COSATU Today, 25 May 2012
Patrick Craven
|
|
|
Our side of the story
Friday 25 May 2012
Contents
Ø We dip our revolutionary flag in honour of SAMWU’s Comrade Xolile “Boss” Nxu
Ø Message of Support to 2012 NUM National Congress
Ø
Ø Abuses still exist in Olympic supply chains
Ø NUMSA 25TH Anniversary Rallies
Ø YCLSA 90TH anniversary celebration activities
Ø Khaya Xaba, YCLSA Media Liaison Officer, 24 May 2012
Ø Shoulder to shoulder: South African workers and WFTU
Workers
We dip our revolutionary flag in honour of SAMWU’s Comrade Xolile “Boss” Nxu
Tahir Sema, SAMWU National Media and Publicity Officer, 25 May 2012
SAMWU mourns the loss of comrade and revolutionary leader Xolile “Boss” Nxu, SAMWU’s former 1st Deputy President. He passed away due to natural causes late last night, 24 May 2012.
SAMWU as the Largest Local Government Union - on behalf of its entire membership - mourns this tragic loss. The untimely passing away of comrade Nxu comes at a time when workers are facing so many challenges and attacks, especially in their pursuit of socialism.
As SAMWU we will use comrade Boss Nxu’s impeccable character and strength to continue the fight against the onslaught on workers.
As Trade Unionists and activists we will undoubtedly continue the fight against poverty, unemployment, inequality, the casualization of labour and the cancer of corruption that’s currently plaguing our society.
We would like to send our heartfelt condolences to comrade Nxu’s family and to fellow comrades who worked closely with the revolutionary leader.
Comrades and friends can direct individual condolences to the office of the SAMWU General Secretary, Mthandeki Nhlapo, E-mail: mthandek...@samwu.org.za
Tel. No.: +27 (0)21-697-1151
Tel. No.: +27 (0)21-696-9175
(a) Trade Union House, 8 Beverley Street, Athlone, 7764
(p) Private Bag X9, Athlone, 7760
Further details will be communicated soon.
Message of Support to 2012 NUM National Congress
Sidumo Dlamini, COSATU President, 25 May 2012
The president of the NUM comrade Senzeni Zokwana
The General Secretary of the NUM, comrade Frans Baleni
The entire leadership of the NUM,
COSATU leadership present
The leadership of the ANC – the vanguard of our National Democratic Revolution
The leadership of the SACP – the vanguard of our Socialist Revolution
The leadership of SANCO
Invited Guests, in particular our distinguished international guests, we would like to express our gratitude for your contribution in building the NUM into a sharp instrument of class war.
We would like to thank you for building the NUM into a fighting organisation that has become an envy of both your friends and foes.
We congratulate the NUM for reaching 30 years of fighting uncompromisingly for workers’ rights. It is 30 years of serious and relentless struggle; it is 30 years of building the organization that has forcefully and consistently put employers on a back foot; it has been 30 years of building not only the NUM but COSATU into a force that has earned international credibility; it has been 30 years of building the ANC and deepening the national democratic revolution as a direct route to Socialism; it has been 30 years of building the SACP and advancing the struggle for a Socialist South Africa.
NUM is a reservoir of leaders from where our movement as a whole comes to take the best to lead our revolution. The General Secretary of COSATU comrade Zwelinzima Vavi comes from this homestead
By the way he was not snubbed by the NUM as the media wants all of us to believe. The COSATU General Secretary is a child of NUM he comes in and out of this home as he wishes. We urge the media to stop peddling lies!
The NUM is also a school that prepared the current Deputy President of the ANC and of the country. The man who led negotiations for our democratic transition and presided over the drawing of our constitution which has become an envy of the world, Comrade Cyril Ramaphosa, comes from this reservoir and the current Secretary General of the ANC comrade Gwede Mantashe comes from here.
This is a union known for its political and ideological clarity; it was the first to adopt the Freedom Charter and went on to influence COSATU to adopt a similar progressive position.
This is a union which is known for its militancy. It was the NUM which led a deadly strike action in 1987 which contributed in heightening the momentum for mass mobilisation which ultimately landed a deadly blow to the Apartheid regime.
The NUM is the pride of COSATU. We have noted that the Secretariat Report shows that the NUM now has increased its membership to 320 000, despite the global economic crisis which has led to the shedding of jobs.
We are impressed by the state of finances in the union, which has healthy financial reserves. We are impressed about how the union is using its investments on education and training to realise the dream of producing children of mineworkers to become mining engineers.
All these good things make us to say that the NUM is indeed a model union envisaged by COSATU and we wish that all our unions can copy from the excellent work by the NUM.
It is for this reason that you, the members of NUM, must do everything to defend this glorious organisation
You must defend this union with everything you have. Part of that will include refusing to get service providers and employers to run your union.
There must be a conscious refusal by all of us to have our organisations being defined in terms of their election processes.
Our struggle was never about being elected to positions of power. Our organisations were not formed just to get leaders elected. These organisations are instruments of class war which is not fought on the bases of the position you occupy in the organisation.
We do not have a thing called an “elective” congress, because a congress is not just about elections but is about plotting the class struggle.
Comrades, today we celebrate Africa Day. On this day, the 25th May in 1963, the Organisation of African Unity was born and established as its mission the achievement of independence by all African states.
