The debate around putting House Agreement companies into the Main Agreement has been going on for as long as the idea of a mega bargaining council. The document reproduced below was drawn up in 2000/2001 to stimulate debate around the mega bargaining council. What is your view?
Introduction:
The issue of consolidating our bargaining structures and moving towards the mega-bargaining council, has been on the agenda of the union for some time. For various reasons, not much progress has been made on the issue. Among the reasons for the lack of progress has been:
Ң our inability to drive the processӢ the lack of clarity on what we actually wanted Ң absence of strong enthusiasm on the part of our members.
The need to revisit the issue
With lack of progress on the issue, it is high time that we re-look at our perspective on the matter. Even at the time when the proposal for a mega-bargaining council was mooted, some questions were raised:
“¢ will such a step remove bargaining further away from the shopfloor? “¢ will such a move lead to bureaucratisation of bargaining processes? “¢ does building solidarity between sectors necessitate putting together different sectors into one bargaining chamber? “¢ Will we be able to develop an argument against employer arguments about diversity and the disparate sectors that we were trying to put together.
These questions are still relevant and have not been adequately answered.
An alternative or a stepping stone to a mega-bargaining council – consolidating the existing bargaining arrangements?
Anyone familiar with our bargaining structures will realise that there are problems with the arrangements. These are some of the problems:
Ң despite all the attempts, we have not be able to unite motor workers given the diversity and different histories and fighting capacities of the different chapters within the motor industryӢ automotive component companies are found both in engineering and motor sectors Ң the absence of a statutory forum in auto assembly Ң the historical but illogical separation of tyre and rubber from other auto components companies.
These anomalies besides causing problems for uniting and mobilising our members, have been a cause of uneven engagement when it comes to engaging on industrial policy matters. Engagement in the MIDP has been more of an issue for comrades in assembly rather than the comrades in components.
Proposal for consolidation:
Sector 1
Sector 2
Restructured Engineering Bargaining Council
A New Automotive Bargaining Council
Step 1: Take auto components out of the scope of this bargaining council.
Step 2: Ensure House Agreements move into the Main Agreement
Step 3: Move tin packaging into the council (Note: this has been achieved)
Step 4: Bring in Denel and the armaments industry into the ambit of the bargaining council (Note: this has been achieved)
Step 1: Create a new bargaining council made up of assembly, tyre and rubber, and motor components. The bargaining structure will be statutory unlike the NBF. The advantage of a statutory body will be that agreements that are reached will be extended to non-parties
This will be made up of motor dealerships, panel beating shops and filling stations
As a way of rectifying these problems, the proposal is that we should consolidate the existing bargaining arrangements. This could be seen either as a stepping stone to the mega-bargaining council or as an alternative.
Development of the proposal:
If this proposal is appealing, the suggestion is that the following steps be taken:
“¢ The proposal be part of regional and local discussions in the run-up to the April 2001 NBC “¢ That a fleshed out proposal be tabled at the NBC “¢ Between now and the NBC, investigation be done on: “¢ the possible legal and procedural route to be followed to effect the proposal (Sector Coordinators & Legal Dept) “¢ what the proposal may mean for the representivity of the Councils (Sector Coordinators) “¢ how to deal with issues of funds and benefits which may be a thorny issue for some of our members (Benefits Officer).
The outcome of these investigations will have to go to the NBC as part of a fully-fledged proposal.Numsa document drawn up in 2000/2001