Echoes of a stormy baptism as Cosatu reaches 30 years
Tensions that almost forestalled the union federation’s birth are again threatening the movement as ideological differences come to the fore, writes Enoch Godongwana
COSATU was launched in Durban 30 years ago. It was launched during the most intense period of mass struggle against apartheid and was built on the back of many decades of black worker struggles in South Africa — from the formation of the Industrial and Commercial Workers Union in 1919 to the African mineworkers’ strike of 1946, the formation of the South African Congress of Trade Unions in 1955, and the wildcat strikes of 1973, which were centred on Durban and Pinetown.
Through their struggles in the ’70s in particular, black workers forced the apartheid regime to create the legal space for the formation and organisation of trade unions.
The Wiehahn commission recommended that black trade unions be allowed to register, leading to an upsurge in trade union activity in the late ’70s and early ’80s.
This culminated in the formation of Cosatu in December 1 1985 under the battle cry of “One union, one industry — one country, one federation”.
There had been two main streams of political thought that contested for dominance during the four years of unity talks that preceded the launch, and started in Langa in 1981.
One stream, represented by the Federation of South African Trade Unions, argued vociferously that anti-apartheid liberation politics would tend to submerge workingclass interests.
Workers needed an independent working-class organisation, such as a workers’ party, to represent specific working-class interests. Among others, the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa was a strong proponent of this approach.
The other stream, represented by the unions affiliated to the United Democratic Front, argued that in conditions of apartheid oppression, workers should emphasise the national character of the class struggle in South Africa.
As a result, the priority should not be to set up a workers’ party, but to participate actively in the anti-apartheid struggle for national liberation, in alliance with the then banned and exiled ANC and SACP.
Among others, the South African Allied Workers Union and the General and Allied Workers Union were strong proponents of this approach.
The unity talks were rocky and practically collapsed during a round of negotiations in Port Elizabeth in 1983.
At that stage, the UDF-aligned unions, known at the time as the “magnificent seven”, basically abandoned the talks, declaring that there was no basis for unity.
The ANC intervened, personified by the work of such comrades as Curnick Ndlovu and Billy Nair, using the organisation’s moral authority to put the talks back on track.
The ANC’s intervention led to a ground-breaking meeting in Ipelegeng in July 1985, which sealed the deal and allowed for the launch of Cosatu later that year.
It seems that in some ways history is repeating itself in some of the debates at the centre of the terrible and destructive rift that is tearing Cosatu apart on the eve of its 30th anniversary.
For decades, the sensitive handling of ideological differences glued Cosatu together.
A trade union, even a federation, is not a political party and it is, therefore, incorrect to impose ideological convergence. History has taught the working class of South Africa, particularly the black working class, that strength comes from unity.
Where ideological divisions are not managed, and where some form of common ground cannot be found, this will lead to disunity, fragmentation and a weakening of the voice of the working class. In an unequal society such as ours, this is particularly dangerous, as it is likely to fuel increased inequality and the super-exploitation of poor and vulnerable workers.
It means that workers will not have an effective voice at the very time when they need a leadership that will champion their interests and deal effectively with the challenges associated with casualisation and outsourcing, as well as the growing threat of job losses as South Africa’s economic growth remains low, driven largely by neg- ative global economic developments.
Trade unions worldwide are on the defensive. They have lost membership and their collective bargaining power has declined. As a result, they have lost influence on governments and on the setting of economic and public policy.
A tragic consequence of this weakening, as French economist Thomas Piketty has shown in his recent work, is sharply rising levels of inequality around the world.
South African trade unions are not immune to these challenges. Instead of infighting and ideological squabbling, our trade unions need to be innovating to survive and thrive.
Our trade unions should be driving campaigns of mass recruitment and of improved service to members. Ultimately, to be stronger, unions should be striving for mergers and mega-mergers, rather than divisions, expulsions and splits.
If the current wave of trade union fragmentation continues, it will weaken the voice of workers in South Africa. It may even create increased conflict and rivalry between unions in a manner that is bad for workers and for the country’s socioeconomic development project more broadly.
Workers and worker leaders need to use this moment to be selfcritical and self-reflective, as the call for “one industry, one union — one country, one federation” is as logical and relevant today as it was 30 years ago.
But first a vexing question needs to be answered: who in South Africa’s body politic has the moral authority to guide and lead such a process to fruition?
Godongwana is a former Numsa general secretary and chairman of the ANC’s economic development planning committee
Where common ground cannot be found, this will lead to disunity and a weakening of the voice of the working class