In 2002 the OAU established its own successor, the African Union, which defines its mission as ensuring the development of the African continent under terms determined by the African people themselves.
As we celebrate this we must remind ourselves that Africa is said to possess 99% of the world’s chrome resources, 85% of its platinum, 70% of its tantalite, 68% of its cobalt, 54% of its gold plus significant oil and gas reserves.
The continent is also home to uranium, manganese, diamonds and bauxite deposits in very high quantities, timber and other forest resources, including massive underground water reserves discovered in some of the driest parts of the continent. There are the endless riches of this content. Yet our people are subjected to hunger and abject poverty because of colonial plunder and corruption which continues to rob them of the development they so much deserve.
These are the countries’ resources which attracted the imperialist powers that met in Berlin 1884 and decided to divide Africa amongst themselves and imposed artificial boundaries in order to divide our resources amongst themselves.
This imperialists’ Berlin conference consolidated the process started by Jan Van Riebiek in South Africa when they arrived uninvited on our shores in 1652.
It is these colonial and imperialist processes which rendered Africa a colonial territory in which her peoples were subjected to indignities and killings, administered by foreign powers ironically claiming to be democratic and civilized.
Just when we thought that the project of reconstructing Africa and South Africa in particular was on track we woke up to a nightmare of Peter Mulder who, like his ancestors, told all of us that “Africans in particular never in the past lived in the whole of South Africa. The Bantu-speaking people moved from the equator down while the white people moved from the Cape up to meet each other at the Kei River. There is sufficient proof that there were no Bantu-speaking people in the Western Cape and North-western Cape. These parts form 40% of South Africa’s land surface”.
As if that was not enough the DA went on to make racist pronouncements to denigrate our people, who in the main were blacks and Africans and gave them a status of refugees in their own country, mistaking the Western Cape as just another State which exists outside of a unitary South Africa.
As we were still trying to find creative ways to engage with the insults hurled to our people, the DA became even more aggressive. They decided to march against COSATU, using the African youth to advance their racist and neoliberal agenda.
Like their colonial forebears who used the divide and rule strategy, the DA used the strategy of setting the black working class against each other on a programme that is intended to exploit them.
UTata uMandela warned us when he wrote an article entitled the Shifting Sands of Illusion in June 1953. Speaking about the DA of that time he said that they, “though apparently democratic and progressive in form, are essentially reactionary in content. They stand not for the freedom of the people but for the adoption of more subtle systems of oppression and exploitation. Though they talk of liberty and human dignity they are subordinate henchmen of the ruling circles. They stand for the retention of the cheap labour system and of the subordinate colonial status of the non-European masses together with the Nationalist Government whose class interests are identical with theirs. In practice they acquiesce in the slavery of the people, low wages, mass unemployment, the squalid tenements in the locations and shanty-towns.”
Comrades when these things happen, the whole principle of non-racialism gets questioned, when it starts to look as it is Blacks and Africans and a few whites in our ranks who have the responsibility to work for peace and non racialism.
Just recently we also woke up to another racial slur when De Klerk told the world that not all aspects of apartheid were morally repugnant and that there was merit in the notion of ethnic groups living apart”.
This is not the first time De Klerk abused the trust given to him by our people. He showed similar dishonesty during the CODESA negotiations, leading to comrade Mandela saying that “even the head of an illegitimate, discredited, minority regime as his, has certain moral standards to uphold. He has no excuse, because he is a representative of a discredited regime, not to uphold moral standards ... that his weakness is to look at matters from the point of view of the National Party and the White minority in this country, not from the point of view of the population of South Africa”
Recently we woke up to yet another insult, when the president of the ANC and the country was depicted in the most denigrating fashion in the name of art and freedom of expression.
We have been once again forced to relive the memories of Sara Bartman who in 1810 was taken from Cape Town to London and later in 1814 taken to France, and became the object of scientific and imperialist investigation and medical research that formed the bedrock of European ideas about black female sexuality.
Like Sarah Barman who was put in a museum for Public viewing and entertainment for the masters, the denigrating picture of our President was put in an art gallery for public viewing and entertainment.
We were reminded and forced to relive the painful colonial period in which the image of black people in the white mind focused on outrageous depictions of individual blacks and their assumed cultural practices.
During that period dozens of graphic artists and illustrators prospered as racial commercial artists by drawing such images to sell products and to illustrate show bills and magazines.
Even though we have been provoked to the extreme we must not make a mistake of responding in a racist fashion; we have a responsibility to stand on the side of honour and honour the principle of non–racialism as the core principle of our revolution.
Ours is to build a non-racial, non-sexist, united, democratic and prosperous South Africa.
The poisonous racial beliefs which are being harboured in the thinking and policies of the DA ,the Freedom Front Plus and articulated through their ideological instruments such as in art galleries have no place in our country.
We call on all our members to Join COSATU, the SACP and the ANC as we take to the street to defend the principle of non racialism.
We are also angered by the City Press’s stance and arrogance that they will not remove this drawing from the website. We call on our people to show their disapproval by stopping stop buying the newspaper until they remove the drawing from the website.
As we fight racism that is being perpetuated by the DA we must not lose focus from the main tasks confronting our revolution.
