It is no exaggeration to say that South Africa is in the midst of the most important political development since 1994. The decision by the majority of the Cosatu union federation executive to expel its largest affiliate, the National Union of Metalworkers (Numsa) started a process that is in danger of becoming a train smash that could seriously damage the country’s fragile democracy.
As Cosatu general secretary Zwelizima Vavi noted in a letter to the Cosatu executive, “the magnitude of the decision is not only of historical importance but has momentous implications”. Should the country’s largest trade union federation fragment in chaos, this will have profound effects throughout society.
Any hopes that the executive and its supporters in the ANC and South African Communist Party (SACP) may have had of isolating Numsa and carrying on as before have also been shattered. In the first place, seven of the eight Cosatu affiliates that had originally backed Numsa, reiterated their support at a Press conference, along with a call for a special national congress of worker delegates.
The SA Municipal Workers’ Union (Samwu) was the eighth and three of its four delegates to the Cosatu executive defied their union policy and voted for Numsa’s expulsion. Now, following a bitter court battle that saw a purged group of leaders reinstated, it seems likely that Samwu will again ally itself with Numsa.
Explanations by Numsa general secretary Irvin Jim and representatives of the seven about why they opposed the expulsion have apparently been favourably received. And their call for a special national congress as being both constitutionally correct and the only way out of this looming disaster has widespread support.
However, the response of ANC secretary general Gwede Mantashe and that of the Cosatu executive once again introduced confusion, with Mantashe maintaining that a special national congress is not a national congress. This is also the spurious argument taken up by the executive majority.
But a national congress is a national congress. A special meeting of this kind merely refers to the fact that it is summoned to deal with matters of critical importance outside of the usual three-year cycle. And the request is covered in clase 3.3.2 in the federation’s constitution,
Anyway, anyone who thinks the situation facing Cosatu right now is not critical, must be delusional. And when Mantashe maintained that to hold such a congress now would mean a “split” in Cosatu, he indicated acceptance of undemocratic behaviour.
In the past there have been fierce disagreements at Cosatu congresses; these have been put to the vote and the majority decision accepted. A classic example was the 1993 Numsa resolution to withdraw from the ANC-led alliance once the ANC became the government and a major employer.
That resolution was lost, but Numsa remained in the fold. And the union continued to support the alliance even although affiliates are not bound to do so.
However, Cosatu president S’dumo Dlamini listed Numsa’s decision to break with the ANC as one of five reasons for expulsion. But there is no constitutional requirement for a Cosatu affiliate to support the ANC, SACP or any political party. In fact, the banking union affiliate, Sasbo, has a clause in its constitution that prohibits affiliation to any political party.
Dlamini also noted that the Cosatu executive had expelled three unions in the past. But these were all for the reason of not having paid their subscriptions while Numsa is fully paid up. He also failed to mention that Cosatu offices were also instructed to provide a desk for the expelled and impecunious domestic workers’ union organisers to work from, something they still do today.
The only reason advanced by Dlamini that might arguably be valid is the accusation that Numsa went beyond its “scope” and was “poaching” members from other unions, when Cosatu’s policy is “one industry, one union”. This concept has never worked and, at one stage, Cosatu had, for example, three affiliates porganising nurses. Now there are two. Individual workers also have the right to decide for themselves which union they wish to join.
With calamity looming, democratic decisions by rank and file workers at a national congress seem the only solution. And if that results in a breach with the alliance that would damage both the ANC and SACP politically and financially, then so be it.
Heather
November 17, 2014
Hi Terry
I would so appreciate a clear summary of what the intended and unintended consequences of this development could be. To the interested but not expert followers, such as myself, it is very difficult to see what these “moves” and intentions mean in translation.
Our media seems to have a singular focus – to spread the “ain’t it awful, dangerous, bad news” in an inept percussion piece because they never go further by giving interpretation for the interested laywoman.
That is one reason I follow your column, but I would like more substantial interpretation so I can sit back and formulate a view which is validated or cancelled by what I read.
Kind Regards
Terry Bell
November 17, 2014
Hi Heather
In a situation like this, with so many agendas in play, it is not possible to predict consequences. They could be — depending on your point of view — good, bad or indifferent, although indifferent seems very unlikely.
What we have in play here is the potential for a move toward greater grassroots, democratic control within the union movement that may spill over into broader society. But it faces huge challenges from authoritarians both in power and hoping to gain power. I hope this movement toward more democratic control, along with the demand for an egalitarian society, is not hijacked by special interests and distorted, does not dissipate in disillusionment or is not crushed by repression. All I am saying is that I have pessimism of the intellect here, but optimism of the will to try to ensure that the democratic surge is not misused or diverted.
Regards,
Terry
Alutha
November 18, 2014
Interesting views Terry ; but there is one question though, many have predicted that if the split goes ahead this would mean more to our democracy especially for labour relations but here is my question what happens if these unions which support Numsa decide to let go of the battle then there by leaving Numsa in the cold, thus meaning the authoritarian voice of “Stalinist Blade” win? would our democracy and the interest of the working class be defeated?