If the working conditions of employees in mass distribution are often called into question by the media and sociologists, it is on the other hand a sector little accustomed to collective movements. It is therefore the story of an improbable strike in a hypermarket – from its genesis to its outcome – that Marlène Benquet invites us in this work.
The 1er February 2008, we witnessed for the first time in the mass distribution sector a day of inter-brand and inter-union strike. Although the movement was a great success, it was not repeated nationally the next day, with the exception of the Hypermag Grand Large hypermarket, located in the northern districts of Marseille. The cashiers, at the origin of the movement in this store, will in fact extend the strike there for 16 days. At the end of the movement, whose CFDT marked the end, none of the employees’ demands were met. It is to understand this improbable protest movement that Marlène Benquet invites us in this work.
Indeed, mass distribution is one of those sectors in which collective mobilizations are rare. In this sense, the study of this strike carried out by the cashiers – an emblematic population located “ at the crossroads of the triple movement of feminization, tertiarization and precarization » – undeniably constitutes a contribution to the understanding of the renewal of professional protest observed since the 2000s as well as to that of the mobilization of populations hitherto little involved in social movements. The author’s aim is to uncover the reasons and justifications put forward by the employees of this hypermarket to explain their commitment to collective action. at that moment.
From the emergence of a discourse of injustice to collective mobilization
Trying to trace the genesis of the feeling of injustice which ultimately led to this strike, the author first pays attention to the working and employment conditions of the cashiers. In the first chapter, she explains: different ways to be a cashier » and to experience the economic, organizational and projectional precariousness to which this population is exposed. Marlène Benquet distinguishes three generations of cashiers corresponding to different perceptions of this professional precariousness, the latter being the product of heterogeneous socio-professional trajectories linked to age and geographical roots. Despite these dissimilarities, the cashiers nevertheless share the same devaluation of a job that they found “ for lack of anything better » and which does not give them any common professional identity. In addition, the organization of work is extremely restrictive and is characterized by a relationship of dependence on management through a system of reciprocal arrangements. In this context, opposition to management proves almost impossible. All of these elements combined do not seem conducive to collective mobilization.
And yet, the 1er February 2008, many Hyper Grand Large employees will stop work for the first day of inter-union and inter-brand mobilization in the history of mass distribution. The next day, while work was resuming at the national level, a core of cashiers voted to extend the movement. It is the emergence of a discourse of injustice denouncing their working and employment conditions which is considered by the author as the origin of this protest movement. Its appearance would be linked to the history of the store and the group. At the time of the opening of the Grand Large Hypermarket in 1996, the employees recruited were heavily involved, which had the effect of creating strong bonds of solidarity between employees as well as with management, but also of nurturing hopes of promotion. The latter would be disappointed three years later when the store was bought by the Hypermag group, the new management not having knowledge of past efforts, which would be experienced by the employees as a denial of recognition. This is an opportunity for cashiers to realize the precariousness of their situation ; They thus become aware of the fact that they have a job with no prospects and at the same time notice a drop in their remuneration. Projectional precariousness thus combines with economic precariousness. Added to this is a deterioration of professional relations. While the former director was particularly appreciated by employees, relations appear to be very tense with the new management. It is thus in reference to the past professional situation, conceived as an ideal at work, that a discourse of injustice relating to current working conditions is constructed. It is supported by the older and the intermediate generation, whose geographical belonging to the northern districts of Marseille will also favor the existence of a common extra-professional identity participating in the constitution of a collective. This discourse of injustice will finally find an echo among young cashiers who have the feeling of belonging to a population of poor workers. It was therefore necessary for the different generations to come together for the movement to take place.
Two distinct commitment regimes will, however, coexist. The elders and the cashiers of the intermediate generation constitute the hard core of the cashiers mobilized around a collective judgment of injustice. On the other hand, the youngest do not seem to have objective reasons to mobilize. Reluctant to engage in collective mobilization, this job is in fact the most satisfying they have ever held in their precarious professional trajectory. Thus their enrollment in collective action should be interpreted less as a rallying to the judgment of injustice than as a fear of marginalization of the professional socialization group which is constituted during this movement. Ultimatelyall the cashiers went on strike and an occupation of the hypermarket was organized, supervised during the first week by the unions, not without difficulty.