Comrades we have a responsibility to reflect properly and confront those things which matters for our revolution to succeed. These included confronting divisions.
We should do so not do so from a neutral, but from a working class standpoint.
The first aspect of this standpoint is that we should seek to build unity that is founded on protecting our class interests and not just workers’ interests but working class interests as a whole.
Secondly we should seek to build unity that is founded on our responsibility to deepen the National Democratic Revolution as a direct route to Socialism. This requires that at all material times we should know what to emphasize based on our common understand of the balance of forces and what should be achieved at that point in time. In my view what we emphasise should be determined by what we have defined as our primary enemy and not to elevate the secondary to the level of the primary factors to a point where tactical considerations are elevated to strategic factors.
We must at all times seek to keep the motive forces together and direct war against our primary class enemies. There will be from time those within our ranks who will deviate but we must be clear about how we should deal with them.
Do we deal with them as if they were class enemies or we deal with them in such a way that we seek to maximise unity within the motive forces?
I have observed with great concern for example how during election factions define themselves as being principled; but what is to be principled?
This phrasing comrade has become a weapon of giving credibility to factionalism. All factions claim to be acting on the basis of pursuing a principle and when you come closer you are likely to discover that the overriding principle is individual interests.
Our immediate tasks are to elaborate and clarify ourselves about the objective principles that should underpin our actions at all material times. Today I want to emphasise that at the top of these principles must be working class unity which must be based on class interests.
It is on the basis of this class unity that we should pursue a battle against neoliberalism as an antithesis of the working class interests.
The Second immediate tasks is that as Marxist–Leninists we should shift away from a false belief that history is made by “Great Men and Women”, kings and queens, statesmen and politicians.
As Marxist–Leninists we are opposed to this unscientific approach, but we do not deny the role of individuals in history, their initiative or audacity (or lack of it), in the social struggle.
We accept that history is made by people. But we make it our responsibility to uncover the dialectical relationship between the individual (the subjective factor) and the great forces (the objective factors) that govern the movement of society and see this role in its historical context.
Marxism teaches us that no person, no matter how talented, capable or farsighted, can determine the main course of historical development, which is shaped by objective forces.
However, we do accept that under critical circumstances, the role played by individuals can be decisive, the last decisive link in the chain of causality. But we must always deliberately seek to enhance the role of the masses in our revolution and subject the individual to the revolutionary masses.
It is in this context that the third strategic task we need to undertake is to assert the role of shop stewards as being central in the political life of our organisation. The resources of our formations must be directed to building both the political and organisational capacity of our shop stewards as the nucleus of our organisation.
Comrades our revolution has reached a stage where we need to invest our resources into building the capacity and political resourcefulness of our shop stewards based on advancing our class interests.
If we fail to do this task the confidence of the right wing which exists both within and outside our movement will continue to be in the ascendency and remain unchallenged.
The fourth challenge comrades, is that we should consistently wage a relentless struggle against the neoliberal agenda. We should be prepared to fight it wherever it raises its ugly head.
We should fight it inside our own movement even if it comes camouflaged as government departmental programmes, where we are told not to micro-manage deployees in government.
Part of this task includes building the SACP as our vanguard. We have noted with concern how some of our differences have played themselves out in the public. As COSATU we want our affiliates to be guided by the resolutions of our Central Committee which on among others called for better management of differences amongst Alliance formations.
Most of what goes into the public should be managed internally through such structures as the National Political Council and the Alliance secretariat.
Articulation of COSATU positions in opposition to the government or even other components of the Alliance policy positions should not be seen as public spats. It also does not take away the right and responsibility of comrades to engage robustly on any political question as they try to find answers to the burning questions of our society. This articulation should happen in a manner that seeks to build consensus and unity of the Alliance and should not degenerate into name-calling and labelling. We emphasise that the unity of the Alliance is sacrosanct and people must not play around with it.
The Central Committee said that COSATU’s view that the SACP is being weakened and its national profile is on the decline as a result of its decision to change its constitution to allow the post of the General Secretary not to be full time is a matter that should be guided by the spirit of this resolution.
COSATU should however respect this as a decision of the SACP constitutional structures. COSATU also accepts the SACP argument that deployment of its cadres is informed by its Medium Term Vision that enjoins the SACP to occupy all fronts of struggle including in the state. COSATU agrees with this strategic objective that communists must be in all sites of struggle but insists that the current situation does not strike a balance between this need and a need to build a strong SACP on the ground. COSATU will have space to influence the SACP in the run-up to its 13th National Congress.
In the meantime this should not be allowed to divide COSATU and the SACP and must, as far as it is possible, be better managed in the internal debates between the two formations.
In our Central Committee we also said that our task in the current conjuncture is to defend the ANC 52nd National Conference progressive resolutions and ensure that we embark on a series of campaigns to ensure their effective implementation. The political task of the working class in this conjuncture is to defend the leadership collective elected in this conference against those who have from inception launched campaigns to put this leadership on the back foot and who have undermined their authority.
Our task is to work with government to realise the common objectives summarised in the ANC elections manifesto of 2009, and ensure that the programme of decent work is taken forward. We want the government to succeed on its five priorities because we know their failure will spell disaster for the working class.
