Organised labour continues to play a prominent role in shaping employment relations in South Africa. The individual worker is powerless and in a weaker bargaining position against his employer. The advent of democracy was accompanied by numerous interventions to level the historically uneven bargaining field. The trade union movement has made and consolidated significant gains since the advent of democracy. It however faces a plethora of new challenges, such as the negative forces of globalisation, declining membership (often associated with high levels of unemployment and the changing nature of work from standard to atypical employment), the resurfacing of adversarialism in the bargaining process, and numerous shortcomings inherent in forums established to facilitate corporatism. Business is intensifying its calls for investor-friendly policies, which effectively mean a relaxation of labour policies. The trade union movement faces an enormous task of rebuilding confidence and credibility among its members and at the same time showing some commitment to other social actors, government and business, that it is committed to contribute to economic growth and employment creation. The central focus of this thesis will be to highlight the gains made by the trade union movement, the numerous challenges threatening their existence, and how they have attempted to redefine their role in the face of these challenges. It will attempt to offer advice on how trade unions can continue to play a prominent role in shaping relations of work in South Africa. The study begins with a historical overview of trade unionism in South Africa. It then attempts to establish how trade unions have made use of the institution of collective bargaining, the importance of organisational rights to the trade union movement, the effectiveness of industrial action, and the emerging challenges threatening the vibrancy of trade unions. The overall aim is to assess whether the trade union movement is still a force to be reckoned with and its future role in influencing employment relations in South Africa.

Collective bargaining is the process whereby employees act as a collective unit whilst negotiating terms and conditions of employment with employers. The collective unit typically takes the form of a trade union, mandated by its members to negotiate on their behalf. By negotiating collectively the inherent imbalance of power between employer and individual employee is seen to be neutralised. The process of collective bargaining enjoys legal status in South Africa and around the world. The Industrial Conciliation Act of 1924 institutionalised collective bargaining for the first time in the form of the Industrial-Council system. This sectoral bargaining system stood firm throughout the pre-democracy period but initially excluded non-white employees. Industrial unrest in the 1970s was the catalyst for the Wiehan commission which ultimately brought all employees into the fold. By the dawn of democracy in South Africa the bargaining system enjoyed wide-spread support and legitimacy. This was particularly so amongst the COSATU-led labour movement which enjoyed a position of political strength. This support and strength were reflected in the contents of both the Labour Relations Act and the Constitution which enshrined the constitutional right to engage in collective bargaining. Possibly the most debated aspect of the Council system has been the question of extending agreements to non-parties. Those in favour argue that the Council system cannot function in the absence of extensions. This is so because what would then effectively be a voluntary system would not attract sufficient volunteers. Those against argue that extensions act as a barrier to economic activity, particularly for small and new businesses. Legislation has, since 1924, facilitated the extension of agreements as long as certain criteria are met. Section 32 of the Labour Relations Act is the current extension vehicle. The extension criteria have vacillated over time and especially so in recent history with section 32 being subject to change in every post-democracy amendment to the Act. Possibly the most serious challenge to the extension status quo has come in the form of a constitutional challenge by the Free-Market Foundation. The Foundation advances old economic arguments but links these to an alleged impingement of constitutional rights. The challenge comes at a time when the country is experiencing the most significant socio-political turbulence since democracy. This includes the most enduring strike in our history, a landmark-employer lock-out and a parliamentary facelift. The Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council oversees the biggest manufacturing sector in the South African economy. This status prompted the Council to submit its own responding papers in the Free-Market case. Particularly fascinating is that an employer party to the Council not only supports the Foundation case but has also lodged its own proceedings against the extension of the 2014 Engineering agreement. Both these cases are still pending and the outcomes have the potential to transform the political and economic landscape of our country.

