*Marikana, violence, intimidation, killings and important questions from a collective bargaining perspective*
*Alex Mashilo is YCLSA Gauteng Provincial Secretary*, Writes in personal capacity What has been and is happening at Lonmin Plc in Marikana, Rustenburg? This is and will continue to be the subject of discussion, in this small piece, and elsewhere in the present period and in future. This small piece not only discusses what happened and is happening in Marikana but also poses questions from a collective bargaining perspective for further engagements. In ‘Lonmin Plc 2012 Interim Results Announcement’ (14 May 2012) the company’s CEO Ian Farmer states in his review that he is “pleased to report that the company delivered a solid operational performance in the first half of 2012 financial year in spite of known and significant disruptions during the period” (p. 4). Two important themes from this statement are worth highlighting and analysing. First, the company *delivered a solid performance*. Farmer expressed “sincere gratitude to all... employees, contractors and community members for their support and commitment to delivering “a solid performance in the first half of 2012” (p. 10). Counting from 31 March 2012 backwards, by the first half of 2012 it clearly appears reference is made to the period starting 1 October 2011 and ending 31 March 2012. It is important to underline the fact that the company “delivered a solid performance”. At least one of the reasons for this is worth highlighting. In its website[i]<https://mail.google.com/mail/html/compose/static_files/blank_quirks.html#_edn1>Lonmin Plc states that it is successful when its “employees* *live and work safely and experience the personal satisfaction that comes with high performance and recognition”. There is no doubt the company’s “employees, contractors and community members” performed well as recognised in the “sincere gratitude” expressed to “all” of them by the CEO. I must highlight that it also makes sense for the CEO to express “sincere gratitude” to “contractors” (i.e. out-sourced workers) and “community members”. But as to what Farmer means by that is something else. In ‘*A critique of The German Ideology*’ Marx correctly states that by producing their means of subsistence workers also produce their material life. This material life is also being reproduced daily in communities and households, but capitalists like Lonmin Plc do not pay for that reproduction. It clearly appears the expressed “sincere gratitude” by Lonmin, which might not have been expressed for the first time, does not translate in better life in the community. The conditions of the communities surrounding Lonmin Plc’s operations in Marikana speak for themselves. This is no different from other working class and poor communities inclusive of the working poor as located in other strategic industries in our economy. The province of Gauteng typifies this situation. It is the centre of the South African and our continent’s economy. But if you follow workers to the communities in which they live you will arrive in Alex in Johannesburg North; Alaska in Mamelodi, Tshwane, Ramaphosa in Ekurhuleni, Sicelo Shiceka in Midvaal, and so on. There are just so many squatter-camps or dilapidated areas like Alex. Linked with this the main contention at Lonmin Plc Marikana operations, is that workers want to “live and work safely and experience personal satisfaction”. It is important to note that in the ultimate analysis we are not just talking about the fact that workers want to “live and work safely and experience personal satisfaction” linked with a “solid operational performance” in the first half of 2012 as reported by the Lonmin Plc’s CEO. It is important to bear in mind that we are talking here about a company that is recognised and recognises itself as “the world’s largest Platinum producer” (‘Lonmin Plc 2012 Interims Results Announcement’, p. 2). Without workers definitely such a performance position is inconceivable. In fact there is just no performance inconceivable in any company without workers. It is workers who produce value. But it is capitalists who appropriate the value that works produce. That is the basic contradiction in Marikana, in all sectors of “our” economy and throughout the world under the yoke and prevalence of capitalism. The second theme in Lonmin Plc’s CEO review is that “in spite of* known and significant disruptions during the period*”* *a solid performance was achieved in the first half of 2012 financial year. Farmer the CEO (14 May 2012) states that “Labour dynamics are going through a sea change, with the emergence of an alternative trade union in the PGM [Platinum Metal Group] mining industry, in the form of the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union [AMCU], to rival the dominance of NUM”. Underline the choice of the phrases “*alternative trade union*” and “*to rival the dominance of NUM*”. From the above it can be inferred that the probability is that what Farmer refers to as “known and significant disruptions” did not end by 31 March 2012 but continued and grew quantitatively. For Lonmin, AMCU is an “alternative” trade union and it will “rival the dominance of NUM”. Hang on a little bit here. What type of a trade union is the one seen by management as an “alternative”? What do workers stand to benefit from trade union rivalry, organisational disunity and fragmentation? There has to be a thorough inquiry into these questions. As it stands, clearly it is not workers but private capital accumulation by the bourgeois that stands to benefit from the emergence of the so-called trade union rivalry, “alternative” and small unions, disunity and fragmentation. Many sections of the media, parliamentary and extra-parliamentary opposition have over the last few weeks intensified their support for the fragmentation of worker organisation, by supporting the emergence and development of the so-called alternative and small unions. When bourgeois supporters and chief spokespersons such as a larger proportion of economists push for something as a worker I have always known that it is not in my but in the bourgeois interests. What we must press for is the maximum unity of the workers, the advancement of the COSATU-SACP policy of one industry one union and one country one federation, and for the workers of the world to unite because they have nothing to lose from their unity except their chains – a clarion call by Marx and Engels in 1848 in the *Manifesto of the Communist Party.