Amcu is sabotaging its own best interest
THE perception that the Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (Amcu) did not sign the framework agreement for a sustainable mining industry last week because its input was not taken into consideration is wrong.
A technical committee consisting of senior representatives of every mining stakeholder was appointed to draft and finalise the agreement. Amcu and the National Council of Trade Unions — acting jointly — nominated their respective legal advisers to represent them on the committee. The final meeting was held on June 28, when we concluded the agreement. Eight hours were spent dealing with the list of amendments proposed by Amcu — and all its proposals were entertained. In many instances, and after lengthy debate, the wording was brainstormed and reworked until all parties, including Amcu, agreed to the revised wording.
For example, Amcu indicated
It is time to start acting in the best interest of its members
that it was opposed to politicians having business interests in the mining sector, and after a debate we all agreed to the following: “The government commits to ensure fairness, impartiality and avoid conflict of interest in all areas of government when dealing with matters pertaining to the sector and act swiftly where these principles are violated.”
When the final draft was put forward for approval at the meeting, Amcu’s legal team had no objection to the final version. The chairman also indicated that because all parties had accepted the agreement, it would be in bad faith should a party spring a surprise on the signing date — July 3. Amcu’s representatives did not indicate that they required a mandate from their members to approve the agreement, or that they had any preconditions.
When Amcu refused to sign, certain commentators praised the union for first consulting its members on the agreement’s content. A trade union’s objective is to act in the best interest of its members, and this mandate is renewed at its annual national congress, which gives the leadership the authority to act on members’ behalf if and when so required. Professional unions will also have a national executive council consisting of elective member representatives from all its regions. Such council will meet on a regular basis and can give a mandate to union leadership to bind its members to an agreement. Solidarity and the National Union of Mineworkers, for instance, have such structures in place, but at Amcu they are clearly lacking.
It is astonishing that Amcu is showing a lack of leadership by first requiring a mandate from members before the leadership commits itself to peace and stability. The fact that Amcu also placed other obstructions in the way of signing the agreement is again a sign of bad faith and a clear indication that it is ignorant about bargaining protocol. Analysing its list of preconditions for signing the agreement, it is clear that Amcu is feeling the pressure after its members at Glencore Xstrata and at AngloGold Ashanti were seemingly badly advised by the union, which led to the dismissal of nearly 1 800 members. Amcu raised the reinstatement of its members as a precondition to signing.
It is time for Amcu to start acting in the best interest of South Africa and its members by preventing further unprotected strikes, showing up on time for meetings, participating in debates, signing agreements that will benefit its members and not always looking for an excuse to walk out of a meeting. Amcu is an important role player, but it should not alienate itself from stakeholders and chase investors away to the detriment of the constituency it represents.
Du Plessis is general secretary of Solidarity