The promulgation into law of the concept of workplace forums has been beset with immense criticism and opposition from organized labour and some quarters of organized business. Last ditch efforts by the Ministerial Task Team had won the day for the inclusion of this controversial provision in the new Labour Relations Act.1 Commentators on the Act tend to agree that the fallout with organized labour at the negotiations has probably set the scene as to whether the provisions would be widely used or not. History has shown that the establishment of such forums in workplaces has been low. In some situations where workplace forums had been established, their continuous sustainability was put into doubt. This has led to the de-establishment of some of these forums in some workplaces. Various reasons were provided, but the prime factors for its failure could be traced back to the negotiations at NEDLAC. The unions opposed the original proposal by government that minority unions and even non-union employees can trigger the establishment of a workplace forum and insisted that this be restricted to majority unions. The voluntary nature regarding the establishment of a workplace forum and the trigger that only a majority union can invoke the provisions has still seen unions reluctant to utilize the provisions since it did not serve their purpose. The aims of the provisions, namely to increase workplace democracy, was therefore thwarted in favour of more informal procedures. Although the idea is a noble one, it is argued that the introduction of the provisions was ill-timed and inappropriate. The lesson that the legislature can take is that for any provision to be a success, buy-in from all stakeholders is paramount. Research has shown that there was a steady decline in the establishment of workplace forums. Since December 2004 there was not a single application received by the Commission for Conciliation, mediation and Arbitration. There is also doubt as to whether any of the Forums that were previously established are still functional. What is certain is that statutory workplace forums is not at the forefront as a vehicle for change that was envisaged in the Explanatory Memorandum that accompanied the new Labour Relations Act. What is also certain is that employers and employees are utilizing other forums to ensure workplace participation. These forums, however, only provide a voice to unionized workers. The vast majority of non-union workers remain voiceless. The proposed amendments in 2002 that intimated that the trigger be any union and not only majority unions failed to be passed into law. Perhaps it is that type of catalyst that is required to give life to the provisions. The future of workplace forums in South Africa is bleak and will continue to be if there is no intervention by the parties at NEDLAC to revive it. A complete revamp of the legislation would be required for such a revival. Some commentators have made meaningful suggestions on changes that can be made to the legislation to make workplace forums more attractive. Some have suggested it be scrapped altogether and future workplace participatory structures should be left to the parties to embrace voluntarily. Workplace forums are a novel innovation with great potential to encourage workplace democracy. There is nothing wrong with the concept. The application of such forums in the South African context is what is concerning. Perhaps prior experience and experimentation with similar type forums have tarnished workplace participation. The strategies by the previous regime and some employers have caused such participation to equate to co-option. Perhaps not enough spade work was done to ensure that the climate and attitude of the parties was conducive for its introduction. What is paramount no matter the form it takes is that workplace participation is crucial for economic growth and the introduction of new work methods to improve productivity. Without the establishment of such forums, whether voluntary or statutory, the ‘second channel principle’ that promotes non-adversarial workplace joint decision-making would be lost and conflict based participation could spiral leading to economic disaster.

This paper is divided into two distinct sections. The first being an analysis of the legal protection of temporary employees as things currently stand. It deals with the various labour laws that currently regulate temporary employment as well as the temporary employment contract and the common-law. The second section summarises and analyses the provisions of the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill as they apply to fixed-term employees. Temporary employees are protected by the general protection extended to all employees in terms of section 23(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, guaranteeing all employees the “right to fair labour practice”. The Labour Relations Act has as one of its main objectives to give effect to and regulate the fundamental rights contained in the Constitution. Thus the Labour Relations Act must not only give effect to constitutional rights but it must also ensure that it in no way unreasonably or unjustly denies or limits constitutional rights. Temporary employees have a number of labour laws protecting their interests. Where the provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, a Bargaining Council Agreement or a Sectoral Determination do not apply the employee will rely on the terms of the fixed-term employment contract and thereafter the common law for protection. The only protection offered to temporary employees contained in the Labour Relations Act is in section 186(1)(b), where a dismissal is defined to include the non-renewal of temporary contracts of employment where there is a reasonable expectation of renewal on the same or similar terms. This provision has proved to be highly controversial in that it does not expressly cater for temporary employees who harbour reasonable expectations of indefinite employment. An analysis is made of the most important cases relating to section 186(1)(b). The second section unpacks and critically analyses the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill which have been long in the offing and when they are finally enacted, will bring with them sweeping changes for atypical employment . The amendments