We said we will do so not by becoming uncritical supporters of both the ANC and government leadership. We shall at all times engage strategically with the ANC to ensure that it builds capacity and has the necessary confidence to act decisively to lead the Alliance and society.
At the same time, when the leadership allows paralysis and lack of confidence in our movement, we shall, in a principled fashion, speak out and embark on campaigns to ensure that the revolution stays on track. We shall at all times engage the ANC leadership on our concerns so that they may appreciate why we have chosen to embark on such campaigns.
In this context we want to remind some of the deployees in government that Polokwane did not speak about the Gautrain, City-to-city Speed Trains. Neither did it speak about e-tolls but it spoke about “the promotion of affordable public transport, the expansion of rail logistics and the reversal of the apartheid spatial legacy”.
We must remind our comrades in government that Polokwane rejected proposals on the youth wage subsidy; instead it said that “as part of directly absorbing the unemployed there was a need for a much larger national youth service and ensuring the linkage of industrial strategy with key youth development programmes in the form of an integrated Youth Development Strategy. This would include programmes that target the employment of women”.
Polokwane also said that “answering the challenges of unemployment, poverty and inequality means that we must simultaneously accelerate economic growth and transform the quality of that growth. Our most effective weapon in the campaign against poverty is the creation of decent work, and creating work requires faster economic growth. Moreover, the challenges of poverty and inequality require that accelerated growth take place in the context of an effective strategy of redistribution that builds a new and more equitable growth path”
Comrades we will not allow employers to abuse the youth wage subsidy in the same way that they turned SETAS into milk cows and gave workers useless skills. We have no doubt they will do the same with the proposed youth wage subsidy.
An amount of R5 billion has been budgeted to support the youth wage subsidy by National Treasury. This R5 billion should be used to upgrade basic education infrastructure, expand FET colleges to skill and train young people, strengthen the capacity of SOEs and municipalities to directly deliver infrastructure and services and thereby directly absorb the unemployed, build industries through beneficiation and strengthening of domestic value chains.
All these interventions require a radical shift in macroeconomic and other policies, including the decisive role of the state in strategic sectors!
The DA claims that the subsidy will create 400 000 jobs, but Treasury estimates show that the net jobs created would be 178 000. This does not take into account the displacement that would occur as firms replace workers who are less than 29 years, neither does it take into account the substitution that would take place, as firms replace unsubsidised workers with subsidised workers. Furthermore, this does not take into account the displacement of firms whose workers are not subsidised.
There are six reasons in the main why COSATU is opposed to the Youth Wage Subsidy, which in our view will have the following impact:
1. It will substitute already employed workers who have hard-won benefits (ILO made a presentation at Nedlac on this, based on international evidence):
2. It will give money to employers to hire people that employers would have hired even without a youth wage subsidy (the so-called deadweight loss):
3. It will degrade conditions of employment for workers across the board:
4. It does not guarantee that the young person will be trained during the subsidy period.
5. It will lead to increase in the precarious nature employment across the board:
6. It will Increase profit margins and not employment
We must refuse to allow a situation where access and control to state power by our movement used to butcher the working class.
The ANC is our movement we must make it to serve the interests of the working class which constitute the primary motive force of the National Democratic Revolution.
We wish this congress all the success.
Amandla!
What SACTWU told M&G
Andre Kriel, SACTWU General Secretary, 25 May 2012
Dear comrades
You will see an article in today’s M&G about the issues in the clothing industry, written by Teigue Payne. We have in the past had serious run-ins with him about his biased reporting. Today’s article is a better representation of our views. I have though noticed that some important aspects has either been omitted (eg our view on the Youth Subsidy) or alternatively wrongly attributed (like for example where he claims I have admitted productivity agreements could not be implemented because wages are too high, which I never said.
For your information below, please see my actual replies, for your information. Regards
Teigue Payne, Mail & Guardian, business section
I have been asked to do an article primarily focusing on the success or otherwise of the 30% wage concession deal. I would like to get the union's view of its success or otherwise, and answers to the questions below. Please would you let me know whether you will be replying so that I can leave space for your replies.
Questions
According to Johann Baard, the 30% scheme has been a disappointment to employers so far, with only a few hundred people having been employed in terms of it. He says that even if the scheme survives after 30 months, it is no kind of a solution to the overall scenario in the clothing industry.
Do you agree with the above?
The union has agreed to the lower entry rate. In return employers have committed to grow compliant jobs by a bench-mark rate of 3% as at the end of February this year. They have failed to do so. We have stuck to our part of the agreement, without any excuses. We expect them to stick to their part of the agreement by resolving the management difficulties they face in implementation. Yes, the agreement is no solution to the overall challenges facing the industry. We have never claimed so, nor was it ever the intention.
Baard also says that the scheme results in disruption in the workplace and wastage. For instance a new entrant may achieve equal productivity to other employees and will often demand equal pay. Management then has a decision as to whether to comply, and if this cannot be afforded, then the person leaves. It generally therefore boils down to a relatively costly recruiting, training and departure scenario.
Do you agree with the above?
We are not surprised. These matters were generally ventilated when the provision was negotiated last year. Employers were confident then that it would not be insurmountable. It is their responsibility to resolve these management problems themselves so that they can meet their counter commitments of job creation.