From cooperation to the split of strikers and trade unionists
A gendered division of labor is established between strikers and trade unionists, the former (mainly women) taking charge of the technical management of the strike, while the latter (men) take care of strategic activities aimed at external actors. to strike (management, media, union leadership). Although the union federations CFDT And FO are not in favor of this strike, they have no other choice, under pressure from employees, than to support the movement. The union representative CFDToccupying a majority position, is in a particularly complex situation, torn between the employees mobilized to intensify the conflict and the union leadership who want it to end quickly. It is this weakness of support from trade union organizations which seems to explain why the employers did not seek to find a solution to the conflict quickly and, instead of negotiating, opted for an offensive strategy. During the second week of the conflict, during which the cashiers faced strong judicial and police repression, we witnessed the gradual withdrawal of the union organizations. Relations between cashiers and unions become more conflictual, calling into question the previously established division of labor. Furthermore, splits are emerging among the cashiers, some dissociating themselves from the movement. After two weeks of strike and a day of negotiations, the CFDT and management sign an end-of-strike protocol, in continuation of the negotiating relations maintained between union organizations and employers in the mass distribution sector. None of the cashiers’ demands will be met.
Marlène Benquet’s investigation does not end with the cashiers’ resumption of work. She will return to meet the protagonists of this movement a few weeks later. It thus appears that the cashiers consider the union organizations responsible for the failure of the strike and therefore maintain strong resentment towards the CFDT. And yet, the outcome of the movement results in a union revival since a fifth of them join a union FO and to the CGT. Furthermore, despite this failure, the strike had the effect of strengthening the work collective. It thus enabled the intergenerational transmission of a certain working culture to young cashiers, as well as demonstrated the possibility and effectiveness of collective organization. Conversely, the older and middle generations have been influenced by the younger cashiers. They now tend to adopt a more individualistic mode of resistance which takes the form of a disinvestment in work and the implementation of braking techniques whose objective is to go against the expectations of management.
The judgment of injustice as a source of mobilization
“ Why here rather than elsewhere ? Why at this time rather than another ? » These are the questions that Marlène Benquet tries to answer when she analyzes this improbable strike. For this, she insists on the interest of the ethnographic method which allows us to return to the genesis of the collectively shared feeling of injustice which she considers to be the driving force behind mobilization. This judgment of injustice would signal “ a change in the subjective perception by employees of their professional situation » (p. 224) which, from bearable, would then become unbearable. This model of analysis is not without raising some questions. Indeed, the judgment of injustice does not appear to be the only source of mobilization as it itself shows. A certain number of cashiers, particularly the youngest, only join the protest to avoid marginalization, and not because of a collectively shared feeling of injustice. Furthermore, nothing says that the basis of the latter is common to all employees, various reasons being able to explain its emergence. Finally, if the judgment of injustice can constitute one of the driving forces of mobilization, it only partly explains the fact that a strike is strongly followed and, above all, is renewed in this way. Indeed, in other stores and other companies, employees can share such a feeling without it giving rise to their mobilization. Consequently, the model proposed by the author only partially answers the questions asked.
However, despite these few reservations and questions, Marlène Benquet’s work undeniably constitutes an important contribution to the sociology of social movements, contributing to the understanding of the mobilizations of populations traditionally far from collective action. The emphasis placed on the effects of belonging outside of work seems particularly relevant to us in this regard and deserves attention in future research. Likewise, sociologists interested in the mass distribution sector will find detailed descriptions of the working and employment conditions of employees in the sector as well as the professional relationships that characterize it. It is indeed necessary to underline the richness of the materials mobilized and the undeniable interest of the ethnographic approach which makes it possible to follow the unfolding of this improbable strike, from its genesis to its outcome.