will drastically change the way employers make use of fixed-term employees as well as the way in which Temporary Employment Services may conduct business if they are in fact able to keep working at all. There is very little literature of substance written about the Labour Relations Amendment Bill as it applies to atypical employment. The fact that the proposed amendments have changed so many times over such a long period of time might have deterred many writers from investing time and effort in attempts to analyse and summarise the amendments. Articles posted on the internet are in the main short and have very little content. No books were found with any discussion that pertains to the amendments. The amendments divide employees involved in atypical employment into two different categories. These categories consist of employees earning above the threshold in terms of section 6(3) of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act and those earning below this threshold. All fixed-term employees may rely on the provisions of section 186 of the Labour Relations Act. Employees earning below the threshold are considered to be the most vulnerable and have been afforded additional protections in terms of sections 198(A), (B) and (C). Issues surrounding Temporary Employment Services and fixed-term employees have been very divisive and have been the topics of heated debate at all levels of Industrial Relations for a long time. Discussions regarding the use of the services of Temporary Employment Services can be highly emotive, with Temporary Employment Services being accused of committing wideThis paper is divided into two distinct sections. The first being an analysis of the legal protection of temporary employees as things currently stand. It deals with the various labour laws that currently regulate temporary employment as well as the temporary employment contract and the common-law. The second section summarises and analyses the provisions of the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill as they apply to fixed-term employees. Temporary employees are protected by the general protection extended to all employees in terms of section 23(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, guaranteeing all employees the “right to fair labour practice”. The Labour Relations Act has as one of its main objectives to give effect to and regulate the fundamental rights contained in the Constitution. Thus the Labour Relations Act must not only give effect to constitutional rights but it must also ensure that it in no way unreasonably or unjustly denies or limits constitutional rights. Temporary employees have a number of labour laws protecting their interests. Where the provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, a Bargaining Council Agreement or a Sectoral Determination do not apply the employee will rely on the terms of the fixed-term employment contract and thereafter the common law for protection. The only protection offered to temporary employees contained in the Labour Relations Act is in section 186(1)(b), where a dismissal is defined to include the non-renewal of temporary contracts of employment where there is a reasonable expectation of renewal on the same or similar terms. This provision has proved to be highly controversial in that it does not expressly cater for temporary employees who harbour reasonable expectations of indefinite employment. An analysis is made of the most important cases relating to section 186(1)(b). The second section unpacks and critically analyses the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill which have been long in the offing and when they are finally enacted, will bring with them sweeping changes for atypical employment . The amendments will drastically change the way employers make use of fixed-term employees as well as the way in which Temporary Employment Services may conduct business if they are in fact able to keep working at all. There is very little literature of substance written about the Labour Relations Amendment Bill as it applies to atypical employment. The fact that the proposed amendments have changed so many times over such a long period of time might have deterred many writers from investing time and effort in attempts to analyse and summarise the amendments. Articles posted on the internet are in the main short and have very little content. No books were found with any discussion that pertains to the amendments. The amendments divide employees involved in atypical employment into two different categories. These categories consist of employees earning above the threshold in terms of section 6(3) of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act and those earning below this threshold. All fixed-term employees may rely on the provisions of section 186 of the Labour Relations Act. Employees earning below the threshold are considered to be the most vulnerable and have been afforded additional protections in terms of sections 198(A), (B) and (C).

Conflict is an inherent part of any service relationship, and is one of the important methods of effective organisational functioning. Depending on its management, it has both constructive and negative outcomes. The most extreme outcome of conflict in an industrial relationship is a strike. The South African Public Service strike of 2007 was the most protracted and united strike in the history of South Africa. In order to provide an insight into this strike, this treatise explores the following key aspects: • To present a short background of collective bargaining in the public sector through time. • To provide a short background to the public sector strike in 2007. • To develop a conflict model for analytic purposes based on a literature review and to use the conflict model to analyse the strike. A study of the strike was deemed essential because of its current nature and it being charged with political undertones. Moreover, conflict in the employment relationship has had an important influence on theories of industrial relations. The South African labour relations system is pluralist in nature, with a focus on the formal institutions of industrial relations. The focus should be on the motives and actions of parties in the employment relationship. Hence, one should look beyond conventional explanations in understanding conflict.

