Sasbo to appeal against court order
Finance union SA Society of Bank Officials (Sasbo) and union federation Cosatu are to appeal against a court order stopping their planned strike to shut the banking sector down on Friday.
Finance union SA Society of Bank Officials (Sasbo) and federation Cosatu are to appeal a court ruling halting their planned strike to shut down the banking sector from going ahead.
Judge Hilary Rabkin-Naicker said on Thursday that she would provide her reasons for granting the interdict in due course.
The interdict prevents Sasbo members from protesting against retrenchments. Had the strike gone ahead on Friday, it would have been a precursor to Cosatu’s national protest against jobs losses and retrenchments scheduled for October 7.
Lobby group Business Unity SA (Busa) approached the Labour Court on Monday, arguing the protest would not help tackle the realities affecting the banking industry but would “further burden the economy and deter investment”.
The Reserve Bank predicts growth of 0.6% for 2019 and less than 2% to 2021. The unemployment rate rose from 27.6% to 29% in the second quarter.
Following the order, Cosatu deputy general secretary Solly Phetoe said the protest action was not over, but merely suspended. He accused RabkinNaicker of making a ruling in favour of capitalism. “We are not going to demobilise our members, we are going to continue to mobilise our members against exploitation and retrenchments in the banking, manufacturing, mining, farming and agricultural sectors.”
Phetoe said he would ask Cosatu’s legal team to lodge an appeal. The labour federation would also resubmit a section 77 notice dealing with protected protest action to the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac). This clause in the Labour Relations Act was the main focus of the court arguments on Wednesday between lawyers representing Busa, Cosatu and Sasbo.
Nedlac issued a section 77 certificate to Cosatu in August 2017. Busa’s lawyer, advocate Alistair Franklin, argued that the certificate could not be relied on in 2019 and questioned why no action had been taken by the respondents in the interim to enforce the notice. However, advocate Daniel Berger said the certificate remained current and valid as the issues raised in 2017 were still prevalent in 2019.
Sasbo general secretary Joe Kokela said the union was not surprised by the ruling. “We are going to suspend the march for [Friday]. If things go well, you might see us on October 7 back on the streets.”
Banking Association SA said banks would operate as usual on Friday. “We expect the authorities and union to ensure the safety of customers and property, if any protest action goes ahead. Given the decision of the court, we urge Sasbo to suspend any planned protest action and to engage with banks on the underlying issues facing our industry,” the association said.
0.6% The rate of growth in 2019 as predicted by the Reserve Bank
Trade union federation Cosatu and its affiliate, finance union Sasbo, were left nursing bloodied noses after the labour court halted their planned strike set to shut SA’s banks on Friday. It didn’t take long for the unions to reply with familiar and predictable slogans. A few minutes after judge Hilary RabkinNaicker had delivered her ruling, labour leaders criticised her for favouring “capitalism”.
The ruling served as a sobering reminder that no-one is above the law and that unions would not be allowed to hold the economy to ransom. A total shutdown of a sector that helps to keep the economy running would have had devastating consequences.
But that was the last thing on Sasbo general secretary Joe Kokela’s mind. He told Business Day earlier in September that the protest action was aimed at “proving a point” and teaching the banking sector bosses a “costly lesson”.
In an economy that the SA Reserve Bank expects to grow just 0.6% in 2019, embarking on a strike that had such an ill-defined purpose would to most people seem unwise, especially if it led to more of his members losing their jobs.
Cosatu deputy general secretary Solly Phetoe said the action was to protest against “the exploitation, against the continuation of retrenchments both in the banks sector, but also in the manufacturing, in the mining, in the farming area”.
So rather than a single issue that affected bank workers in particular and could be resolved in negotiations, they were using the strike to counter structural changes that probably cannot be reversed, even if bank managements were inclined to try.
Like other industries, banking has to adapt to technological advances and changes in consumer behaviour towards digital solutions. If fewer people want to use branches, it makes sense for banks to reduce their numbers. The sector is still one of the biggest employers in SA, and according to the Banking Association SA (Basa), it actually has increased employee numbers in recent years, despite a weak economy.
Shutting it down seems counterproductive. And it’s hard to accept the argument that the strike was so urgent that unions could not go through the proper processes, instead using a twoyear-old notice filed at the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac). Basa maintains that protest action will not help to deal with realities facing the industry, but will “further burden the economy and deter investment”.
“The only sustainable solution is improved education and attracting higher levels of investment to drive economic growth and job creation. These require government, labour and business to work together in the national interest,” the association says.
But it is of no use to speak to those who are not prepared to listen. The protest action, after all, was about proving a point.
However, the unions’ frustrations cannot be dismissed entirely. There is great resentment over the mouthwatering amounts paid to CEOs, not just at banks, while ordinary workers are losing their jobs and those who are lucky to stay employed, have to settle for small pay increases, if any.
On the face of it, the sector doesn’t have a crisis of profit, a factor that is surely demonstrated in the ability of boards to approve salaries for the heads of the six biggest banks, the lowest of which is a whopping R30m. Juxtapose that with the R21,190 a month the average worker gets paid in SA, and reality will slap you across the face that such increasing inequality is unsustainable.
If the government does not take the necessary steps to tackle these issues, there could indeed be an “unled revolution in this country”, to borrow EFF leader Julius Malema’s words.
Anarchy is the first thing that comes to mind when pondering what an unled revolution could lead to in SA. The planned action on Friday may have been misguided and counterproductive. Ignoring the source of their grievance will be doubly so.
And it won’t just be the banks that are left counting the cost.
THEY WERE USING THE STRIKE TO COUNTER CHANGES THAT CANNOT BE REVERSED