Opportunism Hinders the Class Struggle and Distracts Workers From the General Strike for Wage Increases

Following a broad agreement among unions in December 2025, the kidnapping of President Maduro, and the rise of a US-backed government, the various political parties with a presence in the Venezuelan labor movement began agitating, calling for wage increases and organizing protest actions during the first four months of 2026. We have seen significant media activity from leaders of the so-called right, the bourgeois left, and those opportunists who call themselves leftists (and in some cases even “Marxist,” “socialist,” and “communist”), who are calling for rallies and demonstrations.

The deviation of electoralism

The vast majority of these unions are pro-management and treacherous, differing only in that one sector is pro-government (primarily the CBST) and another sector opposes the government and proclaims itself "autonomous unionism" (CTV, CUTV, UNETE, CGT, CODESA, ASI, and a number of Federations, Fronts, Coordinating Bodies, and Committees). None of these sectors has promoted strikes, and especially not general strikes demanding wage increases. Neither before nor after Chavismo came to power did these unions call for strikes or confront employers; when they did strike, it was due to worker pressure, and they quickly managed to stop and betray the movement. But when they threatened to strike, they remained just that: hypocritical threats. Today, after a history of betrayal, they appear before the workers, calling them to mobilize for wage increases. The electoral agenda has been activated once again, and these leaders, always ready to take sides in the race for presidential elections, are eager to win votes. Now they're competing to present themselves with the highest wage demands, hoping to capture the attention, sympathy, and votes of the workers. But they know that no new government will deliver a significant wage increase, much less without the pressure of a general strike, which they will neither call nor organize.

A special mention must be made of the so-called "Trade Union Coalition", which, for all practical purposes, can be defined as the campaign committee of a presidential candidate within the labor movement. Therefore, their call to fight for wage increases is the most blatantly hypocritical, demagogic, and false, proclaimed by leaders paid by the political and economic sectors that support this candidacy. They are the clearest expression of the electoralism that today seeks to use workers as a springboard and who do not hesitate to present themselves with high wage demands and calls to march on Miraflores Palace to promote themselves on social media and capture the attention of workers. But while these are shameless traitors and opportunists, the trade union movement is infested with opportunists, defenders of oppressive democracy, the Constitution, the homeland, and capitalism in general. This was confirmed in all their street initiatives, such as the march on April 9, in which they did not promote workers' or union slogans but electoral ones, and new calls of the same type, such as concentrating in front of the US Embassy, ​​taking the course most openly separate from the real demands of the workers.

But this wave of opportunism and demagoguery against the labor movement is also fueled by a pack of technocrats, specialists, and influencers who flood social media with analyses outlining the salary levels deemed "viable" by the government from a budgetary and accounting perspective, the existing legal limitations, and how to increase workers' income while maintaining the current bonus policy. These messages tend to limit workers' aspirations, leading them to resign themselves to waiting for legal reforms, tripartite agreements, and government announcements, and encouraging passivity and complacency in the face of a wage increase "that will come", waiting idly by, without a fight, simply electing a new government.

The political atmosphere is rife with opportunism and electoral demagoguery. Some of the slogans, pronouncements, and pronouncements used to harass and confuse workers include: “The Workers’ Struggle for Wages is the same as the Struggle to Restore the Constitution and Democracy,” “Down with the dictatorship, out with imperialism, no amnesty for the regime’s leadership, and no pacts with imperialism!”, “Wages will only improve when the sanctions against Venezuela are lifted,” “Out with Trump and the dictatorship! No to the Delcy-US pact! For a workers’, socialist, and people’s government!”, “For wages, democracy, and freedom.” They all claim, despite their differences, which are not essentially ideological, and amidst miserable squabbles over the scraps and carrion thrown to them by the capitalists, that workers should mobilize to change the government, remove the Chavistas from control of public institutions, repeal or reform laws, rescue democracy, and that the wage “benefits” will come later. And the most “radical” speak of “socialism” (democratic socialism, with parliamentary elections and a market, of course) and “workers’ government” (the same old thing but with a different twist: the same bourgeois democracy). But with these slogans, the opportunists seek to confuse the workers and get them expecting to fight against a supposed external enemy, instead of confronting, in their own country and without delay, their class enemy (whom the opportunists try not to name): the bourgeoisie, the state or private capitalist employers. Very few say there will be no wage increase without a workers' struggle. But practically no one speaks frankly to the workers and tells them that a major day of mobilization must be prepared, culminating in a General Strike, and that no government—neither the current one nor any to come, all bourgeois governments—will increase workers' wages without them undertaking a struggle of such magnitude that it provokes an economic and political crisis, jeopardizing the profits of capitalists and the political stability of their governments. The response of the labor movement must be that strong. And this would be achievable if the central and federated unions weren't nests of treacherous rats and instead adopted a serious and firm plan of struggle for wages.

