Master of Ceremonies
The President of the Union, Mrs. Carol Mentor
The General Secretary of the Union, Mr. Calvin Nembidzane
Committee Members and Shop Stewards of the union
The Mayor of George
Distinguished Guests
Ladies and Gentlemen
The white rabbit put on his spectacles. “Where shall I begin, please
your majesty?” he asked. “Begin at the beginning”, the King said
gravely “and go on till you come to the end. Then stop”.
Begin at the beginning! Excellent advice – provided you know where
it is. I do. It is on the 16 March 1926 when the National Union of
Leather and Allied Workers was registered. The beginning was eighty one
years ago when NULAW became the founding party to the Leather Industry
Bargaining Council. Indeed this is an occasion that you should be very
proud of, as this was a sign of committed and visionary leadership.
Clearly, these pioneers knew what they wanted and the sector is still
reaping the fruits and benefits of a well organized sector. Had they
lived, they would have had to tell of hardihood, endurance and
courage.
Eighty-one years ago, when this union was formed, the world was a
totally different place from what it is today. During the formation of
this union, labour and natural resources formed the cornerstones for
economic growth. During the industrial era, this changed to energy
resources such as coal and oil, and their steam and electricity
generation capacity. The world economy of yester-year was not as
connected as the world economy of today, and more importantly,
geographic areas were distinct and isolated from each other – unlike
today.
In the last ten years, Manual Castells and Martin Carnoy tell us
that the core activities of the economy have since been
internationalised, using the new technologies. These core activities
include more integrated financial markets, the emergence of
multinational corporations, new forms of high value-added exports such
as computers, science and technology as the key drivers of high
performance economies, and the production and global sharing of highly
skilled person power. All these activities can now all operate across
the globe at the same time.
Globalisation is pervasive, and has impacted on all aspects of
social life. It has also led to the decline of the nation state. The
power of nation states to stabilise domestic economic conditions
through fiscal and monetary policy has also been severely undermined by
globalisation. Both Castells and Carnoy argue that with the decline of
the nation state there has also been the demise of key social and
cultural institutions and identities that have historically been part
of the nation state. These include institutions and concepts such as
'citizen', 'trade union', 'nuclear family' or 'political party'.
Tempting as it might be for me to focus on all these issues,
including the extent to which globalisation has led to the formation of
the fourth world, I would however like to only talk about two things
that directly impact on us as a result of globalisation.
Let me look first at the twin goals of skills development and
employment equity. Our economy has been registering tremendous growth
in the last ten years, but this growth has been of a different type. It
is growth that is largely technologically driven, as is the case
elsewhere in this global world. This skewed growth has therefore
demanded labour with intermediate to high-end skills. At the same time,
the apartheid education and training system had been designed to keep
more than 80% of our population largely unskilled, or at best, trained
at the lower-end of the skills pipeline. The fruits of this unfortunate
paradox are that today, we are seating with the unemployment rate which
is mainly comprised of individuals with less than a matric
qualification – most of whom are African and female. A small percentage
of the unemployed has a post matric certificate, the bulk of them have
a diploma or certificate and only a few have a university degree. The
total African unemployed graduates make up 85%! These shocking
statistics do not come from me, but are contained in a report prepared
and released last year by the Development Policy Research Unit of the
University of Cape Town. Ladies and gentleman, we are seating on a
ticking time bomb which will leave no winners when it explodes.
At the same time, our economy has been generating about 76% of jobs
requiring semi-skilled and skilled labour, with only 26% of jobs
generated requiring labour at the low skilled level. Simply put, we
have a skills mis-match. Unfortunately, this time bomb continues to
tick.
This is why the International Labour Organisation, in its recent
report on Equality at Work, said that: “the creation of more equal
societies must become a central goal of development paradigms and
policies”. This is also why we are constitutionally required to put in
place measures to affirm the previously disadvantaged. Employment
Equity is not a luxury for this nation, it is an attempt to diffuse
this ticking time bomb. Section 9(2) of the Constitution states that,
“Equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and
freedoms. To promote the achievement of equality, legislative and other
measures designed to protect or advance persons or categories of
persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination may be taken”.
Therefore, those who say we must throw away our employment equity
legislation because it has outlived its use, are living in a fool’s
paradise. The ANC addresses this matter in their strategy and tactics
document.
Critical to nation – building is the de – racialisation of South
African society and the elimination of patriarchal relations. It means
creating a society in which the station that individuals occupy in
political, social and other areas of endeavour is not defined on the
basis of race, ethnicity, language, gender, religious, cultural or
other such considerations. It means integrating communities in
residential areas, at the work – place and within the trade union
movement, in sports and other areas. It also means a consistent
programme of affirmative action to eradicate the disparities created by
apartheid.