Press releases and statements from yourselves recently have said that the clothing industry may be in a better state than people think, with slightly higher employment figures. The employers believe that this is a case of the union talking up the industry ahead of wage negotiations. Baard says that the industry is not seeing a repatriation of orders by South African retailers from the Far East to South Africa, and although the frequency and factories of short time/closures has slackened over the past year, the industry is still on a knife edge.
What is your comment on the above?
We have only focused on the empirically verifiable factual data, not subjective opinion. We have also not counter-accused the employers of ‘talking down’ the industry ahead of wage negotiations.
We have used two sources of data [from Statistics SA (StatsSA) and from actual job losses which we collect from around the country, respectively] to make our observations about relative employment stabilisation in the industry.
Regarding the StatsSA data, to the best of our knowledge, StatsSA isn’t guided in data collection and production methodologies by the intention to promote any particular party or interest. Certainly not that of the union. Yet there it is, in StatsSA’s own data, that employment in the industry has increased in the last three quarters of 2011.
As for our job loss data, in the past when our job loss data showed the devastation of the industry, clothing employers were only too happy to support it, and to quote it – especially when it was used to lobby the state to assist the industry. Yet now when the data tells a more positive story, employers suddenly have a problem with it. Strange.
You report Baard as claiming that employers have not seen a repatriation of orders to South Africa. But some senior employers within Baard’s own constituency would disagree it seems - see http://www.fm.co.za/article.aspx?id=170591 where, amongst other things, (quote): “John Comley, CEO of Celrose Clothing and Eddels Footwear, says that while the industry has a long way to go to achieve the supply chain efficiencies required, a trend has definitely started and orders are being repatriated from the East”.
Baard also says that government subsidies and other devices which the union says are lifting the industry have been shown to be relatively ineffective elsewhere in the world and that basically the clothing industry migrates from high labour cost to lay low labour cost areas (as is happening in China, from South to North currently), no matter what subsidies or other devices are put in place.
What is your comment on the above?
Behind the incorrect public pronouncements that wages are too high, for a long time clothing employers have lamented their inability to compete against countries which subsidise their industries. That is precisely why the industry demanded such support from the state, because it was believed it would allow the industry to better compete. If you are reporting Baard’s position properly to us, it is a case of chronic Orwellian double-think, since only a few days ago Baard also said: “the South African industry has not been "out-competed"; it has been "out-subsidised". It doesn’t seek protective tariff barriers, but it wants equal treatment. He claims China offers as many as 60 different subsidies by national, provincial, local and city governments.” See http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/content.aspx?id=171574
Baard says that the compliant employers are now at a point where they will not accept any increase in wages unless there is a level playing field. They would prefer a level playing field in the sense of a lower minimum wage which they believe many non-compliant companies would be able to achieve; but in the absence of that, then a level playing field must be achieved by closing down the non-compliant companies. He says that the union is being obstructive in regard to execution of the writs against the approximately 450 non-compliant companies.
What is the union's current view regarding execution of these writs? Does the union believe that they should be delayed?
The union does not support non-compliance. Many of our members work in such companies and we are painfully aware of the brutalities of such employment. Nevertheless, while the union believes non-compliant companies should be closed, such action is not our first preference. We have been at pains to seek alternatives, such as a phase-in program to compliance, allowing incentives to promote compliance, etc.
It is not true that compliant employers have suffered increased prejudice due to non-compliance. Their are a range of support and other measures which helps to mitigate the effect of non-compliance: for example, only compliant employers have access to the lower entry wage rates, only complaint employers have access to government incentives and compliant employers suffer during wage related strikes.
It is refreshing to see employers finally acknowledging SACTWU’s position on the execution of writs. There was a media outcry in 2010 and 2011 about the ‘fiendish’ union which was closing workers’ factories, while those actions were really mainly the choice of clothing employers. In private, clothing employers stoked the fire of executions. In public, however, they sat quietly like innocents while the union was blamed for everything.
SACTWU does not believe that cutting workers wages will resolve non-compliance, because wages in the clothing industry are not high at all, Clothing industry workers are the lowest paid in the whole of the manufacturing industry. Nor is the primary source of non-compliance higher wages.
In any event, it is a false claim that non-compliance in the industry has worsened. In September 2004, the number of non-compliant companies were just over 70%. By the employers’ own written admission, it has now been reduced to about 40%.
It is also a myth that non-compliance is caused by the bargaining council set wage rates. Non-compliance were even rife at the time, for example, when the non-metro part of the industry was not covered by any bargaining council agreement.
More worrying though, is that senior AMSA members are themselves deliberately fuelling non-compliance. SACTWU has empirical evidence of this. We have advised AMSA so . They have not denied this.
In any event, SACTWU is not the cause of non-compliance.
Baard agrees with a statement recently made by Mr Kriel that companies have not implemented the productivity incentive system approved by the union. Generally, he says, companies say that the basic minimum wage which must be covered is too high so they cannot afford further productivity payments. Thus the scheme is effectively a nullity.
Is the scheme in fact being applied by any companies, and if so by how many?
Has any part of Seardel implemented the productivity incentive system, and if so which parts?