The truth is that the struggle of the workers' movement is not against the "dictatorship of Chavismo", but against the class dictatorship of the bourgeoisie, whether it presents itself as democracy or fascism, whether Chavismo or its opponents are in power. Every new government that comes to power, regardless of the political group that controls it, will represent the interests of the class dictatorship of the capitalists (the bourgeoisie). The struggle for wage increases, therefore, has a strategic connection not with the "restoration of democracy and the Constitution", but quite the opposite: with the overthrow of capitalism, which is the mode of production that oppresses and exploits the working class worldwide and is responsible for the miserable wages that plague workers and the wars that erupt around the globe. And with the downfall of capitalism, its political forms of democracy and fascism will also fall, and it will be the Dictatorship of the Proletariat (of its party) that will set in motion the transformations that will bring social redemption for the great oppressed masses. All those who today clamor for democracy, a constitution, and peace only intend to perpetuate the causes of exploitation and low wages. They are the “Trojan horses” within the workers' movement, the accomplices of the capitalists; it doesn't matter whether they side with the government today or present themselves as opponents. The workers' movement will have to rise up and fight, and, in the process, rid itself of these leeches.

A Trojan horse for labor reform

On the other hand, the issue of wage increases is being used as an excuse to push through labor reform, as has already happened in many countries and recently in Argentina. This reform will not be limited to eliminating the retroactive application of social benefits, supposedly as an "obstacle" to making wage increases "viable" in both the public and private sectors. Rather, it is expected that this reform will encompass various areas that will facilitate the exploitation of workers or provide legal cover for what is already happening. It is anticipated that this reform will make working hours and shifts more flexible, address overtime, temporary and outsourced contracts, erode hard-won rights by making everything contingent on what is agreed upon in each individual contract, reduce paid leave, and so on. Therefore, what is at stake is not only achieving a significant wage increase, but also fighting against the labor reform that is almost certainly coming to benefit capitalists. The announcements made by the acting president confirm all of this, proposing pension cuts (limiting them only to those who contribute, without touching the business sector in the slightest), offering a “responsible” and “non-inflationary” salary increase (that is, maintaining a “zero salary” and only increasing bonuses, so as not to affect business profits), and initiating a privatization process (generally associated with layoffs), all while speaking of economic reactivation, which in capitalism can only be understood as the concentration of wealth and property (infrastructure and land) in the hands of a handful of companies and increased exploitation of wage earners. And so the government presented itself on May 1st, announcing an increase in what they call the “Comprehensive Minimum Income,” increasing a bonus for active workers and another for pensioners, but maintaining the so-called “minimum wage” at 130 bolivars per month (equivalent to $0.26). The government stated that this announcement was the result of an agreement reached between the business sector (Fedecámaras and Fedeindustria), the labor sector (CBST, CTV and ASI) and the Ministry of Labor, all enemies of the workers.All united to protect the profits, capital, and wealth of the bourgeoisie. All united under the false narrative that wage increases cause inflation. But the price of food, goods, and basic services has risen all these years, without wage increases and with the payment of meager bonuses. The enemies of the workers proclaim in unison that they haven't been able to raise wages due to US sanctions, but they have all accumulated wealth despite the sanctions, which have been exposed every time corruption and the multi-million dollar fortunes amassed become visible, while employed workers, pensioners, and the unemployed accumulate only misery and disease.

In March 2022, the government set the minimum wage at 130 bolivars per month, equivalent to $30 at the time. The basic food basket for a family of five cost $471, and the basic needs basket was estimated at $940. At that time, the dollar was valued at 4.29 bolivars. On May 1st of this year, the government announced that the minimum wage would remain the same (130 bolivars or $0.26), while the basic food basket and the basic needs basket would now cost $692 and $1,385, respectively. Thus, whether the employer pays the minimum wage or the slightly higher base salary offered by some institutions and companies, it is insufficient for workers to cope with the cost of living. Between March 2022 and May 2026, the dollar increased by 11,311.42%, the cost of the basic food basket by 50%, and the cost of basic necessities by 50%—a picture of rampant inflation without any increase in wages. The national government's announcement of a minimum income equivalent to $240 per month (based on bonuses), even if it were to "benefit" all workers (which it is not), would barely cover 34.7% of the cost of the basic food basket and 17.33% of the cost of basic necessities.