The ANC recognises that individuals within such a nation will have
multiple identities, on the basis of their physiological make – up,
cultural life and social upbringing. Such distinctive features will not
disappear in the melting – pot of broad South Africanism. Neither does
their association on the basis of one social attribute or the other
constitute a denial of their other identities. But it is critical that
the over – arching identity of being South African is promoted among
all those who are indeed South African, as part of the process of
building an African nation on the southern tip of the continent. The
affirmation of our Africanness as a nation has nothing to do with the
domination of one culture or language by another – it is recognition of
a geographic reality and the awakening of a consciousness which
colonialism suppressed.
Apartheid colonialism also meant the systematic suppression of the
talents, creativity and capacity of women to play their role in the
ordering of the nation’s affairs. Much more than any other sector,
colonial oppression and a universal patriarchal culture, including
socially constructed “gender roles”, conspired to degrade women and
treat them as sub – human. These gender roles permeate all spheres of
life, beginning with the family, and are entrenched by stereotypes,
dominant ideas, cultures, beliefs, traditions and laws.
Critical to the NDR is not only the affirmation of gender equality,
but also ensuring that it is lived in practice by all South Africans,
and finds conscious expression in all the policies and programmes of
the nation. Concerted efforts will have to be made to educate citizens
to change their attitudes and practices regarding the roles of women
and men in society, and to assert an approach to issues of race and
class which consistently recognises the gender imprint within and among
these races and classes. This includes creating the necessary spiritual
and material conditions to facilitate women’s advancement in all
spheres of life.
In the same vein, the youth, the disabled and others have borne the
brunt of apartheid’s hierarchy of denial, and affording them the
requisite conditions for their advancement demands a united national
effort.
Addressing these matters is not merely a concern for this or the
other “sector” of society. It is in actual fact a matter of principle,
an expression of our humane values, without which liberation would be
neither genuine nor legitimate.
These are the principles, that as a member of the ANC who is loyal
and disciplined is abiding by. I will not be addressed through the
media on policy issues but by the legitimate structures of the ANC
With globalisation having weakened the nation state, the creation of
this equal society cannot be the sole prerogative of the state.
Employers and workers have to form part of this building process.
Employers must do more to open their doors and affirm workers from the
previously disadvantaged, whilst workers must also do better to
organise at the workplace and ensure that employment equity is adhered
to. Unions must make sure that they participate fully in the Employment
Equity Consultative Forums, not only to make a meaningful contribution,
but to engage in the monitoring and evaluation processes to make sure
employers do not attempt to circumvent the requirements of legislation
both procedurally and substantively. We all carry the
responsibility to create a diverse and tolerant workforce that is
equitable in nature and free from unfair discriminatory practices.
Equally, both employers and workers are represented on SETA boards
and therefore have to accept responsibility with regards to SETAs that
are not pulling their weight, and find ways to improve the functioning
of our SETA system. As social partners, we introduced the Skills
Development Act to empower those in employment and the unemployed. We
wanted our society to acquire the necessary skills to enable it to
produce good quality products or render the best services, for people
to enter formal or self employment, and to derive an income that will
improve their standard of living. At the same time, employers will also
derive benefits in terms of productivity growth and profits. To
facilitate and implement these skills development interventions, we
have established the 23 SETAs including the Clothing, Textile Footwear
and Leather Seta (CTFL Seta) controlled by an equal number of employer
and trade union representatives.
However, I am told that countries such as Italy and India source
their Leather from countries such as ours to produce some of the finest
shoes, leather wear, and lounge suites that we in turn buy at 50%+ the
original price they paid for. Of course this phenomenon is also rife in
other raw materials that we produce. They manage to do all these
because of the technology and the skills levels they have developed in
their countries. We are sitting with a declining sector and huge
unemployment levels especially amongst the youth – why are we not able
to do the same? We need to start developing the necessary skills
amongst our people so that we can produce these products ourselves.
Amongst the questions I want to pose to you today, is what difference
do you believe you have made in the CTFL Seta? Is the institution
serving the needs of your members and the industry? Do you know who
represents workers in the SETA since its inception and to what extent
have you held such a representative accountable? Going forward, given
the levels of this SETA’s income and its size, and the new National
Industrial Policy Framework - what are your views regarding the future
of this SETA? I am raising these issues because I want you to be part
of the debates in order to advance the course of workers in the Leather
sector.
I would like to now change gear, and focus on the second issue that
globalisation has made us suffer from – the decline of the nation state
and its implications on the demise of key social and cultural
institutions and identities that have historically been part it.
The advent of globalisation has weakened nation states and the
extent to which they are able to direct nations in particular ways.
Today, skilling your people does not necessarily mean that they will
work for you. In all likelihood, they might just relocate to work in
other countries. At the same time, we also benefit from skilled people
trained by other countries. Businesses come and go as they please, the
rand goes up and down as it pleases, and the list is endless.
Therefore, being able to carve a definitive role of the state has
become more challenging under globalisation. It is however not only the
state that has had to adapt or die. Our labour market institutions are
facing similar challenges.