M.Phil. / An in-depth Employment Relations Management Audit conducted in Kutama Sinthumule Maximum Security Prison in order to assist both managers of the Department of Correctional Services and of Private Prison to efficiently and effectively apply sound Human Resource and Labour Relations policies and procedures. The study critically examines and discusses the perceptions of employees of the Kutama Sinthumule Maximum Security Prison. The researcher administered questionnaires to one hundred and fifty (150) employees out of a total of five hundred (500) personnel. Interviews were held with senior managers of Kutama Sinthumule Maximum Security Prison who provided vital information on issues pertaining to privatisation of prisons in South Africa

A research report submitted to the Faculty of Management, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Management. Johannesburg, January 1994. / The purpose of this study was to identify the factorS involved in the process of Human Resource policy formulation and implementation as well as to determine who the stakeholders are and to what extent they are consulted in the process. A further objective of this exploratory research was to gather empirical date that would serve as the basis for the development of a generic human resource policy formUlation and implementation model. [Abbreviated Abstract. Open document to view full version] / AC2017

Thesis (MPA (School of Public Management and Planning))--University of Stellenbosch, 2009. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Chapter 1 outlines the purpose of the research, provides the background on the way in which LR matters are currently managed and handled in the Department of Defence (DOD), identifies the research problem, and outlines the research design and methodology. Chapter 2 explores the theoretical framework of the principles of labour relations and management of change. The chapter reveals that the principles of labour relations hold persons in management or supervisory positions responsible for managing LR matters, and suggests that LR practitioners should therefore be able to equip them with adequate skills and knowledge of the procedures for dealing with LR matters in the workplace. The chapter also reveals that the principles of the management of change suggest that the employees should be prepared for change; that a change agent, who should create an environment conducive to change through lobbying the support of persons in management and employees for the proposed change, should be identified; and that resistance to change should be identified at an early stage of the change process in order to eliminate it. Change agents are encouraged not to dominate the change process, but rather to facilitate it in order to ensure that the organisation and its employees drive the change process themselves. Chapter 3 explores the objectives of the LR support function as well as the content of LR practices in order to determine the extent to which LR practitioners can become change agents in the DOD. The chapter reveals that LR at grassroots level is practiced in the way that has resulted to conflicts and costly litigations. In this chapter the regulatory framework and procedures that impede LR practitioners from becoming change agents are also analysed. Chapter 4 covers the data collection process and the analysis thereof. The data reveals that the LR structure at grassroots level is not conducive for the professional delivery of enhanced LR services; that the target group does not have access to adequate resources that would enable them to execute their functions; and that empowerment programmes are implemented to equip the target group with adequate qualifications, skills and or knowledge to be able to render enhanced LR services. The main findings were that guidance is lacking to ensure that LR systems, structures and processes at grassroots level are in place, to ensure that LR matters are managed and handled in a fair and responsible way; to ensure that LR staff with adequate competences to render LR services is appointed; and to ensure that the LR department is active enough and lead the execution of enhanced LR services. In Chapter 5 the main findings are analysed and it is concluded that LR practitioners are unable to become change agents if LR systems, structures and processes are not in place. It is encouraged that LR practitioners should form a cohesive but diverse team that is able to render enhanced LR services, and that the LR department should take a leading role. It is recommended that a study be conducted to determine overarching LR strategy that would guide the establishment of LR systems, the determination of LR structure and processes for dealing with LR matters, and the empowerment programmes for ensuring the professional delivery of enhanced LR services. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hoofstuk 1 skets die doel van die navorsing en verskaf agtergrond oor die manier waarop arbeidsverhoudinge tans in die Departement van Verdediging bestuur en hanteer word. In hierdie hoofstuk word die navorsingsprobleem ook geïdentifiseer en die navorsingsontwerp en -metodologie uitgestippel. Hoofstuk 2 ondersoek die teoretiese raamwerk van arbeidsverhoudingbeginsels en die bestuur van verandering. Die hoofstuk openbaar dat die beginsels van arbeidsverhoudinge persone in bestuurs- of toesighoudende posisies verantwoordelik hou vir die bestuur van arbeidsverhoudingkwessies. Daar word voorgestel dat arbeidsverhoudingpraktisyns daarom in staat moet wees om hierdie persone toe te rus met voldoende vaardighede en kennis van die prosedures vir die hantering van arbeidsverhoudingkwessies in die werkplek. Die hoofstuk openbaar ook dat die beginsels van die bestuur van verandering aandui dat werknemers op verandering voorbereid moet wees en dat ’n veranderingsagent geïdentifiseer moet word. Só ’n agent moet ’n atmosfeer skep wat bevorderlik vir verandering is deur steun vir die voorgestelde verandering van persone in bestuur en werknemers te werf. Verder moet weerstand teen verandering in ’n vroeë stadium in die veranderingsproses vasgestel word om dit sodoende uit te skakel. Veranderingsagente word aangemoedig om nie die veranderingsproses te oorheers nie, maar eerder te vergemaklik om te verseker dat die instelling en sy werknemers die veranderingsproses self dryf. Hoofstuk 3 ondersoek die teikens van die arbeidsverhoudingsteunfunksie asook die inhoud van arbeidsverhoudingpraktyke om te bepaal tot watter mate arbeidsverhoudingpraktisyns veranderingsagente in die Departement van Verdediging kan word. Hierdie hoofstuk onthul dat arbeidsverhoudinge op grondvlak op ’n manier beoefen word wat reeds tot konflik en duur litigasies gelei het. In hierdie hoofstuk word die regulerende raamwerk en prosedures geanaliseer wat arbeidsverhoudingpraktisyns verhinder om veranderingsagente te word. Hoofstuk 4 dek die data-insamelingsproses en analise van hierdie proses. Die data onthul dat die arbeidsverhoudingstruktuur op grondvlak nie bevorderlik is vir die professionele lewering van verbeterde arbeidsverhoudingdienste nie, en dat die teikengroep nie toegang tot voldoende bronne het wat hulle in staat sou stel om hulle funksies uit te voer nie. Die data openbaar verder dat bemagtigingsprogramme toegepas word om die teikengroep met voldoende opleiding, vaardighede en/of kennis toe te rus om verbeterde arbeidsverhoudingdienste te lewer. Die hoofbevinding was dat daar gebrekkige leiding is om te verseker dat arbeidsverhoudingstelsels, -strukture en -prosesse op grondvlak gereed is; dat arbeidsverhoudingkwessies op ’n regverdige en verantwoordelike manier bestuur en hanteer word; dat arbeidsverhoudingpersoneel met voldoende bevoegdhede aangestel word om arbeidsverhoudingdienste te lewer, en dat die arbeidsverhoudingdepartement aktief genoeg is en die voortou neem in die uitvoering van verbeterde arbeidsverhoudingdienste. In hoofstuk 5 word die hoofbevindinge geanaliseer en die gevolgtrekking gemaak dat arbeidsverhoudingpraktisyns nie in staat is om veranderingsagente te word indien arbeidsverhoudingstelsels, -strukture en -prosesse nie gereed is nie. Arbeidsverhoudingpraktisyns word aangemoedig om ’n verenigde maar diverse span te vorm wat verbeterde arbeidsverhoudingdienste kan bied en die arbeidsverhoudingdepartement word aangemoedig om ’n leidende rol in hierdie verband te speel. Daar word aanbeveel dat ’n studie gedoen word om ’n oorkoepelende arbeidsverhoudingstrategie vas te stel wat as riglyn kan dien vir die stigting van arbeidsverhoudingstelsels, die bepaling van arbeidsverhoudingstruktuur en prosesse om met arbeidsverhoudingkwessies om te gaan, en bemagtigingsprogramme om te verseker dat verbeterde arbeidsverhoudingdienste professioneel gelewer word.

