Half a century already. Unexpected events, often referred to as the union occupation of Sept-Îles. Of course, many have tried to forget everything. We can without hesitation include the circles that held power, both behind the scenes and officially. Others, although engaged in union action, found themselves uncomfortable during certain outbursts and then distanced themselves out of fear or uncertainty. Some people cannot forget, because they definitely carry the traces of violence in their flesh or even live with the disappearance of a loved one. Many, on the other hand, seek not to forget and instead want to decode the significance and profoundly social significance of these events.
According to Jacques Rouillard (Quebec unionism), the strikers blocked the city for two days in Sept-Îles. He thus refers to the blocking of Route 138 by construction workers on the morning of May 10, 1972, both to the west and to the east, the only land access route. In general, historians of trade unionism minimize these events, evoking a two-day action while the city was under trade union control between May 10 and 17. It was therefore a week after the blocking of the road that all unionized employees returned to work, with construction workers and public sector union members being the last to do so.
One event particularly caught the attention of commentators: the impact of the ram-car which drove into the crowd of demonstrators behind the courthouse. The vocabulary used indicates different understandings of this gesture. For some, it is a panicked “driver”. According to this type of interpretation, everything would have happened accidentally: a clumsy gesture on the part of a driver more or less in control of his driving! According to others, we are rather dealing with a “notorious anti-unionist”. According to this second interpretation, it would rather be a deliberate and voluntary gesture. A “tragedy” therefore, which goes beyond the nature of a “dramatic accident”. This gesture is then much more like an “attack”.
It is very generally mentioned that this tragedy destabilized the action of this expanded common front in Sept-Îles. Indeed, some were quick to point out that it was because of union action that this tragedy occurred. If we must admit that unionized workers can show violence, it is very rarely acts against people. The gestures that can be described as violent are aimed more at objects representing institutions or companies. These are therefore rather symbolic gestures that respond, in many cases, to an accumulation of frustrations or forms of institutional violence.
Many of the writings that recall this particular action rely on secondary sources and tend to relativize it. On the other hand, other stories are based on primary sources, that is to say the actors of this collective action. This is the case of that of Jean-Marc Piotte who was the first to investigate these witnesses and actors during the two years following the events, while situating them in a particular context.
The magazine working life of June 1982, while referring to Piotte’s story, continues the latter’s work by also relying on the witness-actors. The texts of this publication are also largely accounts of these witnesses or those of other activists who are part of the movement of this social action launched by the United Workers Front (FTU) of Sept- He is. The story of the occupation of the city is preceded by various contributions that situate the historical and social context of the area, including the struggles for the organization of trade unions and their recognition. The aboriginal question is also raised, particularly the fate reserved for the Innu in the process of dispossession of their territory and the resources found there. The issue is completed by a section which reports certain advances during the 10 years which followed the occupation, both on the trade union level and on the side of the emergence of the popular and community movement, student actions and the women’s movement.
This file of Littoral therefore continues, 50 years later, the reflection on the meaning and scope of these events, an episode that had a before and an after, a social prelude with the FTU, and a continuity with social struggles in other forms or with new strategies in various sectors. This approach is based on the practical and reflective knowledge of the actors and direct witnesses of these collective actions. Indeed, we consider that these social actors, very generally set aside for the benefit of the dominant actors, must be heard and put forward, to understand the transformations and social innovations that followed and which are attached to their struggles.
Comments or suggestions for Ideas in Review? write to [email protected].