The content on this page is not written by Polity.org.za, but is supplied by third parties. This content does not constitute news reporting by Polity.org.za.

Yesterday, COSATU rubbished the DA’s legislative proposal to make unions responsible for the misconduct of its members during strikes. It claimed that it already “puts measures in place to prevent strike violence” and that any legislation to hold unions accountable for such violence is therefore “out of order”.

Actually, the contrary is true. COSATU has never attempted to prevent its members from wreaking havoc during strikes. Furthermore, COSATU has never disciplined unruly members who trash public property.

The reason for this is simple: violence and vandalism is used by COSATU as a bargaining chip in wage negotiations. That is why violence and vandalism is consented to (tacitly or otherwise) by the Union Federation leadership.

In 2007, for example, COSATU General Secretary Zwelinzima Vavi condoned strike violence on the basis that workers “will soon be angry, they will be frustrated.” He suggested that because strike violence was likely to occur, the negotiating parties should swiftly find a resolution that will be to the workers’ liking. Please see the IOL article in reference to this incident by clicking here.

In August this year, a SAMWU strike caused chaos across Cape Town, with street vendors’ goods destroyed and stolen, shop and car windows smashed and members of the public intimidated. COSATU Provincial Secretary in the Western Cape, Tony Ehrenreich, refused to condemn the violence and destruction – even after being publicly invited to do so by the Mayor of Cape Town, Patricia de Lille.

Similarly, in a speech to the Southern African Catholic Bishops Conference in February this year, Zwelinzima Vavi said, “Almost every week we read reports of violent community protests over service delivery. Workers are very often forced to take to the streets and go on strike to win a modest wage increase.” This is yet another implicit admission from Mr. Vavi that strike violence is simply part and parcel of the normal negotiation process.

COSATU’s leadership is in a position to keep workers calm, keep strikes regulated and to maintain general order. They choose not to do so, because violence and vandalism strengthens COSATU’s bargaining position. This puts pressure on employers to deal with strikes swiftly in order to stave off violence and damage to property.

Our labour legislation was written in good faith, with the hope that unions would take the sensible responsibility to avoid violence and intimidation during strikes. COSATU have failed to do so. This is precisely why we need laws that hold unions directly responsible for strike damage, as I have proposed in my Private Members’ Bill.