But the announcement of a monthly income equivalent to $240 for active workers and $70 for pensioners, all based on bonuses, was, as in previous years, an informal announcement. After the first 20 days of May, the announcement had not been published in Venezuela's Official Gazette. This means that, from a legal standpoint, the Cestaticket (food voucher) and the War Bonus (which are the components of the announced $240) remain technically unchanged, without an increase. The government will resolve this with some maneuver to pay the announced increase to the bonus for public sector workers. However, for example, when private school employees asked their employers to comply with the government announcements, the employers stated that they could not act without the official decree published in the Official Gazette, and furthermore, doing so would imply an increase in tuition fees, for which they would also "need government authorization". Thus we see how far these wretches, the “entrepreneurs”, “the captains of business”, “the leaders of private companies”, can go in order to maintain and expand the surplus value they appropriate, paying workers with crumbs and, if necessary, failing to comply with any demagogic announcement of the bourgeois government.

On the other hand, even knowing it contradicts itself by announcing an increase only in bonuses and not in salaries, the government announced it would review the public sector salary scales. This announcement seems like a demagogic ploy by employers and union bosses alike to quell worker discontent by creating the expectation of a salary increase. But whether or not these salary scales are adjusted, workers can expect nothing more than crumbs from the government, which defends the interests of the bourgeoisie, nor can they expect strike calls from union leadership, which is complicit with the government and employers in this plundering of wages.

In this context, May Day arrived, with the government offering demagoguery, bread and circuses, and with the trade unions appearing in the streets in small gatherings, without making much effort to mobilize active workers and without disguising their electoral ambitions and their hypocritical call to fight for wage increases.

Another important aspect that is often overlooked is that when undertaking the struggle for wage increases, it's crucial to consider that more than half of Venezuelan workers lack formal employment. They work without contracts, are self-employed, hold casual jobs, or are simply unemployed. This situation must be addressed in the demands, requiring the unemployed to receive a full salary. Similarly, retired and pensioned workers should receive payments equivalent to those of active workers. Therefore, workers must transform unions in the future, so that they don't just represent workers from the same company, but also from the same locality, bringing together active, unemployed, and retired workers of all trades and nationalities, who can then mobilize as a working class in their demands (something currently prohibited by bourgeois laws and which will only emerge with the resumption of the proletariat's class struggle). Trade unions must be a guarantee of class unity, and current unions, those recognized by bourgeois laws, are not designed for that purpose. The union must break free from the local straitjacket of organizing solely within the walls of the company, institution, or workplace. As the strike movement grows, as workers participate more widely and become aware of their power, they will find it necessary to break with opportunistic leaders and give rise to genuine class-based unions.

The struggle that must resurface requires high levels of grassroots worker participation. And only consistent leaders will foster this active participation. Holding assemblies at all levels must be emphasized. Assemblies without debate, without agreeing on actions to fight, without appointing committees to handle different tasks, to advise the union leadership, and even to remove leaders who fail to commit to the struggle are meaningless. Assemblies (and strikes) are the primary spaces for participation, and victory will be achieved with the broadest possible participation of wage earners.

Venezuelan labor unions lack a strong capacity for worker mobilization. The high-profile mobilizations called by Chavismo—which have dwindled over time—have always enjoyed the government's financial and coercive backing. Pro-government unions would be unable to mobilize many workers without this logistical and financial support. But the so-called "autonomous unionism" is also incapable of producing significant worker mobilizations, even if they unite in this effort. However, neither pro-government unionism nor "autonomous unionism" is truly willing or interested in mobilizing workers and leading them on strike. For Chavismo, mobilizing workers serves only to support the government (that is, the bourgeoisie), not to demand concessions, and strikes are rejected and viewed as conspiracy, terrorism, and "playing into the hands of the right wing". For "autonomous unionism", mobilizing workers is tantamount to opposing Chavismo and fighting for other bourgeois groups (with whom most of the leadership of this unionism is compromised) that seek to control the government. They demand workers' rights, but only as a complement to the demands for "more democracy", "defense of the Constitution", and "against the dictatorship" (referring to the Chavista government). Nor do they advocate strikes and mobilizations as the primary forms of struggle for workers. Both currents of unionism are always willing to sacrifice workers' interests for the smooth functioning of businesses and the national economy. They call for the defense of sovereignty and the homeland, which is tantamount to defending capitalist exploitation.

In comparison with the last 15 years, when the only dominant opposition slogan was "out with the dictatorship", recent calls for worker mobilization have focused somewhat more on demanding wage increases, but workers should not be fooled by these demagogues and traitors, who are really campaigning for the presidency.

The working class is mired in apathy, frustration, fear, and rejection of treacherous union leaders. This attitude has accumulated over decades of betrayal. But discontent persists despite being repressed not only by the police, the courts, and prisons, but primarily by this pro-business and treacherous unionism, which keeps workers demobilized, divided, and disorganized. And this discontent will always be the foundation for a resurgence of workers' struggles. Regardless of the immediate course of Venezuelan workers' mobilizations, in the medium term (well beyond May 1, 2026), they will have to confront the need to establish genuine class-based unions and the challenge of uniting all their struggles in an indefinite General Strike without minimum services.