* Closely related to the developments at Lonmin Plc’s Marikana operations and bearing similar features, is the situation that broke out earlier at Impala Platinum, Rustenburg. There the emergence of an infant trade union AMCU was driven through violence. Crispen Chinguno (2012)[ii]<https://mail.google.com/mail/html/compose/static_files/blank_quirks.html#_edn2>, a post-graduate student at the University of Witwatersrand documents the emergence of AMCU at Impala Platinum in Rustenburg. Clearly this union finds manifestation and emergence through violence. Writing about what happened at Impala Platinum, Chinguno (2012, pp. 10-11) highlights the following: workers “were usually attacked in the early hours of the morning when the first shift was scheduled to start”; the violence “was apparently coordinated by an underground violence committee and its networks” and is used “as a strategy to forge worker solidarity”; “In the first fatal incident the victim was caught in the early hours of the morning and stripped naked before being fatally assaulted and left... dead” and many “such incidents followed as the violence escalated”; “In the height of the strike a video footage of captured men and women scabs who were forced to strip and *toyi-toyi* nude was circulated via mobile phones”; and “Amcu held a mass meeting which resolved to shut down all NUM offices”. Many of these activities are no different from what has been taking place and continue at Lonmin Plc operations in Marikana. Ten workers inclusive of two police and two security officers were killed *by other workers* between 10 and 12 August 2012. All sorts of opportunists, rightwing and leftwing alike did not come out against the violence and deaths, most probably because the killings were not committed by the police. With no discontinuity in violence, thirty-four workers were killed and seventy-eight others injured by the police (*who are by the way workers too*) on 16 August 2012. But it was only following the events of 16 August that parliamentary and extra-parliamentary oppositions came out claiming to be condemning but only the killings that took place on 16 August. These groupings are blind to the fact that their silence and that of their ilk when workers were terrorised through violence and between 10 and 12 August when ten were killed has served as a catalyser to 16 August both as a culmination and a continuation of violence. Let alone workers’ interests, if indeed the genuine concern by these groupings was or is the right to life and opposition to violence then all of them must be asked where were they and why did they not come out against the killings, injuries and intimidations that took place before 16 August at Lonmin Plc and Impala Platinum. No doubt the killings and injuries of workers on 16 August must be condemned to the contempt it deserves. They must be investigated as per the commission of inquiry established by President Jacob Zuma. And justice must be seen in action prevailing. The same must apply to the killings, violence, and intimidations that took place before, on and after 16 August. Much of these things except to varying extents, some up, some at same level and some down, continued even after 16 August to the silence of the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary opposition. On 12 August it was reported that another worker was found killed. NUM came out on 13 August to confirm that the worker was the union’s shop steward at Lonmin Plc in Marikana. Again there were no condemnations from the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary oppositions and all sorts of opportunists, demagogues and populists. The unpublished truth about the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary opposition, constituted in terms of Marikana by all if not most of the groupings, organisations and individuals who only focus on the events of 16 August, is that they have a scavenger tendency. What the various elements in this opposition seek to achieve is to build themselves or their popularity by scavenging over the deceased and injured workers with focus on 16 August. Huge volumes of misleading propaganda including likening Marikana with Sharpeville and other apartheid regime massacres are being unleashed through the media including the factionalised public broadcaster, SABC. The truth that is being hidden is that there has been worker against worker violence in Marikana with all the victims being Africans in particular and blacks in general, and particularly painful, defenceless as well. This must be condemned to contempt it deserves. Opportunists would not condemn it. There are at least two forthcoming activities that cannot be ignored by any serious analysis in all of this, i.e. ANC 53rd national conference (Mangaung) and the 2014 national and provincial elections. There are many tendencies in this regard, but three are worth