What can trade unions, employers and the state do to reduce violent intimidation during strikes — which all observers agree is on the increase? This week Matuma Letsoalo asked Grahamstown-based advocate John Grogan, a prolific writer on labour law and court practitioner for both unions and employers, and Frans Baleni, the general secretary of the National Union of Mineworkers, for their practical proposals.
Grogan listed eight measures:
A greater commitment by union leaders to peaceful industrial action.
This means reining in aggressive rhetoric and threats about dire consequences if a settlement is not reached. “What is often absent from strikes is a clear message from union leaders to members that certain forms of action are unacceptable.”
Avoid letting negotiations drag on after strikes have begun, which makes strikers desperate.
Negotiators often engaged in posturing and sophisticated game-playing, while long bargaining delays caused dangerous levels of frustration among the strikers themselves. Often it is better for employer and union negotiators to move quickly to their bottom-line positions rather than to conceal their hands and try to bluff each other.
Stricter monitoring of picket lines, especially to ensure that criminal elements do not join them.
Unions need to place sufficient and clearly identifiable strike marshalls on picket lines, among other things to ensure that pickets are not infiltrated by “free-riders”. The Labour Relations Act caters for agreements on rules for picketing and provides a detailed code of good conduct, which is often not implemented. The public service, with its many unions and worksites, is particularly problematic for unions, and perhaps requires the negotiation of special picketing rules. These might include a ban on rowdy picketing at hospitals and “insidious intimidatory practices” which obstruct life-saving essential services.
Educate workers on the fundamental purpose of strike action — to exert pressure on employers by withdrawing labour.
This apparently elementary and internationally accepted principle is not always understood in South Africa, where many workers seem to believe intimidation and damage to property are legitimate tactics.
Restrained reaction to demonstrations by the police and other authorities.
Often the police do not distinguish between real troublemakers and the mass of strikers, and indiscriminate action can trigger a violent response from the peaceful majority. As illustrated by incidents in Cape Town during the current strike, “ham-handed” police officers sometimes resort too quickly to measures of last resort, such as rubber bullets and stun grenades.
Earlier intervention by professional mediators.
Mediators seem to have been brought in too late in the public service strike — the negotiating parties did not have to wait until a strike erupted before bringing in professional deadlock-breaking help. This can be done at an early stage in collective bargaining to elicit the underlying positions of both sides.
Constant communications between employers and unions during strike.
Employers should regard strikes as an integral part of the negotiating process and keep talking to unions, both about the dispute and about issues such as violence. During last year’s security strike, the parties were out of contact for long periods.
Firm but fair disciplinary action against identified wrongdoers after the strike.
This is intended “for the future”, to create a climate for peaceful industrial action. The Labour Relations Act draws a clear distinction between the right to strike and misconduct during strike action, and workers have to accept that they remain employees during strikes and are subject to normal company discipline. But indiscriminate action against all strikers has the effect of further poisoning relations.
Baleni highlighted two measures:
Unions must put systems in place to ensure that where there are violence flashpoints they are dealt with immediately.
Leaders at every level must keep a close eye on developments at every strike-bound workplace and picket line.
Once the strike is declared, there must be constant communication between various structures of the union and the secretary general.
Effective lines of communication are needed between all strike marshalls and shop stewards on the ground and higher union structures at regional, provincial and national level. The secretary general’s office is the nerve-centre of the strike and must be constantly updated on developments to provide for interventions by top union leaders.