The Shoprite strike, said one analyst, had something for everyone. Central to it was the position of casual workers, and demands for a guaranteed number of hours so as to create some certainty around rates of pay and the realignment of casual wage rates.
But the strike also marked the first real challenge by workers to a sectoral wage determination drafted by the Department of Labour. In the public hearings leading up to the retail sector determination, the South African Commercial, Catering and Allied Workers Union (Saccawu) demanded unsuccessfully that casuals and permanent part-timers be guaranteed a minimum of 30 hours a week.
The determination came into effect in February this year. However, numerous retail companies approached the department at the time to request a delay in implementation because they claimed they were not ready. Companies were forced to go ahead and some, like Shoprite, failed to consult properly on the changes, leading to the two-week strike.
The strike received widespread support from the public at a time when there is much less tolerance of strike action than there used to be. Organisations ranging from the far left social movements, including the Anti- Privatisation Forum and its affiliates, to the African National Congress pledged support. It was a rather unusual spectacle to see ANC general secretary Kgalema Motlanthe join one of the marches against Shoprite management.
In recent years the ANC has not always been supportive of industrial action — especially where it has targeted state policies like privatisation. Of course, Motlanthe is a former union heavyweight — the ex-general secretary of the National Union of Mineworkers, in fact. But the proximity of the general election, and the ruling party’s fear that it may be exposed on its left flank, may also partly explain the ANC’s stance.
Shoprite workers did not win their demand for a fixed statutory number of hours for casuals, which employers claim would take away the element of flexibility in the determination. But the strike remains significant, because it was spearheaded by casual workers, the most vulnerable in the formal sector.
Having highlighted the plight of casual workers, the strike now poses a serious challenge to Saccawu to take up cudgels on their behalf in a meaningful way. The union launched a campaign last year to intensify its recruitment of casuals. But there is certainly an argument that it missed an opportunity to mobilise during the public hearings.
The strike may force it to confront the numerous organisational problems in the union, repeatedly highlighted in reports presented to various Congress of South African Trade Unions workshops and the recent national congress.
Since the disclosure of widespread irregularities and mismanagement of its national provident fund earlier this year, the union also faces something of a credibility crisis.
Wits University sociology lecturer Bridget Kenny said the strike bore out the deep frustration and anger of casual workers over their conditions of employment, which had been building up over many years.
“The strike suggests high levels of frustration, which can now be tapped into by the union to organise casuals and then represent them,” she said.
Casuals had joined the union in the past only to leave when the union did not represent their interests. This failure is reflected in the fact that their conditions are governed by a statutory determination, rather than union-negotiated collective agreements.
Ighsaan Schroeder of Khanya College agreed, but remarked that the responsibility for organising casuals applied to a range of unions. The broader labour movement had yet to deal effectively with the changing nature of the labour market, he said.
Increasingly, permanent formal jobs are being replaced by atypical work practices that are becoming the norm. The trend poses a major threat to established unions, which are losing their traditional base — industrial workers — and are finding it hard to recoup their losses by recruiting new categories of employee.
Employers and the state also need to reflect on their approach.
Was Shoprite management sufficiently sensitive to the affected workers whose employment conditions changed overnight? Did it concern itself with the potential labour relations implications of its actions, or seek to gain greater flexibility, and reduced costs, without due regard for its employees?
The labour department faced a tough task in drafting the determination. But were the parties given sufficient time to implement new work arrangements, which are rather complex? Has the determination been properly communicated to workers across the retail sector, many of whom are not unionised?
Renée Grawitzky is editor of the South African Labour Bulletin