highlighting. The first tendency is found within our broad movement. This is aimed at Mangaung and subsequent government elections to advance its own private interests. This tendency bears some features of “an internal opposition”. What this first tendency does is to work like the external opposition which focuses mainly, if not exclusively, on the negatives. Just to put the record straight, in our revolutionary movement we are not prohibited to critique our government. But our approach is to acknowledge achievements and progress made, point out at the objective conditions and limitations, and then focus on our failures from a point of view of constructive self-criticism. The second, more obvious tendency, for example is typified by the newly formed parasitic political organisation misnamed Friends of the Youth League (ANCYL). This is constituted by, and on the basis of support for, ill-disciplined elements that were either suspended or expelled from the ANC. This tendency is heavily interested in Mangaung. The elements in this misnamed (as such because the ANCYL has distanced itself and therefore refused to accept the “friendship”), demagogic and populist tendency of a counter-revolution in both its nature and character are on record stating that they support certain leaders in the ANC for election in Mangaung in return of being reinstated which is basically why they are interested in Mangaung. Should this tendency win in Mangaung it could every day bring not only the ANC but also the alliance 24 hours closer to their graves although determining how long it would take will not be a simple question to settle. Under such a situation it would be more difficult to turn things around for the better. For a revolutionary cadre it is inconceivable to imagine the ANC and the alliance being led by leaders who would have been propelled by ill-disciplined, demagogic and populist elements who are nothing but essentially a counter-revolution based on private accumulation of wealth through public resources, especially deployments and tenders. This tendency is connected at least through deeds (since suspension or expulsion) with *some *in the ANC who are on record saying they want “change”, which in fact refers to nothing except essentially factional change. By the way some elements who say they want change are either part of ANC or government leadership, or both. For them the *modus operandi* is to accept credit for collective achievements and distance themselves from collective failure. When they speak about change in the leadership they are actually referring to continuity in the leadership by themselves. The third interrelated tendency is typified by the parliamentary and extra-parliamentary opposition including sections of the media. This tendency is interested in the 2014 national and provincial government elections and other elections to come, as well as in defending capitalist accumulation. The point of convergence in all these tendencies is that either ANC and State President Jacob Zuma or the ANC itself is the first target of attack. Revolutionary cadres will not fold their arms and leave this counter-revolution take over. But while this applies and is intensified some questions for inquiry are worth highlighting with regards to Marikana. Firstly, to what extent is a violent strike an indicator of minority domination or action? Usually, a strike that is supported by the majority has the capacity to stop production, which would not require anyone to be coerced. Secondly, to what extent has the Labour Relations Act reached its saturation point? With the deepening of precarious employment and working conditions the number of unprotected strikes is increasing across our economy. I have been involved in handling some of them as a trade union official. All the sectors of our economy consist of the working poor, the wages of the workers at Lonmin Plc are comparatively no different from what is prevailing in the rest of our economy. What is the alternative? How can the struggle to abolish the wages-profit system be intensified because reality is that it is this commodity-based production and private capital accumulation regime that represents the material substratum of class inequality, poverty and unemployment, as well as the developments in Marikana, Rustenburg and so on? To what extent is company-based bargaining a problem and to what extent does it stand to achieve the principle of equal remuneration for work of equal value? To what extent is company-based bargaining and management’s unilateralism sources of strikes? Workers compare themselves with their counterparts in similar operations, and from this they formulate demands for improvements. This is actually the right thing to do. As long as we bargain door to door this situation is likely to breakout occasionally. Also, at both Impala Platinum and Lonmin Plc clearly management’s unilateralism including giving selective wage increases is one of the sources of the problem. This is also the situation in other sectors of our economy although the revolts, when breaking out, have not had the same magnitudes. The problem is also that the Labour Relations Act is presently incapable of addressing such situations properly while in real terms the same Act and case law have severely limited the right of workers to strike. What can we do to advance centralised bargaining and use it as a vehicle to harmonise employment and working conditions on an industrial basis, maximise worker power and improve both effectiveness and efficiency of coordinating it? I believe that by engaging on these questions we could start charting the way forward. -- You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] .
