THE STRUCTURE OF THE FACTORY COMMITTEES

The bigger a factory, the more likely it was to have a factory committee. The most comprehensive data on this question do not, at first sight, appear to bear out this contention, for if one groups the delegates to the First Conference of Petrograd Factory Committees (30 May-3 June), according to the size of the factory from which they came, it emerges that the biggest proportion of delegates came from medium-sized factories of 100–500 workers, rather than large ones. If, however, one compares the number of factories of a given size, represented at the conference, to the total number of factories of that size in Petrograd, then it becomes clear that a direct correlation exists between the size of an enterprise and the likelihood of its being represented. Thus 100% of factories with a workforce of more than 5,000 (18 in number) were represented at the First Conference, whereas less than 5% of factories with 50 workers or less were so. 200 workers seems to have been the critical size, for over half the factories of that size or larger sent delegates to the conference. In enterprises of less than 200 workers, it seems that workers were either less interested or less able to set up committees. There is evidence that, notwithstanding the fact that factory owners were obliged by law to recognise the committees, some small employers prevented their workers organising such committees. At the tiny Glazer leather workshop, the nineteen workers formed a committee in March, but its members were fired by the boss and, as a result, the committee collapsed.