[miningmx.com] – IT’S the eleventh hour for wage negotiations in the mining industry.
And since the middle of May, when the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) sent its wage demands to the Chamber of Mines, little progress has been made between the Chamber and the four mining unions in the central bargaining on mineworkers’ wages.
Since the Eighties, NUM has forced the Chamber of Mines to carry out central bargaining on behalf of the country’s gold and coal mines, and the wage settlements on this forum have been seen as one of the most important indicators for wage increases elsewhere in the economy.
But more important than the uncertainty that this creates in other sectors, gold mines this year face problems of their own that make it imperative for the wage negotiations to be finalised.
NUM is demanding increases of 60%. It yesterday gave the chamber seven days to meet its wage demands, otherwise it would come out on strike on Sunday night. The chamber is now offering 6% plus performance payment of 1%.
The Association of Mineworkers & Construction Union (AMCU) is demanding increases of up to 150%, but so far it has said very little in the wage negotiations. When these two unions are told how ridiculous their wage demands are, the answer is that they are merely the messengers of their members.
Everyone knows NUM has experienced its most difficult year since it was formed in the hostels of the country’s gold mines 30 years ago. By its own admission, its membership tally has dropped from 310,000 a year ago to 270,000.
Unions never acknowledge that they have lost members – it’s almost akin to suicide, because it is an admission that they have lost power. They would rather go on struggling in silence for months or even years trying to win back the lost members, no matter how hopeless it seems.
But before you pat NUM on the back for its honesty, it is wise to look at other union figures.
AMCU says it has grown from about 30,000 members a year ago to at least 130,000, mainly due to growth in the platinum mines, but also at gold mines. And the membership of the National Union of Metalworkers (Numsa) is up from 290,000 a year ago to a staggering 340,000.
And if you start working out where Numsa’s growth comes from, you realise it’s NUM members who have defected, especially where the presence of NUM and Numsa overlap, such as in chrome mines, where there are many smelters.
Only NUM will know exactly how many members it has lost, but if it still has 200,000 left, it’s a generous estimate. It may even be as low as 150,000. It is certainly far less than 270,000. It now probably has more members in related industries, such as construction and electricity (Eskom) than in the mining industry itself.
NUM is weak. The union doesn’t want to strike because that would show the decline in its membership figures, not to the public, but employers at the gold mines will see it clearly. The Chamber’s records show that NUM represents about 65% of the workers at gold mines, but these records are clearly outdated.
A realistic figure at which it will accept wage increases in the mining industry will be between 6% and 8%. It’s ready for a wage offer – if it received a wage offer of 8% today, it would accept it as soon as possible – possibly even without a strike.
AMCU, on the other hand, is remaining quiet, but is in a position of strength and is clearly ready for a scrap. It is waiting for NUM to reach a settlement and is then going to negotiate for a higher figure. According to the Chamber’s records, it represents only 17% of workers at gold mines, but these records are now probably also very outdated.
However, it formally represents the three richest mines – Siybande Gold’s Driefontein-Kloof, AngloGold Ashanti’s Moab Khutsong and Harmony’s Khusasalethu. It’s only natural that it’s going to try to get a higher settlement at these mines than NUM accepts at the other mines. After all, these three mines can afford better increases.
The chamber believes that wage agreement entered into with NUM can simply be expanded to the other mines as well because it has done so for years and this has become standard practice. If AMCU doesn’t accept this, and its members come out on strike, that would, according to the chamber, be an unprotected strike and its members can be dismissed.
There are legal arguments to support this, but they aren’t 100% convincing. AMCU after all is entering voluntarily into central bargaining with the Chamber. It has never been part of this before, and it would therefore be difficult to argue that the standard practice should be enforced on it too.
There is no central bargaining agreement whereby a statutory bargaining council can be established to expand wage settlements. And even if such a strike is unprotected – what will the heads of these three large mines do if AMCU’s members go on strike there? Dismiss them?
We have often seen that – they will simply have to reappoint them later, probably when relations have deteriorated badly and people have been killed in violence.
If AMCU and the owners of the three mines that it represents plan to fight out a wage settlement in a strike, so be it, but it would be better if it is an orderly protected strike. To agree with AMCU beforehand on the rules for a strike and to get the new upstart union stick to them would be a great step forward for the years to come.
It will be much easier to convince NUM to accept wage increases of between 6% and 8% – even if AMCU’s members at the three major mines get 9% or 10% – than it will be to convince AMCU to accept increases of 8% or less.
And it’s very important that the other smaller mines reach a wage settlement without a strike.
If the Chamber follows this strategy and agrees to bigger increases at richer mines than at smaller, poorer mines, it will be a deathblow to central bargaining in the mining industry.
That wouldn’t be the end of the world – in fact it would be a very good development. It would allow smaller, marginal mines to continue existing much longer than if they are forced to pay the same wages as the big, richer mines.