Chairperson, in all the congresses of unions and bargaining councils
I address, I always raise the issue of representivity of bargaining
councils as a challenge that we need to address. Representivity of
parties to the councils is the life-blood of the continued existence of
such councils. Independent research is indicating to us that the
bargaining councils cover just less than a third of employees that are
potentially covered by collective bargaining. I have also done a quick
scan of the representivity percentages of bargaining councils
registered with my Department, and the trends are consistently going
downwards. To illustrate my point, in building, the Cape of Good Hope
bargaining council has had its trade union representivity declining
from 58% in 2002 to its current 44%; the Road Freight bargaining
council has had its trade union representivity declining from 48% in
2002 to its current 43%; the motor industry bargaining council has had
its trade union representivity declining from 56% in 2002 to its
current 48%; the same declining representivity trends are evident in
entertainment, furniture manufacturing, metal and engineering; and with
your sector – trade union representivity has also declined from 81% in
2002 to its current 70%, which is one of the best performers.
Therefore I am very happy to address a union that stood the test of
time. Every one will understand that a union like yours will have its
ups and downs, but a union with character and integrity will achieve
diversity and prove its worth to the world. On this occasion it is
fitting to reflect on some achievements registered by this union in
relation to our collective bargaining system and bargaining councils in
particular.
Your union negotiated a restructured footwear agreement, which I
extended to non-parties on 26 September 2005. This is being regarded as
a groundbreaking approach to accommodate the needs of all the different
employers in the industry, especially the SMMEs who previously had to
apply to the council for exemptions from collective agreements. The
agreement allowed for the categorisation of employers into Formal,
Semi-Formal and Informal Employers, and enabled employers and employees
to negotiate certain employment conditions, including wages, at plant
level, which allows employers particularly, a large degree of
flexibility.
This is an achievement that your union was largely responsible for
and of which you can be proud. These are the types of innovations that
unions should look at to try and improve the working conditions of
their members. I wish more unions would follow this practical approach
to negotiations.
Nonetheless, there is general decline in trade union membership.
Globalization has placed more emphasis on trade liberalization and the
relocation of production to lower-wage economies, which has an adverse
effect on the working class. The World Commission on the Social
Dimension of Globalization acknowledged that globalization has had a
varied impact on employment and economic sectors with the decline in
formal employment being experienced in developing countries. Due to the
fundamental principles guiding globalization, the power of the markets
have grown and increased with the working class being subordinated to
an international process of capital accumulation. As a consequence,
these global trends have also been accompanied by the changing methods
of work organisation and “atypical” forms of labour - which have made
all the more difficult for trade unions to organize workers
successfully using the old traditional forms.
In 2000, you acknowledged that the fall in production and employment
in the footwear industry was due to amongst others the demands for a
flexible labour market and liberalization of the economy. All these
changes have an adverse impact on the working class with the
development and emergence of a “new sub-class” of workers characterized
by employment, income and all other forms of insecurities. These
insecurities, which have largely resulted in informality, pose major
challenges to unionization and the patterns of collective organisation
and solidarity.
This situation might be worsened by the issues I raised earlier
around the changing nature of work organisation with more emphasis on
casualisation. With increasing casualisation of workers, the capacity
of labour to organize is increasingly being weakened, with the
resultant effect that more and more bargaining councils are becoming
less representative, which means that their collective agreements
cannot be extended to non-parties. Whilst some might see the weakening
of trade unions and bargaining councils as a positive development, I do
not see it as such. A strong collective bargaining system has served
this country well over many years and to weaken any of the role players
in the system could be regarded as a recipe for disaster. As a trade
union, you have to play a major role in strengthening our collective
bargaining system and institutions.
Challenges, as you know, will come in different forms. Your task
will not be easy unless you address the weaknesses in your organisation
and your structures. If you want to continue enjoying the benefits of
the collective bargaining system, you need to find ways to hold on to
the current membership, as well as find ways of recruiting new members.
Due to the changing nature of employment, the ball will remain squarely
in your court to stay a step ahead in the representivity race. The
representivity of parties to bargaining councils is the most
challenging requirement for the bargaining council system to survive.
We will however not win this race by reviewing the threshold of
representivity, as some of my comrades in COSATU have proposed, because
that on its own will erode the legitimacy of the bargaining councils
system as a whole both in South Africa and internationally.
With the challenges of globalisation upon us, I urge you and
employers in the industry to work towards strengthening the sector. I
believe bargaining councils’ duty is not only to bargain on wages and
conditions of employment, but to also look at ways to strengthen the
sector in order to prolong the lifespan of the sector. In other words,
you must all work towards making this industry competitive by
organising better in the workplace.
I congratulate the Union again on the service and dedication to the
Industry over the past 81 years. NULAW is an excellent example for all
to see and emulate.
I wish you well with the rest of your Congress; I hope your congress
will achieve what you set out to do.
THANK YOU