Thesis (MPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The thesis is an analysis of the strikes at Volkswagen SA during the period 1999-2000 and its social and political outcomes. Seen from a broader perspective, it is a case study of social conflict in a young democracy after the formal demise of apartheid in 1994. By the time (i.e. early in 2000) events reached a climax, the company had lost millions of Rand in revenue and more than 1300 workers their jobs. The thesis wants to explain how this came to be - despite attempts by the company to establish a pluralistic industrial relations culture that go back to the early 1990s and after, ostensibly, gaining the consent of the shop stewards committee at the factory and the NUMSA leadership for a lucrative ("A4") export agreement. After studying the literature and the press, interviewing key actors in the "drama", and closely following the proceedings of the CCMA and the Labour Court, the thesis comes up with an explanation more complex than the "conventional" ones offered during and after the strike. The immediate cause of the strike action was the nonacceptance of the terms of the export agreement by 13 shop stewards and their supporters. These shop stewards had been elected onto the VW shop steward council after their union (i.e. NUMSA) and the company had concluded the agreement. When they came out in open defiance of the agreement, they were suspended by the union for their unconstitutional action. They subsequently tried to rally their followers for their own reinstatement. However, the thesis shows that the strikes of 1999 and 2000 were merely two more outbursts of shop floor tension and conflict that had been dormant for a long time. Before and after 1994, there existed informal structures and factions at the shop floor level which refused to tow the official NUMSA "line" - a policy which increasingly started to embrace the ethos of "reconstruction" and economic competitiveness. Neither the union leadership, nor company management were able to deal with these informal structures and bring the dissident faction under control. Although the potential for more cooperation and trust did exist, both the union leadership and management failed to turn this into "social capital". The thesis suggest that this may have been possible, if there had been more direct forms of worker participation (over and above the shop stewards committee). Also, the haemorraging of the union leadership after 1994, and the increasing bureaucratisation of industrial relations did nothing to improve the situation. To make matters worse, the thesis argues, the terms ofthe export agreement were not properly communicated to the union rank and file. To top it all, the thesis provides ample evidence that the VW workers could not record any extra material gains in exchange for more flexible working arrangements in the wake of the shift from "Fordism" to "Lean Production" at the Uitenhage factory. Here, "wealth creative" industrial relations did not accompany the shift to lean production, as post-Fordist theory would like to suggest. When the 13 shop stewards and a certain percentage of the VW workforce came out in protest against this arrangement, no special efforts were made to mediate the conflict. The "fallout" of the conflict includes hundreds of millions of Rand in lost company revenue, more unemployment in one of the poorest regions of South Africa, a drawn out legal process and political divisions in worker ranks and in the Uitenhage community. Although NUMSA admits to a "wakeup call", the relationship between the COSA TU affiliated union and the state is as close as ever. In the eyes of the thesis, however, the case of the VW strike, including the direct intervention of the head of state, is proof that the young, post-settlement democracy is not yet able to deal with social conflict in a mature way. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die tesis is 'n analise van die stakings by Volkswagen SA tydens die periode 1999- 2000 en sy sosiale en politieke gevolge. Gesien vanuit 'n breer perspektief, is dit 'n gevallestudie van sosiale konflik in 'n jong demokrasie na die formele be'indiging van apartheid in 1994. Teen die tyd (vroeg in 2000) wat gebeure 'n hoogtepunt bereik het, het die maatskappy honderde miljoene Rande in inkomste verloor en meer as 1300 werkers hul werk. Die tesis wil verklaar waarom dit gebeur het - ten spyte van die pogings deur die firma sedert die vroee 1990s om 'n pluralistiese arbeidsverhoudingskultuur te skep en nadat die "shop stewards" komitee by die fabriek en die NUMSA leirskap oenskynlik sy instemming gegee het tot 'n lonende ("A4") uitvoerkontrak. Na 'n studie van die literatuur en die pers, onderhoude met sleutel akteurs in die "drama" en 'n noukeurige monitering van die verrigtinge by die CCMA en die arbeidshof, kom die tesis na vore met 'n verklaring wat meer kompleks is as die wat tydens die staking en daama aangebied is. Die onmidellike oorsaak van die staking was die nie-aanvaarding van die uitvoer ooreenkoms deur 13 "shop stewards" en hul ondersteuners. Hierdie "shop stewards" is verkies tot die VW "shop steward" komitee midat die unie (d.w.s. NUMSA) en die maatskappy die ooreenkoms gesluit het. Toe hulle openlike opposisie teen die ooreenkoms gewys het, is hulle deur die unie geskors vir hul onkonstitusionele optrede. Hulle het daama hul ondersteuners probeer mobiliseer vir die herstel van hul posisies. Die tesis wys egter dat die stakings van 1999 en 2000 bloot nog twee uitbarstings was van 'n smeulende fabrieksvloer konflik en spanning wat vir 'n lank tyd reeds sluimerend was. V oor en mi 1994 het daar informele strukture en faksies op die fabrieksvloer bestaan wat geweier het om die amptelike beleid van NUMSA te volg - 'n beleid wat toenemend die etos van "rekonstruksie" en ekonomiese mededingendheid aangeneem het. Nog die unie leierskap, nog die maatskappy bestuur was instaat om die informele strukture te hanteer en die afwykende faksie onder beheer te bring. Alhoewel die potensiaal vir meer samewerking en vertroue bestaan het, het beide die unie leierskap en die bestuur daarin gefaal om dit te omvorm tot "sosiale kapitaal". Die tesis suggereer dat dit moontlik sou gewees het as daar 'n meer direkte vorm van werkers deelname (bo en behalwe die "shop stewards" komitee) bestaan het. Die verlies aan kwaliteit leiers mi 1994, sowel as die toenemende burokratisering van arbeidsverhoudings het ook nie gehelp om die situasie te beredder me. Om dinge te vererger, redeneer die tesis, is die klousules van die uitvoer ooreenkoms nie behoorlik aan die gewone unie lede verduidelik nie. Om alles te kroon, voorsien die tesis genoeg bewyse dat die VW werkers nie enige ekstra materiele voordele kon aanteken in ruil vir meer buigsame werksreelings as deel van die skuif vanaf "Fordisme" na "Lean Production" by die fabriek in Uitenhage nie. Hier het "welvaartskeppende" arbeidsverhoudings nie hand-aan-hand gegaan met die skuif na "lean production, soos post-Fordistiese teorie wil suggereer nie. Toe die 13 "shop stewards" en 'n sekere persentasie van die VW arbeidsmag openlik daarteen geprotesteer het, is geen spesiale poging aangewend om die konflik te besleg nie. Die skade van die konflik sluit honderde miljoene Rande aan verlore maatskappy inkomste, meer werkloosheid in een van Suid-Afrika se armste streke, 'n uitgerekte regsproses en politieke verdeeldheid onder werkers en in die Uitenhage gemeenskap in. Alhoewel NUMSA erken dat hulle "wakkergeskrik" het, is die verhouding tussen die COSA TU geaffilieerde vakunie en die staat so eng soos vantevore. In die oe van· die tesis egter, is die geval van die VW staking, insluitende die direkte ingryping deur die staatshoof, 'n bewys daarvan dat die jong, post-skikking demokrasie nog nie gereed is om sosiale konflik op 'n ryp manier te hanteer nie.