Mr Baard is factually wrong. The clothing industry productivity scheme is enshrined in a gazetted wage agreement reached between the parties. It does not require employers to add any additional monies, since the scheme clearly states that existing rates could be re-arranged to allow for a component there-off to be diverted as compensation for productivity improvements. The simple fact is that employers have also seriously failed to make progress in this area. Their failure now places what is an innovative arrangement in serious danger of collapse due to a credibility crises which may emerge at shop floor level on this issue.
In any event, clothing sector minimum wages are not high. Clothing workers are the lowest paid in the whole of the South African manufacturing industry.
Yes, we are aware that the productivity scheme has been implemented in Seardel.
Recent statements by the union have indicated high increases in productivity by clothing workers in recent years.
If workers are capable of such increases in productivity, why does the union oppose a Mauritius-type system of a low basic minimum wage, but relatively generous productivity incentives (either in terms of time off or money)?
The minimum wage in the clothing industry is already far too low. In any event, employers have not even made use of the opportunities for productivity arrangements which currently is in the industry agreement, and which does not require additional monies to be paid for productivity improvements.
Baard however says that the productivity increase figures which you have quoted are multisource and not just for labour, and are therefore a misrepresentation, and that there has been no study of labour-alone productivity.
What is your comment on this?
It is interesting that Baard has claimed this to you. To us he has only complained that he doesn’t have the data and can’t verify it. Hence it is strange that he now ‘knows’ we are referring to “multisource” (actually multifactor) productivity when he has not even seen it.
No, Baard is wrong on a number of counts. Productivity SA has done the study which he believes doesn’t exist and the statistics we have quoted are most definitely not for multifactor productivity. They are for labour productivity.
Nevertheless, Baard is not wrong that multifactor productivity has indeed risen too. The problem is that multifactor productivity has been held back by another constituent productivity factor – capital productivity – which lagged the increases in labour productivity, since employers have not sufficiently modernised their capital equipment.
In other words, productivity has been rising predominantly because of the efforts of workers, not employers.
A recent press release from yourselves indicated that there was a 54% increase in real earnings by workers in industry in the period 2005 to 2010. But in the period 1990 to 2005, there was only a 2% increase in real earnings.
Is this correct, and if so, what accounts for the surge in real earnings by workers in the industry given its difficult situation in the past few years?
It is indeed correct.
These increases are measured against different time periods. The 2% increase was achieved over a 15 year period, and a number of significant trends actually took place in that period. This included the fact that just prior to 2005 (in the equivalent period before 2005, between 1999 and 2004), real earnings actually decreased by 10%. Around that time workers were very frustrated with their acute struggle for survival on the back of lower buying power. They tasted what employers ask – that they earn less – and found they could not live off it. They needed more money.
The data about the recent increases in real earnings must also be read against the increases in productivity which workers have achieved over these periods. The consequence of rising output by workers is that unit labour cost has actually decreased over time, despite the increase in wages.
It is also important to remember that local clothing workers earn very, very meagre incomes. Even with their recent increases, they still struggle to live. In a survey that we conducted in 2011 with clothing workers in Newcastle, for instance, we found that transport generally cost workers R50 to R100 a week to travel to and from work. Household electricity, used as little as possible by generally large households, was about R70 a week, while rent cost about R40 per week. The food and grocery expenses of low-wage workers are limited to basic goods, often simple carbohydrates which provide quick energy and fill one up rapidly. Bread, pap, flour, rice, potatoes, beans, sugar, cooking oil, washing powder and soap are bought in bulk and cost a worker at least R220 a week. If workers spend on other items - such as vegetables, meat, onions, tea, coffee, milk, crèche, airtime, children's transport to school, children's school lunch, or even toothpaste, medication, toilet paper or clothing, amongst other things – their overall costs are higher. Workers' expenses are often greater than the minimum wage.
Does the experience around the 30% scheme prompt any new thoughts by yourselves about the more general question of a youth employment subsidy. What are your views on this?
SACTWU firmly supports the COSATU position on the matter of the Youth Subsidy.
International
Abuses still exist in Olympic supply chains
Mathieu Debroux, Play Fair Campaign, 25 May 2012
Workers making Olympic sportswear for London 2012 for top brands and high street names including adidas and Next are being paid poverty wages, forced to work excessive overtime and threatened with instant dismissal if they complain about working conditions, according to a new report from the Play Fair 2012 campaign published today (Monday).
Last autumn researchers working on behalf of Play Fair campaign (which includes the International Trade Union Confederation, the International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers’ Federation and the Clean Clothes Campaign) visited ten factories – eight of which were producing Olympic goods – in China, the Philippines and Sri Lanka. Across the three countries they talked to 175 workers about their working conditions.
The report “Fair Games? Human rights of workers in Olympic 2012 supplier factories” uncovers a range of abuses, providing more evidence to increase the pressure on the International Olympic Committee (IOC) to act to improve the working conditions in Olympic supply chains in the run up to Rio 2016, says Play Fair.
“Fair Games?” contains many examples where workers making Olympic goods have been badly treated including:
• In China workers at a factory in the Guangdong Province which produces sportswear for Adidas were contracted to work in two separate locations 200km apart so lived in fear of suddenly being sent miles from home for their jobs.
• Workers at the same Amerseas Enterprises Factory also complained of regularly having to do overtime in excess of the legal minimum (with working hours from 8am to 10pm not uncommon even at less busy times) and of not being able to wear the necessary safety masks to protect against dust because of unrealistic production targets.
• In the Philippines workers complained of pay rates so low that they were forced to pawn their ATM cards to loan sharks for ‘pay day loans’ to see them through the month. Workers in the factories producing for Adidas said they were also told when they started that overtime was compulsory.
• In Sri Lanka workers also said that their pay was not enough to meet their basic needs – those questioned said they earned a maximum of 25,000 LKR a month (£122), little more than half the country’s living wage of 45,000 LKR (£220).
• Workers at the Next Manufacturing factory in Sri Lanka reported how the company used an external agent to hire short-term temporary workers. The agent made the workers do double shifts each day – after completing a full shift plus overtime at Next they were transferred to another factory where they had to work until 2.30am. The next morning they had to report for their 8am shift at Next.
• There were no unions permitted in any of the factories and in China, workers said that anyone talking to colleagues about the need to improve factory conditions would be dismissed instantly.
Following research undertaken by Play Fair camping earlier this year www.tuc.org.uk/international/tuc-20660-f0.cfm<http://www.tuc.org.uk/international/tuc-20660-f0.cfm> – which found evidence of child labour, excessive hours, poverty pay and dangerous working conditions in Chinese factories producing pin badges and London 2012 mascots – the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) agreed to get tougher with the factories in its various supply chains.
This included making information about employment rights available in Chinese and establishing a Chinese language hotline so that workers could complain about ill treatment. “Fair Games?” shows that the abuse of workers in Olympic supply chains was also happening in other countries.
To illustrate the extent of the problem and to convince the IOC that it needs to do more to improve the treatment of workers making goods for the next Games in Brazil, the TUC has submitted a number of complaints to LOCOG on behalf of the workers from China and the Philippines who are featured in the report.
TUC General Secretary Brendan Barber said: “Despite the London organisers’ best intentions and its confidence that factory audits would be enough to expose any abuses, this report shows that there have been goods made in Olympic supply chains where the workers were treated in a way that cannot be described as ethical.
“We hope that the IOC can benefit from LOCOG’s experience and ensure that the lessons learned in 2012 lead to better and fairer working conditions for those producing sportswear or merchandise in the run up to Rio 2016. There is much too in this report for sportswear brands and our high street chains to take on board.”
Klaus Priegnitz, General Secretary of the International Textile, Garment and Leather Workers’ Federation (ITGLWF), which wrote the report, said: “Prior to the Beijing Olympics Play Fair called on companies to take action to ensure the human rights of all workers in their supply chains were respected.
“Four years on we see that the denial of the right to freedom of association, the payment of poverty wages and the widespread use of precarious work is still the norm. Companies need to step up their game and work with unions to support the development of mature systems of industrial relations in their supplier factories.”
Sharan Burrow, International Trade Union Confederation General Secretary (ITUC) said: “We need the IOC to take responsibility and make labour rights and decent work a reality for all workers producing for any Olympic Games.”
Anna McMullen, co-ordinator of the garment workers' rights campaign Labour Behind the Label, said: “In an industry where exploitation is the norm, brands, like the IOC or Olympic sponsor Adidas, must take action in order to break the cycle of human rights abuse. If they just stand by and watch, reports like this will keep occurring. Now is the time to make a difference.”
Fair Games? is published by the Play Fair Campaign which is co-ordinated by the International Trade Union Confederation, the ITGLWF, the Clean Clothes Campaign and Building and Wood Workers’ International. The Playfair 2012 Campaign is the UK arm of the global campaign and exists to influence the London Games organisers and international sportswear brands to raise the bar on workers’ rights in the run-up to this summer’s Games.
- A copy of the report is available at www.tuc.org.uk/tucfiles/291/sportswear.pdf<http://www.tuc.org.uk/tucfiles/291/sportswear.pdf>
- Further information about the Play Fair and Playfair 2012 campaigns are available at www.play-fair.org<http://www.play-fair.org> and www.playfair2012.org.uk<http://www.playfair2012.org.uk>
- Today (Monday) Playfair 2012 is launching an online action calling on Adidas, Nike, Next, Pentland (Speedo), New Balance, The North Face, Columbia Sports, Brooks, Saucony, Under Armour and Lululemon Athletica to take action to end the exploitation of workers in their supply chains, and ensure workers’ rights are respected in line with internationally-recognised standards and the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights www.playfair2012.org.uk/what-you-can-do/fair-games<http://www.playfair2012.org.uk/what-you-can-do/fair-games>
Announcements
NUMSA 25TH Anniversary Rallies
Castro Ngobese, NUMSA National Spokesperson, 25 May 2012
The National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) will be holding its 25TH Anniversary Rallies in the provinces of Gauteng, Eastern Cape and Western Cape, this coming Saturday 26 May 2012.
The 25TH Anniversary Rallies coincides with the annual Centenary celebrations of our glorious movement, the African National Congress (ANC), and we shall use our Rallies to celebrate and appreciate the role played by workers and trade unionists alike in building a strong, militant and revolutionary ANC that is committed in building a non-racial, non-sexist, democratic and egalitarian society as envisaged in the Freedom Charter.
