“Money, historic distrust, poor communication by and between different parties and the intervention of a small criminal element provided the volatile mix that exploded into violence….. [management] claimed that the incidents were sparked by rivalry between the dominant National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) and relative newcomer, the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (Amcu).”
Much as it may seem to fit, the statement above was not about Lonmin in August 2012. It appeared in this column on February 19 this year and referred to the situation at Impala Platnum (Implats) where there had been an illegal strike, rioting and deaths.
Both the NUM and Amcu rejected management’s claim and laid the blame squarely on the mine management’s decision to award a differential bonus to some workers. Amid vague and sometimes misleading media reports, NUM spokesperson Lesiba Seshoka admitted that Amcu’s claimed minority of 1 000 members (out of a workforce of 25 000) could not have been responsible for the upheaval; whatever the rivalry between the two, Amcu was clearly recognised a legitimate trade union.
It was accepted that Amcu was founded at the Douglas colliery in Mpumalanga in 1998 by disgruntled former members of of NUM. The union was also legally recognised in 2001 by the labour department and is now an affiliate of the National Council of Trade Unions.
This seems to have been ignored over the past ten days. Allegations emerged from from NUM that Amcu had appeared almost overnight as a proxy for the Chamber of Mines; South African Communist Party general secretary and higher education minister, Blade Nzimande, also claimed that Amcu was a “pseudo trade union funded by [mining giant] BHP-Billiton”.
Such inflammatory propaganda, as well as the opportunistic intervention by expelled ANC Youth League president Julius Malema, and the narrow, finger pointing focus of others, ranging from politicians and government ministers to mine management and some campaigning groups, has added to the tension. That some of these individuals and groups portray themselves as providing the best way forward, has echoes of a statement attributed to the famous British economist, John Maynard Keynes.
Keynes is reputed to have said that there exists “the astonishing belief that the nastiest motives of the nastiest men somehow or other work for the best results in the best of all possible worlds”. Which is not to say that those who have pointed their fingers and paraded their promises and assessments are necessarily nasty. They may be — but, in many cases, their motives are certainly questionable.
In the name of reason and without prejudging responsibility for, and detail about, events, obvious facts need to be made clear. One of these is the origin of Amcu and its earlier acceptance by other unions, including NUM. Another is that the “mountain” where strikers gathered, is a some distance from mine property and on what is generally regarded as common land.
The complex issue of differential wages should also not be used to obscure the fact that many miners live in the most appalling conditions and that a very large percentage of the workforce throughout the mining sector now comprises contract labour supplied by brokers. It is also a fact — which Malema used in an inflammatory manner — that many miners are aware of, and angry about, Cyil Ramaphosa, the first general secretary of NUM. Not only because he is now a millionaire businessman, but because he is also a director of Lonmin.
Other, similar, facts that add to the anger — and will almost certainly be exploited — are that a former NUM president, James Matlatsi became chairman of AngloGold and that a one-time deputy general secretary of the union, Marcel Golding, became a billionaire businessman via the union-backed Hoskin Consolidated Investments.
Particularly galling for some members is the fact that NUM general secretary Frans Baleni justified as “market related” his acceptance of a R40 000 a month — 108 per cent — pay rise earlier this year to take his pay to R77 000 a month.
However, at worker level at Lonmin and throughout the mining sector, arguments about differential wages and wage levels tend to cloud the real issue of the living conditions and dire poverty that are the lot of thousands of miners. This is part of the legacy bequeathed by a bloody history in South Africa of often callous exploitation that created fabulous fortunes for the few.
Those few massive beneficiaries may not all have been nasty people, but the system demanded — and continues to demand — that profit be maximised. The human cost of this, especially in an unfettered and loosely regulated environment that so many in business are again calling for, can be devastating.
Just how devastating came solidly to the fore on Tuesday with the lodging in the South Gauteng high court of the first stage of what may be a multi-billion rand class action against mining companies. Nine former mineworkers representing tens, perhaps hundreds, of thousands of men whose lungs are terminally scarred have demanded the right to sue their former employers.
From the mountains of Lesotho and the lowlands of Transkei, to Swaziland and as far afield as Malawi and Zambia, there are the graves of thousands of men who died slow, painful and premature deaths from silicosis and tuberculosis caused by breathing the fine dust in the stopes and tunnels of South Africa’s mines.
In the same villages where these graves lie, there are men of succeeding generations, many frail and looking aged beyond their years. Their rasping breath and slow movements mark them out as the walking dead from the mines.
This is the largely hidden, unquantified cost of extracting mineral wealth from deep below the soils of South Africa. It is an horrific and frightening reality that — like deadly rock bursts and maiming accidents — miners live with on a daily basis.
All of this must be borne in mind by a comprehensive and transparent inquiry that will hopefully establish what was, what is and, above all, what needs to be done.
Snow Leopard
August 24, 2012
I apologize for what will seem a kind of trivial remark, but I appreciate greatly that you’re getting out a counter-discourse to the dominant phrasing that accompanies events like these (especially in US reporting).
Terry Bell
August 24, 2012
Thank you. Your appreciation is appreciated.
Terry Townsend
August 25, 2012
Hi Terry,
I sent this also to your Facebook page.
I’m Terry Townsend, editor of Links International Journal of Socialist Renewal (http://links.org.au/). I’d like to get your permission to post your recent articles from your blog on the Marikana massacre at the Links website. We’ll of course credit you as author, cite and link to the originals, and add any further attribution your may require.
Looking forward to your response (pls email back at linkssocialism@gmail.com)
in solidarity,
Terry T
Terry Bell
August 25, 2012
No problem Terry. All the material on my blog is available free to all trade unions and non-profits — and obviously to all on the Left.
Terry Townsend
August 25, 2012
Thanks, Terry
I’ll post very soon and let you know when.
Thanks again,
Terry
Terry Townsend
August 27, 2012
Hi Terry,
POsted some of your posts at http://links.org.au/node/3001. Please let me know if there’s any problems.
Terry Bell
August 27, 2012
No reason there should be. Anf feel free to post anything else I put up.
Robert Fysh
August 26, 2012
Julius Malema advocates the ‘nationalisation’ of mines. What does he mean? Does he mean that a government – in this instance the South African government – take ownership and management control of mining activates (in the apparent interests of the ‘people), or could he be addressing another ‘sore’ in the national psyche?
The Brits snatched gold production from the Transvaal after the Anglo Boer War acting on a dubious pretext (they already more or less enjoyed control of the diamond mining through Rhodes).
Control of mining meant that dividends accrued to the ‘Lords and Ladies’ of England (and their cronies), a comfortable and lucrative arrangement.
Simplistically, the magnates used local (cheap) labour to extract the ore (or diamonds), took the best for themselves, and then banked the profits in a safe international bank account. Locals got ‘nothing’ (except monetisation of labour: slave wages).
Could nationalisation, stripped of political rhetoric, mean that ownership and control of local mining should reside in local hands, not foreign interest (you can only own a mine if you’re a local resident)?
If nationalisation could be construed to mean local ownership (not government), then why not nationalise mines? It won’t cure greed, manipulation, corruption, and abuse, but it does shift responsibility for abuse more directly into local jurisdiction. Then of course, you could construct an argument that the proceeds of mining would not accrue to international ‘robber barons’ but locals of the same kind.
Terry Bell
August 26, 2012
Too right Robert: robber barons of the same kind. We need to look very closely at call for nationalisation (especially of gold mines), many of which are reaching the end of their productive lives. There is a substantial amount of generally expensive rehabilitation necessary for whoever owns such mines. Also there is the matter of acid water drainage, a severe problem that could turn Johanneburg into a ghost town. It, too, will be very expensive to remedy (if it is not already too late). From a mining company viewpoint, it is certainly better that the state (ie: everybody out there) pays the bills rather than the companies. Also, as in Zambia, the companies can offload their mines to the government, pocket substantial proceeds in the process and then (because government lacks the expertise to mine) the companies can hire themselves out on management contracts to do so. That’s a win-win situation for the bosses; a lose-lose situation for the rest of us.
Luther Blisset
August 27, 2012
Thanks for this analysis – we’ve posted it here too: http://usilive.org/sorting-fact-from-fiction-at-marikana/
Terry Bell
August 27, 2012
Thank you for posting it on. The degree of hype, myth making and finger pointing already underway here is mor than a little worrying.
muzzie46
August 27, 2012
I have just started a WordPress Blog notjusthanahana … totally different topic (first article) but would be good to get some feed back …. could be heading in the wrong direction … or not!! It’s fun besides …
muzzie46
August 27, 2012
A very good article and very interesting to view the truth from a somewhat different angle! So much more than meets the eye …
Terry Bell
August 27, 2012
Thanks you. It is always good to get feedback.
muzzie46
August 27, 2012
I guess there will always be humans who thrive on hype and sensationalism … dangerous stuff though! Many readers are gullible … I included sometimes!
Terry Townsend
August 28, 2012
You be interested in Martin Legassick’s take: http://links.org.au/node/3002
Terry Bell
August 28, 2012
Interesting, yes. And some good analysis, but unfortunately spoiled by a touch of what looks like conspiracy theory. For anyone fighting to bring about truly democratic change, it is essential to understand the nuances of every situation to ensure that the tactics employed are the ones that stand the gretest chance of success. Even for the best of motives, now is not the time to leap to conclusions and so help muddy waters that provide good cover for right-wing populists, fuelled by cash injections from elements of capital.
The fact that preliminary autopsy reports reveal that a number of the miners were shot in the back will further fuel conspiracy theories. But there is evidence that the police were out to extract vengeance for the earlier killing of two of their number (hence the charges of assault now laid by many of the miners arrested). But what happened was, from government, police and mine mananement’s viewpoint, a serious blunder. All bear responsibility, but there is no need to exaggerate this into a conspiracy to murder. The deaths at Markana have served to highlight the horrors that existed and continue to exist, including the slow, painful deaths from silicossis and dust-induced tuberculosis that afflict thousands of mine workers.
Let us discover who issued live ammunition (against regulations), who — if anyone — gave the order or prior permission to shoot. Let us also try to estabish the pay differentials between contract and permanent miners (and show how Lonmin and other companies benefit by this). Incidentally, the R4 000 to R12 500 issue is something of a red herring because the pay structure is much more complex and rock drill operators are on generally higher scales. But this enables the spin doctors of officialdom to latch onto this to further muddy the waters to their benefit.
Any thorough investigation should also look into how the mining companies have benefitted from the “living out allowance” and how this has has provided an opening for the “shack farmers” to further exploit the miners. I am also amazed that not more has been made of the fact that rock drill operators at Lonmin still have to use the old drills that do incredible and almost certainly long-term damage to the body through repititive strain and hearing loss.
muzzie46
August 28, 2012
Wow! WHERE in this world do we ever find the truth I wonder!! Martin Legassick’s take is quite something … where did he get his facts?? I don’t doubt his credibility however this does put a totally different twist on the story and kind of rings true in light of what has taken place in the past …What happened to man along the way?? He has lost his integrity and moral sense – all in the name of greed … and the crazy thing is… he can’t take any of it with him when he goes! Why am I ever gob-smacked ?… it’s happening all the time, all over the world. I really hoped that the ‘Big Brother’ syndrome was insignificant here, being 3rd world (yet rich in plenty) … I guess I am very naive!
almost2old
August 29, 2012
Good day Terry. I really appreciated your article. It begins with a backdrop against which to evaluate the incident a bit more critically. I am a minister in a denomination that hails from the Reformed tradition and have struggled to formulate my personal response to the whole event. This, while many of my colleagues and a larger part of the mainline churches have jumped in to roundly condemn the violence and the way in which the police handled the matter. Part of me wants to, but another part of me struggles with the idea that the police were faced with some who had produced firearms. The immediate moment and mindset of the police is hard to gauge given the earlier loss of a colleague. Other facts that have made me hesitate are the publicized working wage level of R4000.00, which turns out to be closer to R9000-10 000.00. Another issue is that the public was led to believe early on that they were all employees of Lonmin, which is not the case. As you can see, I have conservative reservations, but would greatly appreciate comment on these matters, or have you written something that covers these points?
Terry Bell
August 29, 2012
I have done some other work on the topic that will be posted in due course. The wages issue is complicated. Rock drill operators are somthing of an elite minority who are paid considerably more than general miners. There is also the question of mine workers who are supplied by labour brokers who may be paid substantially less than permanent employees. There are also many unemployed miners who have been retrenched and who pick up odd jobs when work is available.
The question of the police comes down to who issued live ammunition (apparently contrary to standing orders), who (if anyone) gave the order to shoot and why shots were not fired into the ground or air as warnings before firing volleys at the strikers. This is especially pertinent since the preliminary autopsy reports indicate that many were shot in the back (ie: while turning or running away from police lines).
Hope this is of help.