/ 1 May 1996

Cosatu strike: Was there an ANC trade-off?

Was the ANC’s support for this week’s Cosatu strike a trade-off? Jacquie Golding-Duffy reports

While labour analysts say the strike this week by the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) was “relatively successful”, some are questioning why the federation opted to avoid any direct conflict with the African National Congress.

The 1,6-million-strong federation embarked on its first large post-apartheid strike since the 1994 elections and displayed its ability to muster support among workers. Cosatu’s determination to publicly demonstrate that it is answerable to its constituency, as against pandering to the government’s political needs, was also relatively successful, analysts said.

Although Cosatu claimed 75% of worker support for the stayaway, it appeared that only a small proportion of the federation’s backbone – the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) – took part.

Publisher of the Innes Labour Brief, Duncan Innes, said the NUM’s relatively low support – estimated at around 10% – was “not altogether surprising. Most of Cosatu’s support in the mining industry comes from workers who are from Lesotho and Mozambique, and for whom issues relating to the South African Constitution are not that relevent.”

An editorial board member of the Labour Bulletin, Karl von Holdt, said the strike had proved that the federation is still in touch with its rank-and-file members, in the face of allegations that the federation is weakening and has a withering support base.

Von Holdt said while Cosatu’s decision to focus solely on the lockout clause in the workplace was an incentive for workers to support the national strike call and favoured Cosatu in its efforts to spur a large part of the workforce in a short space of time, the federation was cautious not to pick up on issues that are too closely linked to the ANC.

The issue of proportional representation, as opposed to a constituency system for voting, for example, was not flagged as a major strike demand. Cosatu is opposed to proportional representation, but it is favoured by both the ANC and the National Party.

Some labour observers argued that Cosatu could not outrightly challenge the ANC on the issue of proportional representation because it would not be in the federation’s interests to try to get the ANC’s public support on a political, rather than a labour, issue.

The strike was, therefore, cautiously played by Cosatu because it did not want to challenge the ANC outright and because it also needed the ANC’s tacit support.

In the event, the ANC’s support proved that the alliance between the two bodies is not floundering, but it also highlighted Cosatu’s cunning in focusing on labour-related problems, rather than political issues.

There is speculation that Cosatu and the ANC agreed on a trade-off, according to which the ANC would publicly support the strike as long as Cosatu did not challenge it on the issue of proportional representation, the property clause and other unresolved constitutional clauses.

Some analysts said the federation had no choice but to focus on labour issues because this is the area in which Cosatu can successfully gather workers’ support. Others argued that the deliberate sidestepping of proportional representation – which Cosatu would in fact rather have phased out of the Constitution – was “conspicuously not the focus of its strike”.

Von Holdt argued that the federation was careful not to choose issues closely linked to the ANC, but at the same time it was asserting itself and making it clear that it can be agressive about its independence. “There is caution on the part of Cosatu as to how far it can push the alliance,” he said.

Von Holdt also dismissed claims that Cosatu may have been merely posturing, adding that the federation was making its independence felt among the alliance partners and at the same time demonstrating the strength it still holds among the workforce.

Innes said the strike was focused around issues that were of direct interest to workers, but that this did not necessarily mean “the federation is losing sight of other issues. The strike being centred around the lockout clause was central to Cosatu’s constituency and was therefore the issue which was most suitable to mobilise workers around.”

He added that Cosatu “clearly feels that its views are not taken seriously”, and is therefore intent on continuing with the protest even if agreement is reached on the lockout clause.

However, Innes said he believes behind-the- scenes negotiations will see Cosatu dealing with all the contentious issues, including that of proportional representation, and not continuing to focus solely on the lockout clause.

Labour analyst Gavin Brown said the strike had more to do with the federation’s “organisational problems”, and was a “theatrical performance” to display Cosatu’s support around a convenient issue – the lockout clause.

“The strike was an exercise directed at Cosatu’s internal workings and weaknesses and an attempt to underline their strength and ability to mobilise,” Brown said.

“Whether or not it has any real effect on the clauses in the Constitution, we will have to wait and see,” he said.