The metalworkers will be celebrating their 25th Anniversary of unbroken struggle amidst the ideological onslaught waged against the working class by apartheid apologists and mouthpieces of white monopoly capital, the Democratic Alliance (DA) through the Youth Wage Subsidy, and the proposed new Labour Law Amendments by government and business which are threatening to undermine workers hard won right to strike.
These Anniversary Rallies will be addressed by the National Office Bearers (NOB’s) of the union, namely NUMSA President CEDRIC GINA, General Secretary IRVIN JIM, Deputy General Secretary KARL CLOETE and leaders from COSATU, SACP, ANC and SANCO
The details of the Rallies are as follows:
GAUTENG:
Saturday 26 May 2012, starting time, 10H00am | Speakers: NUMSA General Secretary IRVIN JIM
COSATU Provincial Secretary DUMISANI DAKILE | Venue: Mehlareng Stadium, Tembisa, Ekurhuleni, Gauteng province | Contact person: Sizwe Dlamini, Regional Secretary, 0718748228 |
EASTERN CAPE:
Saturday 26 May 2012, starting time, 10H00am | Speakers: NUMSA Deputy General Secretary KARL CLOETE
COSATU Provincial Secretary MANDLA RAYI
SACP PEC Member PHILA NKAYI | Venue: Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University, Vista Campus, Mission Ville, Port Elizabeth | Contact person: Phumzile Nodongwe, Regional Secretary,0788023140 |
WESTERN CAPE:
Saturday 26 May 2012, starting time 10H30am | Speakers: NUMSA President CEDRIC GINA
COSATU Provincial Secretary TONY EHRENREICH
| Venue: Vygieskraal Stadium, Athlone, Cape Town | Contact person: Vuyo Lufele, Regional Secretary, 0723890408 |
YCLSA 90TH anniversary celebration activities
Khaya Xaba, YCLSA Media Liaison Officer, 24 May 2012
The Young Communist League of South Africa [uFasimba] is celebrating 90 years since its formation. The Young Communist League of South Africa was formed May 25, 1922. In celebrating this important milestone under the theme “YOUTH POWER FOR SOCIALISM “; the YCL will host the following activities:
1. Cake Cutting ceremony
90th anniversary party
Date: Friday May 25, 2012
Venue: Club Nhe, Alexandra Township
Time: 18h00
90TH anniversary rally
Date: Saturday May 26, 2012
Venue: Westernburg Hall, Polokwane
Time: 13h00
The rally will be addressed by the following speakers:
· YCL National Secretary Cde Buti Manamela
· Minister in the Presidency and ANC NEC member Cde Collins Chabane
· Cosatu President Cde Sdumo Dlamini
Issued by YCLSA Head Office
For more information contact:
Mangaliso Khonza
YCLSA National Spokesperson
Cell: 083 617 5546
Tel: 011 339 3621
E-mail: kho...@gmail.com
Or
Khaya Xaba
YCLSA Media Liaison Officer
Cell: 074 5 204 204
Tel: 011 339 3621
E-mail: khay...@gmail.com
Shoulder to shoulder: South African workers and WFTU
George Mavrikos, WFTU General Secretary, 20 May 2012
A book on Moses Mabhida, Mark Shope, Eric Mtshali and so many other heroes of the South African Trade Union movement, their internationalist contribution and the great support they received in the liberation struggle from WFTU and the class-oriented unions around the world...
The prologue of the book says:
Dear comrades,
It is a joy, an honor and, at the same time, a duty of the World Federation of Trade Unions to express its respect towards the heroic struggles of the working class and the People of South Africa who conducted hard class struggles for their political liberation, for the abolition of apartheid.
In this heroic struggle the WFTU from 1945 until today has been fighting shoulder-to-shoulder together with the pioneer militants of South Africa. The history of the trade union movement in South Africa from 1945 until today is simultaneously the history of the WFTU. The comrades who were martyrs in that struggle are also martyrs of the international class-oriented trade union movement of the International Working Class, are also martyrs of WFTU.
This book is the least we could do to honor the thousands who died in the struggle, for those who gave their life against the capitalist exploitation and the imperialist barbarity.
Dear brothers in South Africa.
No struggle goes to waste. The long years of struggle brought the results of the great changes in 1994. Great changes that need to be completed with radical overthrows in the level of economy, since we all know that this is the heart of the policy. We continue...
We continue the struggle for a society without injustice and class exploitation. For a society where the wealth-producing resources will belong to the Peoples and not to the capitalists and the multinationals. For a society in which the means of production will belong to the working people and not the bourgeoisie. For a socialist society...
This value of this book is to be estimated by whether the youth, the next generation of militants of the trade union movement, will derive lessons and experience from it, to continue the struggle with more faith and more boldness.
See this publication online at:
http://www.scribd.com/wftu-press/d/94314241-South-African-Worker-and-WFTU-Shoulder-to-Shoulder
Patrick Craven (National Spokesperson)
Congress of South African Trade Unions
110 Jorissen Cnr Simmonds Street
Braamfontein
2017
P.O.Box 1019
Johannesburg
2000
South Africa
Tel: +27 11 339-4911 or 010 219-1339
Mobile: +27 82 821 7456
E-Mail: pat...@cosatu.org.za