Thesis (MA)--Stellenbosch University, 2015. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: An outcome of this thesis, done on farms in South-Africa in the Swartland area, is that the labour structure in agriculture is still predominantly paternalistic and that paternalism and empowerment coexist. This co-existence causes tension between farmers and farm workers as it disrupts the relationship where farmers traditionally had the authority and farm workers were subordinate, but in the modern farm setting have a measure of independence. A qualitative approach was used to investigate how farmers and farm workers perceived their relationship in the past and how they experience it presently. Individual interviews were held with each farmer and focus group discussions with workers on farms. The study discusses how farmers and farm workers maintain paternalism on farms, in the context of the reduced support of the state to white commercial farmers as well as the expansion and formalisation of labour and tenure legislation of workers' rights. The state acted as ‘patron’ to the farmers in the apartheid era, but the state’s patronage to farmers came to an end with the political transition. Farmers feel frustrated and miss the support they enjoyed previously. Legislation which challenges the power and authority of farmers has been extended to farms and provides a framework for the relationship between farmers and farm workers and establishes a context in which this relationship occurs. This has brought about that the power and authority of the “paternalistic” farmers have been exposed and challenged. These changes in farmers’ and farmworkers’ relationship with the state create uncertainties, changes and adjustments in the relationship between farmers and farm workers on farms. Farmers still take control of farms, regardless of any legislation. The farm workers also still tend to define their position as depending on the farmer’s goodwill in conjunction with formal legislation. However, although the workers are still dependent on the farmer, they are also aware of their rights in the new democratic era and they claim these rights. The “old paternalistic relationship” together with the propagation of new legislation causes tensions as well as disruptions in the relationship between famers and farm workers. But, forged in unequal relationships of dependency and loyalty, farmers and farm workers keep commercial agriculture going. The information collected is intended to shed light on the complex relationships between farmers and farm workers on farms. Hopefully this research on several farms in the Western Cape, in the Swartland environment, can contribute to a better understanding of the complex relationship between farmers and farm workers. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Hierdie studie, wat gedoen is op plase in Suid-Afrika in die Swartland-omgewing, toon dat die arbeidsopset in die landbou oorwegend paternalisties is en dat paternalisme en bemagtiging op plase saam bestaan. Hierdie saambestaan veroorsaak spanning tussen die boere en plaaswerkers en lei tot ontwrigting in die verhouding waar boere tradisioneel die outoriteit gehad het en die plaaswerkers ondergeskik was, maar nou in die moderne plaasopset onafhanklik is. ’n Kwalitatiewe benadering is gebruik om ondersoek in te stel na hoe boere en plaaswerkers die verhoudings met mekaar in die verlede ervaar het en ook hoe hulle dit tans in die moderne plaasopset ervaar. Daar is individuele onderhoude met die boere gevoer en fokusgroepe met die plaaswerkers in hulle eie natuurlike omgewings gedoen. Die studie beredeneer hoe beide boere en plaaswerkers paternalisme op plase in stand hou, ongeag die verminderde ondersteuning van die staat aan wit kommersiële boere, asook die uitbreiding en formalisering van arbeids- en verblyfregwetgewing om plaaswerkers se regte te beskerm. Die staat het in die apartheidsjare as “beskermheer” teenoor die boere opgetree, maar daardie begunstiging van die staat aan die boere het met die politieke oorgang verval. Boere voel gefrustreerd en mis die ondersteuning wat hulle vroeër ontvang het. Wetgewing wat na plase uitgebrei is, verskaf nou sekere raamwerke waarbinne boere en werkers moet optree en stel ook sekere eise wat die konteks bepaal. Dit het veroorsaak dat die mag en outoriteit van die “paternalistiese boere” tot ’n mate blootgelê en uitgedaag word. Dit veroorsaak verskeie onsekerhede, veranderinge en aanpassings in die verhouding tussen boere en plaaswerkers op plase. Boere neem nog altyd die beheer op plase ongeag wetgewing wat hulle beperk. Die werkers is ook steeds geneig om hulle posisie te definieer as afhanklik van die boer se welwillendheid, naas die formele wetgewing. Maar, alhoewel die plaaswerkers nog altyd afhanklik van die boer is, is hulle tog as gevolg van wetgewing bewus van hulle regte en maak hulle ook aanspraak daarop. Die “ou paternalistiese verhouding” en die uitbreiding van formele wette wat boere beperk, veroorsaak dat spanning en ontwrigting in die verhoudings tussen boere en plaaswerkers ontstaan. Maar, gesmee in ongelyke verhoudings van afhanklikheid en lojaliteit hou boere en plaaswerkers die kommersiële landbou aan die gang. Die inligting wat versamel is beoog om lig te werp op die komplekse verhoudings tussen boere en plaaswerkers op plase. Hopelik sal hierdie navorsing op enkele plase in die Wes-Kaap, in die Swartland-omgewing, kan bydra tot ʼn beter begrip van die komplekse verhouding tussen boere en plaaswerkers.