More than two hundred businesses were present at the Ukraine Recovery Conference in Gdańsk, Poland, at the end of June, eighty-two of them from Ukraine. But out of Ukraine’s eighty-three sectoral trade unions, none had so much as a stall, let alone a seat on a main panel. That asymmetry is telling; and for Ukrainian activists, taking part in the conference was something of a cold shower., says Oleksandr Kyselov in a report from this year’s URC for Jacobin magazine.
Trade unionists and activists voiced their critical position on such a business-centric approach within the framework of the URC during the event “Towards a Resilient Ukraine: Conditions for a Progressive Recovery” organized by the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
Nina Potarska, a researcher at the Centre for Social and Labour Research (CSLR), argued that the success of Ukraine’s reconstruction will depend not only on investment and infrastructure projects, but above all on whether the country becomes a place people genuinely want to return to.
Speaking at one of the conference’s side events, Potarska emphasized that discussions on reconstruction remain overwhelmingly focused on financing, institutions, and large-scale infrastructure. Far less attention is paid to the social conditions that will shape people’s decisions to return: affordable housing, quality education, healthcare, public transport, childcare, and decent work. According to her, these are the factors that will ultimately determine whether millions of Ukrainians displaced by the war choose to rebuild their lives in Ukraine.
She also highlighted public procurement as one of the most powerful tools for shaping the future labour market. Rather than rewarding the lowest bidder alone, public contracts could promote fair wages, decent working conditions, vocational training, and local employment. Yet this opportunity received little attention during the conference’s main discussions.
Workers Remain Excluded from Decision-Making
Representatives of Ukrainian trade unions and civil society also pointed to a striking imbalance in representation at the conference. Despite the record participation of businesses and international donors, Ukrainian workers and trade unions were largely absent from the main decision-making platforms.
Nataliia Zemlianska of the Trade Union of Producers, Entrepreneurs and Migrant Workers argued that Ukrainian workers were treated primarily as a resource for reconstruction rather than as equal stakeholders in shaping the country’s future.
She noted that more than 5,000 of the conference’s 7,500 participants represented the business sector, while trade unions had virtually no presence on the main panels. In her view, this reflects the absence of meaningful social dialogue on Ukraine’s post-war recovery.
Zemlianska also voiced strong criticism of the government’s proposed new Labour Code. She recalled that only a year earlier, the government, employers’ organisations and trade unions had signed a tripartite memorandum committing to consult labour organisations on any reform of labour legislation. According to her, the current draft law is moving forward despite those commitments. She also stressed that Ukraine’s minimum wage and officially defined subsistence minimum remain far below the real cost of living.
Labour Deregulation Is Not an EU Requirement
Labour lawyer and social activist Vitalii Dudin also challenged the argument that weakening labour protections is necessary for Ukraine’s European integration. According to him, neither the European Union nor international institutions require Ukraine to deregulate labour relations as a condition for accession, and the World Bank abandoned labour-market deregulation as a benchmark many years ago.
In his assessment, the proposed Labour Code reflects domestic political choices rather than external pressure from Brussels.
Dudin also warned about the risks associated with the large-scale privatisation of critical infrastructure during reconstruction. Commercialising sectors that traditionally provide essential public services, he argued, could lead to higher tariffs for households and weaken public control over strategically important infrastructure.
He further noted that workers maintaining critical infrastructure under wartime conditions still lack adequate legal guarantees for compensation if injured during Russian attacks.
Recovery Is More Than an Economic Project
Conference participants also discussed the scale of financial resources required for Ukraine’s reconstruction. European Commission representatives reiterated that future financial assistance will remain linked to progress on anti-corruption measures and the rule of law, while the World Bank currently estimates Ukraine’s reconstruction needs at more than US$580 billion.
Civil society representatives, however, stressed that reconstruction cannot be reduced to financial figures alone. The key question, they argued, is who will shape Ukraine’s post-war development and whether workers, trade unions, and citizens—the people who will ultimately rebuild the country—will have a meaningful voice in those decisions.
This was precisely the point made by Nina Potarska. She argued that the success of Ukraine’s recovery should be measured not only by billions invested or infrastructure rebuilt, but by whether reconstruction creates decent jobs, quality public services, and living conditions that encourage people to return and build their future in Ukraine.