Unity is essential for unions! Dominic Tweedie: 3 June 2013 Some of the problems of trade unionism in South Africa are intrinsic to our circumstances. For example, all workers have a right to form trade unions, under the constitution, and this is a right that workers have fought for, and still support. But the same law that gives the right to form unions, by that same fact gives workers a right to split unions. Democracy is supposed to bind all - majority and minority together. But in a South African trade union, the minority can walk away and form its own, rejectionist union. Two unions in a workplace or an industry are not better than one. Two unions is not more unity, it is less unity. Two unions is disunity. This right to split does not exist in the national democracy. There, the losers must submit to the winners. Walking away is not a practical option. The acquiescence of the losers in a democracy is one of the main conditions, if not the main condition for its existence. Next, a trade union federation is supposed to serve its affiliates, and not the other way around. The federation does not exercise democratic centralism over its affiliates. They are independent entities that are bigger and wealthier for the most part than the federation. The COSATU federation, for example, as a physical institution, consists of a few offices in Braamfontein, and nine provincial offices – amounting to around 60 deployed officers in total. The affiliates of COSATU, taken together, amount to many times that size. The federation does not organise workers. It does not collect membership fees from individuals. It does not collectively bargain. The federation is mainly there to create unity in the trade union movement as a whole, i.e. between trade unions. The present crisis of COSATU is because COSATU is not doing this. It is not uniting, but it has divided the unions against each other. The biggest bone of potential contention among unions, anywhere in the world, is encroachment, also called “poaching”. COSATU has failed to stop it and is even acting in some cases as if it was on the side of the encroachers. Even worse than that, from the point of view of the elected leadership of the affiliates, is that COSATU is interfering with the internal electoral and policy-forming democracy of its affiliates. COSATU has been playing favourites, not only as between unions, but as between personalities within those affiliated unions. These are the things that most exercise the concern of the affiliates in relation to the COSATU federation. Yes, accusations of corruption do exist. And if true, those accused will either “walk”, or be wheeled out very quickly. But as serious as corruption charges are, they are not the threat to the federation that disunity is. COSATU is not paralysed. The affiliates’ fees for institutional membership of the federation are still rolling in, and COSATU’s rent, employees’ salaries and other expenses continue to be paid. In a more ideal world, COSATU would provide common services for the affiliates, saving money by eliminating duplication of effort, or at least by co-ordination and organised sharing. But this hardly happens. Instead, COSATU is busy with a publicity operation, inventing concerns for unions in between rounds of collective bargaining. But this COSATU of indignation hardly represents the reality of trade unionism. Trade unions are there to represent the collective interests of their members vis-a-vis their employers. Members pay fees for this because they consider it a valuable investment. They do not generally regard themselves as having joined an army. For organised labour to go further than collective bargaining requires a political party, and COSATU, the federation and its affiliates, recognise the South African Communist Party as the vanguard party of the working class, and the ANC as the liberation movement of the country. It is as well to reflect a little on history at this point. There is continuity in South African history. The non-racial federation, SACTU, was a signatory to the Freedom Charter in 1955. Many years of industrial struggle bore fruit in 1979 when the Wiehahn Commission recommended recognition of black trade unions. In 1982 the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) was formed with Cyril Ramaphosa as its first General Secretary and Elijah Barayi as its Vice-President. Barayi was a veteran ANC operative from the 1950s, employed in the mining industry since 1960, a leader of mining strikes who had been working in Carletonville when the massacre of 11 striking miners took place in 1973 – a historical turning point. In 1983 the Chamber of Mines recognised the NUM as a collective bargaining interlocutor. In December 1985, COSATU was formed, based largely on the power of the NUM, and the legacy of SACTU, with Elijah Barayi as COSATU’s first President, a position he held until 1991. Barayi passed away in 1994. COSATU still reveres him, above anyone else, as its historical father. Barayi and Ramaphosa created unity from a very difficult situation. They rejected the path of a “go-it-alone” workerist cult, and joined forces with the political institutions of the liberation movement. This was a crucial part of the process leading to legalisation of those political institutions in 1990, and the universal-franchise national election that followed in 1994. Not all problems were eliminated. Cult of personality is a danger, especially when the leader of the federation claims a special relationship with the ordinary members of the affiliates of the federation. The division in COSATU and its affiliates, as between “worker leaders” who continue to be employed by their original employers, and full-time employees, is an inheritance from the founders that has proved divisive on a number of occasions. Presidents are “worker leaders”, while General Secretaries are full-time. Presidents are senior, but general secretaries have more power. This is a serious, intrinsic problem which is hard to manage and does not go away. The last intrinsic problem of the South African trade unions is one that can be seen in many other democratic institutions. The hardest lesson of democracy is this: That there is no succession without a resignation - or a challenge. In all of the mass-democratic alliance formations, with a few notable exceptions, there is a habit of avoiding votes on leadership In COSATU, there has been no contest for General Secretary for many years past. COSATU’s Congress come around every three years. If a contender does not appear very soon, then the present General Secretary, who became Deputy in 1993 and full General Secretary in 1999, will, all other things being equal, retain office once again in 2015 for a further three years after that, at least. Change is never easy. Dominic Tweedie.
Posted on: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 19:18:20 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015