitalismoglobalizado:História damanipula¸cãopsicológicanomundodotrabalho.SãoPaulo:Atlas. Jornal doMetalúrgico(2013).SindicatodosMetalúrgicosdeSãoJosédos
Campos,11e23deoutubro.
Junior,P.J.(2002).Umtexto,múltiplasinterpretac¸ões:Antropologia hermenêu-ticaeculturaorganizacional.RAE,42,4.
Kosmala,K.,&Herrbach,O.(2006).Theambivalenceofprofessional iden-tity: Oncynicism and jouissancein auditfirms.Human Relations, 59, 1393–1428.
Maanen,J.V.(2006).Ethnographythen:Now.QualitativeResearchin Organi-zations,1(1),13–21.
Marcus,G.E.(1998).Ethnographythroughthickandthin.PrincetonUniversity Press.
Milner,J.C.(2003).Elsalariodelideal.Lateoríadelasclasesydelacultura enelsigloXX.Barcelona:GedisaEditorialePuntoCrítico.
Moraes,L.C.G.(2013).Pulveriza¸cãodecapitaleintensifica¸cãodotrabalho:o casodaEmbraerTese(DoutoradoemSociologia).Campinas:Universidade EstadualdeCampinas,InstitutodeEconomia.
Mota,A.E.(1994).Dooperáriopadrãoaooperáriopatrão.Campinas:Revista Temáticas,2(3).
Motta,F.C.P.(1990).Organiza¸cãoepoder.Empresa,estadoeescola.São Paulo:Atlas.
Nogueira,A.J.F.M.(2007).Teoriageraldaadministra¸cãoparaoséculoXXI. SãoPaulo:Ática.
Nogueira,A.J.F.M.,&Oliveira,M.A.G.(2015).Embraer:Sucesso, global-iza¸cãoe...ataqueaotrabalho.SãoPaulo:OutrasPalavras.Recoveredfrom
http://www.cartacapital.com.br/blogs/outras-palavras/embraer-sucesso-globalizacao-e-ataque-ao-trabalho-5218.html
Nogueira,A.J.F.M.,&Basilio,P.(2012).Inflac¸ão,ConflitoeNegociac¸ão ColetivanoSetorBancário.FIPE(Impresso),3,14–21.
Oakes,H.,& Berry, A.(2009).Accountingcolonization: Threecase stud-ies in further education. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 20(3), 334–378.
Rocha,E.P.Q.,Barros,C.,&Pereira,C.(2005).Perspectivasdométodo etno-gráficoemmarketing:consumo,comunica¸cãoeetnografia.pp.29.Brasília, DF:AnaisdoEncontroNacionaldosProgramasde Pós-Graduac¸ãoem Administrac¸ão.
Sanjek,R.(1990).Fieldnotes:Themakingsofanthropology.Ithaca,NY:Cornell UniversityPress.
Sennett,R.(2004).Acorrosãodocaráter:Consequênciaspessoaisdotrabalho nonovocapitalismo.RiodeJaneiro:Record(Originalworkpublishedin 1998).
Thompson,P.(2003).Disconnectedcapitalism:Or,whyemployerscan’tkeep theirsideofthebargain.Work,EmploymentandSociety,17(2),359–378. Thompson,P.,&O’doherty,D.(2009).Laborprocesstheoryandcritical
man-agementstudies.InM.Alvesson,T.Bridgman,&H.Willmott(Eds.),The Oxfordhandbookofcriticalmanagementstudies.Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press.
Trópia,P.V.,Galvão,A.,&Marcelino,P.(2013).Areconfigurac¸ãodo sindical-ismobrasileironosanos2000:Asbasessociaiseoperfilpolítico-ideológico daConlutas.OpiniãoPública,19(1),81–117.
Vaughan,D.(2005).Ontherelevanceofethnographyfortheproductionofpublic sociologyandpolicy.TheBritishJournalofSociology,56(3),411–416. Vidal,M.(2013).Low-autonomyworkandbadjobsinpostfordistcapitalism.
HumanRelations,66(4),587–612.
Vidal,M.(2011).Reworkingpostfordism:Laborprocessversusemployment relations.SociologyCompass,5(4),273–286.
Wray-Bliss,E.(2002).Interpretation-appropriation:NaExampleoflabour pro-cesstheory.OrganizationalResearchMethods,5(1),81–104.
Weil,S.(1996).Acondi¸cãooperáriaeoutrosestudossobreaopressão, Antolo-giaorganizadaporEcléaBosi(2.ed.).RiodeJaneiro:PazeTerra. Zizek,S.(2012).Oanoquesonhamosperigosamente(RogérioBettoniTrad.).
