Romania Workers Pose Tough Dilemma

Vasile would like to crack down on his workers, who have slacked off since Communist dictator Nicolae Ceausescu was overthrown, but he doesn’t dare.

“If I punished them for not working hard, tomorrow they would ask me to leave,” said Vasile, a chief engineer at the state-run Republica pipe factory. He gestured at an outdoor picnic table, where several workers sat smoking.

Vasile’s problem illustrates those of the newly elected government. It has inherited one of Eastern Europe’s least efficient economies, but cannot change the system radically without risking a loss of support from workers.

How important workers are to the government was illustrated last June, when tens of thousands poured into Bucharest to show support after a day of anti-government riots.

Blue-collar workers, about 40% of Romania’s labor force, have benefited greatly from the revolution that began with the overthrow and execution of Ceausescu in December.

Factory employees went on strike to force Communist managers out, then elected their own new bosses.

“Of course they are nicer to us, because if they aren’t, we might fire them,” said Alexandru, 25, a laminator. Like the others interviewed at the Republica plant, Alexandru gave only his first name.

The National Salvation Front, which took power after the revolution, quickly solidified its position by reaching out to workers.

It increased pay and vacations, cut the workweek to five days from the six or seven common under Ceausescu. In the election campaign, the Front promised to move gradually toward a market economy and avoid the painful unemployment expected in other East European countries.

Both the Front and its presidential candidate, Ion Iliescu, were rewarded with big victories in the May 20 elections. Now they must figure out how to make industry more competitive without offending the workers.

“It is a challenging job,” said Eugen Dijmarescu, an economist expected to be a prominent planner in the new administration.

The Communists converted Romania from agriculture to industry and it has problems typical of Eastern Europe: low-quality production, overemphasis on unprofitable heavy industry and inefficiency caused by central planning.

Its equipment is even more obsolete than that of its neighbors because Ceausescu restricted imports for a decade in order to pay off the national debt.

Romania’s hard-currency trade balance plunged from a surplus of $2.5 billion in 1989 to a $400 million deficit in the first four months of 1990, mainly because of imports of consumer goods, according to government figures.

Official figures show industrial production down nearly 20% for the first third of this year from the same period in 1989.

Among the causes are the closings of some unprofitable plants and diversion of electricity from factories to homes.

Plant managers say the freedom that workers feel from the old requirement of hard work also is involved.

“This is how they view democracy,” Vasile said. “Everyone does what he wants, but still gets full pay.”

Stuart Dunley of the British firm Rindalbourne Ltd., which buys textiles from a dozen Romanian factories, said many had eliminated the unpopular overnight shift. Combined with the reduced workweek, he said, “the effect on production is rather dramatic.”

Dijmarescu, the economic planner, said the new government probably would end some of the recent pay benefits.

He said the government planned to form stock-issuing companies in all industries except electricity, gas production, oil and railways. The shares initially will belong to the government, but gradually will be sold to private investors, he said, and Romania probably will borrow money abroad.

Factory management boards will be allowed to set wages and the level of private ownership, and will be allowed to go bankrupt if they cannot make a profit, Dijmarescu said.