focus on australia || union under siege!

2
International Centre for Trade Union Rights Union under siege! Author(s): ELLIOT RAMOCHELA Source: International Union Rights, Vol. 5, No. 3, Focus on Australia (1998), p. 20 Published by: International Centre for Trade Union Rights Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41935692 . Accessed: 10/06/2014 15:46 Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp . JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected]. . International Centre for Trade Union Rights is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to International Union Rights. http://www.jstor.org This content downloaded from 188.72.127.114 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 15:46:10 PM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

Upload: elliot-ramochela

Post on 12-Jan-2017

212 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

TRANSCRIPT

International Centre for Trade Union Rights

Union under siege!Author(s): ELLIOT RAMOCHELASource: International Union Rights, Vol. 5, No. 3, Focus on Australia (1998), p. 20Published by: International Centre for Trade Union RightsStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/41935692 .

Accessed: 10/06/2014 15:46

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

International Centre for Trade Union Rights is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to International Union Rights.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 188.72.127.114 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 15:46:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

REPORT □ LESOTHO

Union under siege!

ELLIOT

RAMOCHELA, executive

secretary of

NURAW, reports on a small union's

struggle with multinational

capital

NURAW (the National Union of Retail and Allied Workers) represents workers in the distributive, commercial and retail sector in the Kingdom of Lesotho. A former British Protectorate, Lesotho gained independence in October 1966, and is a small, land-locked country completely surround- ed by its neighbour, South Africa. About two mil- lion people live in the mountainous kingdom.

The commercial, distributive and retail sector is mostly dominated by companies based in South Africa, with 70 per cent of NURAW's main- ly women membership working for South African multinational companies. The other 30 per cent work in Asian, Chinese and Taiwanese small hold- er shops. The Chinese companies first tried to establish themselves in South Africa but their low wages and poor conditions brought strong resis- tance from the unions in that country so they sought refuge in Lesotho where law enforcement is almost non-existent and union organisation fragmented.

During a period which began in 1997, workers in a Chinese-owned supermarket in the Lesotho capital, Maseru, were summarily dismissed for alleged minor errors. The workers protested at these unfair dismissals and NURAW took up the cases on their behalf. The management refused to discuss the dismissals with NURAW's representa- tives and the union therefore appealed to the law enforcement agencies for assistance.

On behalf of the workers, NURAW filed a case with the Labour Court for unfair dismissal. The

court ruled in favour of the dismissed workers and ordered the employer to reinstate. The employer, however, made an appeal against the decision to the High Court and the matter is still pending a hearing. In the meantime, the workers remain dismissed.

At the same time as it referred the matter to the Labour Court, NURAW issued a statement denouncing the employer's actions. On the 29 January 1998, lawyers representing the employer sent the union a letter demanding 150,000 South African Rand (US$30,000) in compensation for a loss of business the company claimed to have suf- fered as a result of the statement. Later, the com- pany also filed a case in the High Court for pay- ment of the 150,000 Rand and this case is pend- ing a hearing.

This claim has two direct effects. First, if judge- ment is found against NURAW, the union will be unable to pay and, under Lesotho law, will then cease to exist. Secondly, the claim has diverted attention from the original dispute, the unfair dis- missals of workers who continue to be left in legal and financial limbo.

This tactic of refusing to negotiate with a union whilst simultaneously relying on the greater financial and legal resources of a company to break the union, is one all too familiar to workers in other countries. NURAW can only hope that the High Court will not lend itself to such tactics and will ensure fair treatment and justice for NURAW and the dismissed workers.

INTERNATIONAL union rights Page 20 Volume 5 Issue 3 1998

This content downloaded from 188.72.127.114 on Tue, 10 Jun 2014 15:46:10 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions