THE AFRICAN WORKER IN SOUTH AFRICA

A Study of Trade Unionism

★

ALEX HEPPLE, M.P.

TH E AFRICA BUREAU 65 DENISON HOUSE VAUXHALL BRIDGE ROAD LONDON S.W.l

Price: Two Shillings ALEX HEPPLE, M.P. the author of this important pamphlet on the South African trade union movement, is the leader of the Labour Party in the South African Parliament, and is recognised as the authority on trade union affairs. In the past seven years he has established for himself a reputation as one of the half-dozen outstanding Members in the South African Parliament. Even his opponents have paid tribute to the vigour of his championship of the democratic rights of South Africans of all races: he played the leading role in opposing the recently enacted Industrial Conciliation Act. He has represented Labour interests in the Transvaal Provincial Council and in Parliament for nearly 15 years. Some years ago he gave up his position as'managing director of a flourishing industrial firm to devote himself entirely to his public duties.

ERRATA

P. 5 footnote line 3, for 31j-000j000 read 21s000,000

P. 25 line 15 for 720 read 72 CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION...... 2

1. AFRICANS—THE WORKING CLASS MAJORITY ... 3

2. LABOUR ORGANISATION ...... 6 I. The Story of Trade Union Apartheid ...... 6 II. White Opposition to African Trade Unions ...... 11

III. Barriers Against Union Organisation ... < ...... 15

(i) No Right to M e e t...... 16 (ii) No Place to M e e t...... 17 (iii) The Threat of Suppression ...... 18

(iv) The Banning of L eaders ...... 19 (v) The Banning of Meetings...... 20

3. LABOUR L A W S...... 21 I. The Industrial Conciliation A c t ...... 21 II. The Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act ... 23

III. The Wage Act ...... 26 IV. The Native Labour Regulation Act ...... 28 V. The Native Building Workers Act ...... 29 VI. The Master and Servants L a w s ...... 31

4. THE TRADE UNION ROAD TO DEMOCRACY ... 31 APPENDIX—Workers Employed in S.A. Industry ...... 36

1 INTRODUCTION This is a brief review of labour organisation amongst African workers in the Union of South Africa and of some of the laws and practices which hamper its progress. African trade unions suffer many handicaps. Greatest of these is official hostility. The Nationalist Government of the country, which looks like being in power for a long time to come, treats African trade unions as a threat to White civilisation; it is therefore determined to prevent African workers from organising. The official Parliamentary Opposition, the United Party, is also opposed to statutory recognition of African trade unions. In the circumstances, there is little likelihood of any South African government encouraging or approving the development of trade unionism among African workers. This is a disturbing thought in these days, when we hear so much about the virtues of “White” civilisation. Trade unionism has become an essential part of civilised society; if the doors to trade unionism are closed to African workers, the consequences will be dangerous. In opposing African trade unionism, the so-called defenders of “White” civilisation are in fact preparing for their own destruction. Rather than foster the advancement of the African people intelligently and sympathetically, new laws and regulations are conceived to fetter them to inferiority and to preserve White domination. Amongst White trade unionists also, there is considerable confusion on the question of African trade unions. Even those who favour legal recognition, hesitate to associate openly with African organisations and find it difficult to regard Africans as fellow workers. I believe the question of organising African workers to be of major importance. It would be a tragedy if the Africans could find no support amongst the Whites in their efforts to build their unions. I hope that the facts I have assembled here will stimulate interest in this important subject and induce more White South Africans to adopt a realistic and more enlightened attitude.

2 CHAPTER ONE AFRICANS—THE WORKING CLASS MAJORITY In South Africa, workers are not only classified according to their occupations and skills. They are also identified by their race. One speaks of European (or White) workers, Coloured workers, Indian workers and Native (or African) workers. The Whites perform most of the skilled work. They also occupy many of the semi-skilled occupations. Those who are unskilled are employed by the State-owned railways or by Government Departments and Provincial authorities. *%., The Coloured workers, who are mainly concentrated in the Cape Province, are craftsmen in the building, furniture and printing industries and operatives in such industries as clothing, footwear and canning. Most of them, however, are labourers and semi-skilled workers, for their opportunities in the higher grades of employment are limited. This also applies to the Indian workers, almost all of whom are confined to the Province of Natal. Their employment follows a similar pattern to that of , the Coloureds in the Cape. The African workers, with whom we are concerned here, have always been the labouring class, the hewers of wood and the drawers of water. t But this is changing. Africans are steadily rising above the old menial I status and taking over many occupations that were once the preserve j of the White man. During the war, thousands of Africans were brought into the nation’s factories to aid the war effort, and the demand for their labour increased t rapidly in the vast industrial expansion which followed the war. The a elevation of Africans into the field of higher skills was inevitable. The ^ increasing reluctance of Whites to do “dirty” work has compelled employers to make greater use of Africans in occupations that were once considered beyond their ability. At one time, the Whites held a superior attitude only towards what was called “Kaffirs’ work”, the rough, un­ pleasant labouring jobs. In a land where Colour Bars impose the stigma of inferiority, manual labour holds no appeal. Pride of craft has had to give way to pride of skin. It is no wonder that the Whites are gradually spurning all kinds of factory work and even skilled trades. The sons of families with a long artisan tradition refuse to learn father’s trade. They prefer white-collar jobs, particularly as such work is much better paid than apprenticeship. They are encouraged in this preference because of the increasing threat to the security of the artisan from mechanisation and mass production. This industrial progress, which 3 brings fears of insecurity to the White artisan, provides great opportunities for the African. Nearly all new industries are planned on the basis of mass production, using easily trained operatives, performing specialised tasks. For this repetitive work, Africans have proved eminently suitable. In older industries, such as engineering and building, many crafts that were once part of the skilled artisan’s trade, have been transformed by new techniques. They have been broken down into a few simple operations, performed as a manufacturing process by semi-skilled Africans. In this way, work that was once the preserve of the White man, has been taken over by Non-Whites. This has happened in spite of all legal and conventional colour bars. Even the present Government, with all its talk of segregation and all its control measures, has been unable to check the influx of African workers into industry. Official statistics show that the ratio of Black workers to White is increasing remarkably. It can be seen from the Table in the Appendix (p. 36) that between the years 1937 and 1951, while the percentage of African employees in industry rose from 44% to 53%, the percentage of Europeans dropped from 42% to 30%. The continuing demand by industry for African workers is establishing large “Black” populations in the urban or “White” areas. There are now nearly three million Africans in the main urban and peri-urban areas of the Union, and the number is steadily increasing. African labour has a special appeal to employers. It is cheap, docile, defenceless and disciplined by special laws. In the mines, where upwards of 300,000 Africans are employed, special precautions are taken to isolate them from the influences of urban life, especially trade unionism. Employers of African labour are always at an advantage, for they have the full weight of the law on their side. The Government is determined to prevent the growth of a Black proletariat. Its efforts to preserve feudal lordship of White over Non- White are constantly frustrated by economic pressures created by great industrial expansion. This conflict compels the Government to conceive new laws, impose greater restrictions and apply special measures of repression to urban Africans. Older laws, like the Pass Laws, the Master and Servant Laws, the Native Labour Regulation Act and the Natives (Urban Areas) Act were specially designed to ensure the proper behaviour of African workers towards their masters. These still operate, being often amended but never repealed. In addition, Labour Bureaux direct the labour of Africans according to the needs of the authorities. The Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act, the Industrial Conciliation Act, the Native Building Workers’ Act and other laws specifically discriminate between them and other workers. African workers note with resentment that White workers can sell their labour in the best market, while they are subject to strict control and 4 direction through Labour Bureaux. They ask why there is legal recognition for all trade unions except their own; or why other workers may engage in collective bargaining while they cannot; and why the prohibition against strike action is total in their case and only partial in the case of other work ;rs. They grudge having to carry passes and being compelled to produce them to any policeman on demand, while White men preserve their freedom of movement. To this, the Government replies that discriminatory laws are essential because the African cannot be treated as having a permanent stake in the urban areas, which are “White” areas. The Government promises, however, that two or three generations hence, Africans will enjoy a greater measure of freedom in their own areas. This promise is based upon the official policy of the Nationalist Party, which aims at eventual total territorial segregation. According to the apartheid experts, it will take a long time—at least one hundred years—to achieve the ideal of total racial separation.1 The Nationalists envisage three stages on the road to that ideal. First, a continuation of the flow of African workers into industry in the urban or “White” areas; second, the period of transition, when the flow is stopped and turned back to the Reserves; and finally, the permanent period of total territorial segregation. Dr. H. F. Verwoerd, the Minister of Native Affairs, says he does not know how long it will take to reach the final stage. But I do not think he would put it at less than the popular estimate of one hundred years. This means that the Africans in the urban areas are condemned to a life of repression and restriction for at least another century. The laws and practices which cause them so much misery and hardship are to be main­ tained, and perhaps made more severe, for the next two or three generations. The majority of White South Africans believe that by one means or another, they will be able to maintain this system for as long as necessary. : They try to justify its injustice in the assurance that it is temporary. : Temporary—for a century or more! Yet, what of the Africans? What do the three million Africans feel about it? So far, they have patiently accepted the laws that bear down s upon them. Progress, however, brings remarkable changes. For how ' long will the African workers tolerate all the restraints that are placed > upon them? The plight of the urban African workers must be impressed • upon White South Africans, most of whom seem unaware of what is > happening. Many of them, who support the policies which produce harsh t laws, would be shocked if they could see what these laws were doing to l decent people. In this review I have confined myself to the problems of l labour organisation and labour laws, for this is what concerns the three 1 The Tomlinson Report (1956) estimates that £104,000,000 must be spent over ten years r to develop Native Reserves, and that by 2,000 A.D. there would be a population of . 6,000,000 whites and 21,000,000 Africans, of whom 6,000,000 Africans would work and live in the White area. 5 million Africans who are contributing so greatly to the industrial wealth ot South Africa. It is important to remember that I refer not only to the present. According to the apartheid experts, such things must continue tor at least another century!

CHAPTER TWO

LABOUR ORGANISATION “It is now generally admitted that the industrialised Native should be properly organised on trade union lines, not only for his own protection, but also to ensure that he shall not be used by the employing class to break down the standards of the White worker.” (Mr. A. J. Downes, President, S.A. Trades and Labour Council—1944 Presidential Address.) It is obvious that the stronger the Native trade union movement becomes, the more dangerous it would be to the Europeans in South Africa. . . . We would probably be committing race suicide if we give them that incentive.” (Mr. B. J. Schoeman, Minister of Labour, in the House of Assembly—August 4, 1953.)

I. THE STORY OF TRADE UNION APARTHEID Trade unionism has made slow progress amongst Africans. There are several reasons for this. One is their lack of a trade union tradition, for they are relative newcomers to industry and commerce. In this they’are no different from the Whites who have been attracted by industry from the rural areas into the towns. Had it not been for the pioneering efforts of immigrant (particularly British) workers, who provided the first skilled labour force in South Africa, White workers might not have been as well organised as they are today. The artisan immigrants, who came to South Africa towards the end of the last and beginning of this century, brought their trade unionism with them. They taught many South Africans the value of organisation and consequently the White trade union movement is today well entrenched and relatively strong, though new laws are threatened against its freedom. Because their own craft organisations were their real concern, the pioneer trade unionists did not organise the labourers who worked by their side. Those labourers were not only awkward peasants. They were also Black. The skilled White artisans behaved in varying degrees of impatience or tolerance towards the ignorant, “semi-savages” who struggled to under­ stand and fulfil the tasks assigned to them. The thought rarely crossed the minds of the early craft unionists that the Black labourers who worked 6 with them belonged to the working-class and should be brought into the trade union movement. At the turn of the century, however, some trade union leaders saw this need. They were feeling the first impact of African progress in the industrial field. It is interesting to note, for example, that in 1902, at the Annual Conference of the S.A. Typographical Union, Mr. H. W. Sampson (who many years later became Minister of Labour in the Nationalist-Labour Coalition Government) proposed “that a subsidiary union of Natives be formed”. This proposal arose because printing firms had begun to employ mission-trained African compositors and machinists at lower rates of pay. However, until the 1920’s, the White unions made no serious effort to organise African workers. In 1926 and 1927 the Communist Party embarked upon an intensive campaign to bring trade unionism to the Africans. Unions were formed in the Laundry, Baking, Clothing and Furniture industries, and by 1928 the Non-European Trade Union Federation had been established. This development stirred the S.A. Trade Union Congress (which, although it had no colour bar, was composed almost entirely of White unions), to recognise the need of closer association with African workers. Accordingly, it recommended to its affiliated unions in 1929, “the enrolment of all employees in their respective unions, irrespec­ tive of race or colour . . . or, alternatively, that a policy of parallel branches in the unions be adopted.” In 1939, the Trades and Labour Council, successor to the Trades Union Congress, urged the Government, by way of a unanimous resolution, “to recognise Non-European Trade Unions for registration on the same basis as other workers’ organisations.” This request was made because the Industrial Conciliation Act excluded Africans and their unions from its scope, and therefore denied them the same rights as other workers. The development of African trade unions proceeded slowly through the ’30’s but was stimulated after the outbreak of World War II. Several strikes of African workers, which emphasised the lack of official channels of communication between the strikers and the authorities, awakened the Government to the need for some form of recognition. An offer of administrative recognition, first made in 1939, was revived in 1941. The following year, Mr. Walter Madeley, Leader of the Labour Party and Minister of Labour in Smuts’s wartime Cabinet, opened the first Annual Conference of the recently-formed Council of Non-European Trade Unions. Eighty-seven delegates, representing 25 unions with 37,000 members were present. They rejected the proposals for administrative recognition and demanded full statutory recognition. In spite of the traditionally multi-racial character of the trade union federations that had existed in South Africa until then, new forces began to work for the imposition of apartheid in the trade union movement. 7 Since the early ’30’s, Nationalist-inspired movements had been busy agitating among the growing army of Afrikaans-speaking workers, to wean them away from the influence of their trade unions. Racial propa­ ganda wields tremendous influence in South Africa. In no time the racial issue began to dominate union and inter-union affairs. By skilfully exploiting colour prejudice, the Nationalist propagandists were able to sow dissension and foment disunity in the ranks of the workers. At the Trades and Labour Conference in 1947, a proposal was made which aimed at barring African unions from affiliation to the Council. This was heavily defeated, only 30 unions being in favour, with 115 unions against. Six of the unions, voting in the minority, thereupon resigned. But the seeds of apartheid had been sown. Henceforth, as in other fields, colour was to divide the workers and weaken their organisations. Fighting a losing battle, with its strength being steadily sapped by further resignations, the Trades and Labour Council began to deviate from its traditional policy of multi-racial membership. In 1949, it proposed the setting up of a Co-ordinating Council of African Trade Unions under its protection and guidance. This capitulation to prejudice failed to stop the rot, and the Council continued to disintegrate. At this stage the General Council of the British Trades Union Congress played a part. Concerned with trade union developments in South Africa, particularly over the new labour laws, the General Council at their meeting in July 1953, appointed two delegates to visit South Africa and ascertain the facts of the situation. In their report to the Council1 the two delegates, Messrs. James Crawford and Ernest Bell, discussing the need for unity of the various trade union co-ordinating bodies, expressed the view that:— “Difficulties which had arisen as a result of the proposal that the membership of the Council should be restricted to registered trade unions2 pinpointed once again the basic differences of principle which have caused so much division in the past, as such a restriction would leave unsolved the problem of African trade union organisation. It was in this connection that we felt impelled to urge both sides in the greater interest and urgent necessity of unity to reach a compromise by temporising upon such basic principles and agreeing to the membership of the Council being restricted to registered unions, whilst at the same time leaving individual organisa­ tions in the Council to organise African workers in parallel unions if they so wished.”

1 : TTr7a£ e Unions m South Africa”—Report of T.U.C. Delegation to South Africa T.U.C. Publication, London, March 1954.

Registered trade unions” are those registered in terms of the Industrial Conciliation Act and therefore entitled to engage in collective bargaining. They are those unions which comprise White, Coloured or Indian workers and exclude Africans bee next chapter for further details. 8 This was blunt advice from the T.U.C. delegation that South African trade unions should seek unity by establishing a new federation without the Africans. In other words, they proposed that if unity could be obtained only by applying apartheid to the trade union movement, that should be done in so far as Africans were concerned. This unexpected proposal, subsequently endorsed by the Annual Conference of the British T.U.C. at Brighton in September 1954, has been acted upon. A new trade union federation, the South African Trade Union Council, was established. It specifically excludes African trade unions and unions whose membership is open to Africans. Its constitution however, makes provision for the establishment of a liaison committee “with the Council of Non-European Trade Unions or any other such co-ordinating body of African trade unions”. Most White trade union leaders connected with this new organisation explain that multi-racial federation had to be abandoned in favour of the segregated Council on three main grounds:— 1. That advanced by the British T.U.C. delegation, viz. that this was the only way to unite the majority of “registered” unions. 2. That the laws and threatened laws of the Nationalist Government would make it impossible for a federation which included Africans to function properly; and 3. That as realists, and trade unionists concerned with the welfare of their members, they were compelled to accept the fact that a new order had come to South Africa, and it was their duty to preserve their unions, whatever the cost. As far as the unity of the “registered” unions is concerned, it should be noted that the Nationalist-dominated and extreme right wing unions have remained apart and will not join this new federation. These unions belong to the Co-ordinating Council of S.A. Trade Unions (20,000 members in 14 unions) the S.A. Federation of Trade Unions (58,000 members in 12 unions) and the Federal Consultative Council of South African Railways and Harbours Staff Associations (80,000 members). The South African Trade Union Council has 150,000 members in 45 affiliated unions. Of these, 13 consist of White members only; the other 32 unions have White, Coloured and Indian members. Three of these “mixed” unions have separate branches for their Indian members, and one has separate branches for all Non-White members. The Government has amended the Industrial Conciliation Act to compel all “registered” trade unions to have separate branches for the different races; to provide for the splitting of the existing mixed unions of White, Coloured and Indian members into separate racial unions; to refuse legal recognition to new mixed unions; to prohibit mixed unions from electing Non-Whites to their Executives. It also makes other radical changes in 9 the existing law. The amending bill was bitterly disputed but was finally enacted this year.1 As African workers are not covered by the Industrial Conciliation Act they are not directly affected. Their affairs have already been strictly controlled through the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act passed in October 1953.2 They do not even have the right of trade union recognition. After the formation of the S.A. Trade Union Council, African trade unions and some unions having African sections or members, formed their own federation, the S.A. Congress of Trade Unions. This federation absorbed the old Council of Non-European Trade Unions. At its forma­ tion in March, 1955, the Congress of Trade Unions announced that 35 unions with a membership of 41,643 were represented. This federation has no Colour Bar and has set itself the task of “organising the un­ organised”, who are mainly Africans. However, judging by the results so far, this is easier said than done. The Congress held its first Annual Congress in Capetown in March 1956, and reported an affiliated strength of 19 unions totalling 20,000 members. Organisational work is severely handicapped by lack of funds and personnel, aggravated by the many discriminatory laws which hamper the movements of African workers and restrict their activities. The Capetown Conference adopted a policy statement in which, among other things, it was stated:— “The S.A. Congress of Trade Unions is conscious of the fact that the organising of the mass of the workers for these demands and the successful struggle for them is inextricably bound up with a determined struggle for the political rights and for liberation from all oppressive laws and practices. . . . It follows that a mere struggle for the economic rights of the workers without participation in the general struggle for political emancipation would condemn the Trade Union Movement to uselessness and to a betrayal of the interest of the workers. “It is for this reason that the S.A. Congress of Trade Unions allies itself without reservation with the struggle for the Freedom Charter,* the great united struggle of the people of South Africa for a new basic constitution, which will guarantee equal rights to all people in South Africa.” According to a press report,3 in July 1955, the Council of the S.A. 1 See page 32. 2 For details of which see next Chapter. 3 New Age— 14th July, 1955. * The Freedom Charter demands an end to discriminatory laws and the institution immediately of a universal franchise. It was adopted by the Congress of the People (meeting near Johannesburg in June 1955), which was attended by 3,000 delegates from all over the Union, including 112 Europeans. It was organised by the African and Indian National Congresses and the inter-racial Congress of Democrats. 10 Congress of Trade Unions decided to apply for affiliation to the World Federation of Trade Unions. This is a most significant development. The signs are that, because apartheid has invaded the trade union move­ ment in South Africa, it is not only divided at home but is also following divergent paths in the international trade union sphere. What should give food for thought is the fact that the multi-racial Congress of Trade Unions, which is the only home offered to African trade unions, is throwing in its lot with the W.F.T.U. On the other hand, the S.A. Trade Union Council, despite the Colour Bar in its constitution, appears to be looking to the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions.

D. WHITE OPPOSITION TO AFRICAN TRADE UNIONS The Industrial Legislation Commission (1948-1951) investigated and reported, among other things, upon African trade unions. This Com­ mission was appointed by the Nationalist Government in October 1948 to investigate the working of all industrial laws and workers’ organisations. Of its eight members, two were trade unionists, one of whom died before the completion of the report. On the question of African Trade Unions, the remaining trade union leader submitted a minority report, which is interesting in that it represents the attitude of an important section of the White trade union movement. He proposed recognition of African Trade Unions under control of the Native Affairs Department (instead of the Department of Labour), and subject to a total prohibition against strikes, and against the combining of such unions in a federation. In addition, he recommended that negotiations between Africans and their employers should not be en­ couraged by legislation; that in considering registration of African trade unions, account should be taken of “whether its committee members and officials are responsible persons” ; and that the Registrar should be notified of all trade union meetings and have the right to attend. It is not surprising that the Government is now showing a desire to apply some of these proposals to the White trade unions themselves. The philosophy which produces the varied and complicated solutions, offered by the Commission and by the Government in the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act, is best expressed by SABRA1 “It is clear that should the Natives be given the right to form their own trade unions and then to recognise these unions statutorily, they would receive such a permanent interest and so great a power in our economy, that a change in the tendency to integrate is out of the question. Should they be recognised as established and permanent co-workers, they must in the long run also be recognised as fellow citizens, as in fact takes place 1 The South African Bureau of Racial Affairs, an Afrikaans study group sympathetic to apartheid. 11 in consequence of such recognition. In the light of the numerical propor­ tions in South Africa any step in this direction should be viewed with the utmost apprehension.” This is the overriding fear in every sphere of activity in South Africa. Logic and justice are always abandoned in the face of the White man’s fear of “swamping”. Extreme racialists are always able to stampede normally reasonable people by raising the colour bogey. Many trade unionists readily admit that the obvious course is to admit Africans to full and equal trade union rights, but would not openly advocate such a policy for fear of the agitation it would arouse in their unions. “The Chamber is Opposed...... ” Although the neglect of White trade unionists has been responsible in some measure for the slow progress of unionism among Africans, Govern­ ment restriction and employers’ hostility have been the main handicaps. Restriction has been applied by successive Governments through the many laws which hamper the normal combination of African workers and discourage all efforts to build and maintain healthy trade unions. Employers’ hostility to African trade unionism is strongest in the Mining Industry. It began with the first large-scale employment of Africans in industry, on the Kimberley Diamond Mines. When the Kimberley mines were thrown open in 1871, Africans were brought in by the diggers as labourers, and as mining operations expanded, the African labour force increased. The mine-owners, in spite of their wealth, begrudged the payment of decent wages to their workers, Black or White. The Africans were paid badly, the average wage being 10s. per week and often less. A revealing record of the attitude of the mine-owners is found in the report of a meeting of the Kimberley Mining Board in December 1881. One member proposed that “anyone paying his Native labourers a higher wage than 20s. per week shall render himself liable to a penalty of £1,000.” When Cecil Rhodes effected the amalgamation of the various mining companies to form De Beers Consolidated Mines in 1889, his purpose was unified control of the industry to prevent counter-mining, reduce working costs, check illicit diamond buying and regulate the diamond market. The reduction of working costs was achieved by a squeeze of the workers employed in the mines. The newly-formed monopoly was able to deal with the workers in a way that competing employers could not. The White workers fought their own battles with the Company, and their own trade union, the Knights of Labour, was formed in Kimberley in 1890. Among its objects was “opposition to Indian and Chinese immigration and generally to the cheap labour competition of any inferior race”. In spite of their own struggle with De Beers, the White miners were blind to the similarity between their plight and that of the Africans who did the menial work. The barrier was not really one of 12 colour. It was one of social status, the civilised White in the strange company of the primitive Black. If any of the Africans had thoughts of emulating the Whites by seeking strength through combination, the new monopoly quickly forestalled them. A “closed compound” system was introduced. This was virtually a prison system, for African employees were constantly under guard, never allowed outside the compound. Those who broke bounds even for a few hours, were charged under the Master and Servants Law with desertion. These were the conditions that set the pattern for the future. This system of compounded, migratory labour was copied by the Gold Mines of the Witwatersrand after the conquest of the Transvaal Republic in 1901. Although the extreme control of the Kimberley system was not applied, the restraints and limitations upon personal liberty were such that these two compound systems were virtually the same. Mining ground is hallowed ground in South Africa. The compounds are out of bounds to all but the inmates and the mine officials. Labour organisation is not only discouraged but quickly nipped in the bud. The contract system and the barrack life shut African mineworkers off from trade union influences. When African mineworkers have taken strike action, they have been brutally driven back to work. In August 1946, when about 60,000 Africans on eighteen Rand mines struck work for higher pay, armed police herded them in their compounds and forced them underground. Six strikers were killed and over 600 wounded. The Chamber of Mines adamantly opposes any change in the system of labour control which has operated on the mines for more than a century. In its evidence to the Industrial Legislation Commission in November 1949, the Transvaal Chamber of Mines stated:— “The Chamber is of the opinion that it would be against the best interests of the Natives, of their employers, and of the State to permit the introduction of trade unionism for Natives in the gold and coal mining industry. . . . The Chamber is opposed to the recognition, by legislation or otherwise, of any existing trade unions or other organisation which purported to represent goldmining Natives. . . . The prevention and settlement of disputes involving Natives in the industry should continue to be handled by the Department of Native Affairs in consultation with the employers’ and employees’ organisations.” No South African Government has ever turned a deaf ear to the voice of the Chamber. What is good for the gold mines is good for South Africa! To oppose the Chamber of Mines is considered irresponsible, or even subversive. Of all the expert inquiries, in spite of other radical proposals, none has recommended the recognition of trade unions for African mineworkers. The Inter-Departmental Committee on the Social, Health and Economic Conditions of Urban Natives, 1942, expressed the 13 view “that the growth of trade unions amongst Native workers in South Africa is as inevitable as it has proved to be in other countries and it would be unjust to refuse recognition to workers of one race when those of all other races have been statutorily recognised.” Yet this Committee could not bring itself to apply this principle to the mining industry. Such a simple act of justice apparently would ruin the gold mines! The Witwatersrand Mine Natives’ Wages Commission of 1943, declared that “where bodies of employees are concerned, the right of collective bargaining with employers and other benefits of trade unionism must not lightly be denied.” This Commission, too, found no difficulty in denying this right to African mineworkers, explaining that it was “forced to conclude that Native labourers on the gold mines had not yet reached a stage of development which would enable them to safely or usefully employ trade unionism as a means to promoting their advancement.” It is necessary to record that in the twelve inflationary years since the Commission handed down this piece of wisdom, the cash wages of Africans in the mines have risen by an average of 4d. per day to 2s. 8d. per day. “ Detrimental and Dangerous ” Secondary industry has shown a more enlightened attitude. In August 1948, the Transvaal Chamber of Industries, supporting the recognition of African trade unions, said that “it would probably be a progressive step to give statutory recognition to Native Trade Unions”. The Industrial Legislation Commission reported that in practice many employers and even Government officials were happy to deal with African trade unions. The Commission said that “ . . . many employers not only recognise and give privileges to such unions . . . but also negotiate with them” adding that “Government officials found Native trade union leaders a useful channel through which to approach the workers”. The Commission concluded that opposition to the official recognition of African trade unions failed in most respects when measured against the desires and aspirations of the Africans and the interests of the nation as a whole. Accordingly, it recommended “recognition but in separate legislation from that applicable to other races”. This is what the Smuts Government tried to do in its Industrial Con­ ciliation (Natives) Bill, which it published in May 19471 but dropped because both workers and employers strongly opposed its drastic restric­ tions. This Bill not only provided for the legal recognition of African trade unions but made it compulsory for all such unions to be registered. The present Government has rejected the recommendation of the Industrial Legislation Commission. It has decided that African trade unions shall have no standing and that they will not be legally recognised. 1 Government Gazette Extraordinary Vol. CXLVIII, No. 3817. 16th May 1947. 14 In place of normal communication between workers’ organisations and employers’ organisations, the Government has substituted a Government authority, which will intervene and decide on disputes between African workers and their employers. This unusual procedure is imposed through the Native Labour (Settle­ ment of Disputes) Act promulgated in October 1953. Although this law does not outlaw African trade unions, it is designed to “bleed them to death”. When piloting this measure through Parliament, Mr. B. J. Schoeman, then Minister of Labour, declared, “official recognition of Native trade unions will be detrimental to the interest of South Africa . . In this belief, the Government has legislated against a normal develop­ ment of industrialisation and unjustly discriminated against African workers. Rather than right the wrongs done to Africans by their exclusion from the Industrial Conciliation Act, the Government has punished these workers with new restrictions. The Government’s attitude to organised African workers was made quite clear when it disbanded the Staff Association of African Railway Employees recently. The S.A. Railways and Harbours Non-European Staff Association had been in existence for many years. It was a highly respectable union, enjoying official recognition by the Railways Administration. According to the Industrial Legislation Commission, the Administration’s Inspector of Native Labour was giving branches of the union his assistance and guidance. The Administration did not recognise the other union catering for African railway workers, the S.A.R. & H. Non-European Workers’ Union. The Staff Association had a membership of about 10,000. At the end of June 1955, leaders of the various branches of the Associa­ tion were summoned before senior officials of the Administration and told to pass a resolution, “That the Association be summarily dissolved”. One official explained that in future the interests of African employees of the Railways and Harbours would be taken care of through machinery established in terms of the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act. Accordingly, Works’ Committees and Regional Committees would be established, the workers’ representatives to be chosen by the Administra­ tion. Such workers would be given promotion to better jobs. In addition, officials of the Association would be taken care of; the general secretary would be offered suitable employment on the Railways; and the assets of the Association would be split amongst its members. In this peremptory fashion, the Government disbanded the trade union. III. BARRIERS AGAINST UNION ORGANISATION The forces which resist African progress in the trade union field are formidable. They include the Government, the major Parliamentary opposition (the United Party), the Chamber of Mines, the Public Utilities, some industrialists, and the right-wing trade unions (including the Mine- workers’ Union). 15 That is why there is so much obstruction in the form of strict dis­ criminatory laws. That is why old restraints are tightened and new ones continually devised. The Pass Laws, the Natives (Urban Areas) Act, the Master and Servants Laws, the Native Labour Regulation Act, the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act and other laws and regulations militate against the formation and the functioning of African trade unions. In the mining industry, African workers are shut off in compounds on company property, under the constant, strict surveillance of their employers. Even if they succeeded in forming a trade union on a single mine, their leaders would soon be singled out and dealt with. In any case, they would have no place and no facilities for conducting the affairs of a union.

(i) No Right to Meet. It is extremely difficult for Africans to gather for any purpose, and particularly for political or trade union purposes. They cannot meet on mining ground. There is a legal restriction upon meetings on the mines. The War Measures Continuation Act, re-enacted in June 1954, extends for a further period of two years, Regulation No. 10 of Proclamation 210 of 1939, which empowers a magistrate to prohibit meetings of more than twenty persons on mining ground in the Transvaal. Obviously, any meeting of African mineworkers for trade union purposes would be quickly banned. Outside mining ground there are other restrictions upon gatherings of Africans. In terms of regulations proclaimed under the Native Adminis­ tration Act, 1927, no gathering of more than ten persons is permitted in Native areas without the prior permission of the Native Commissioner or Resident Magistrate. In African townships and locations, regulations framed under the Natives (Urban Areas) Act provide for “the control, supervision and restriction of meetings or assemblies of Natives”. These regulations empower a magistrate, after consultation with the police and municipal officials, to prohibit any meeting, if he believes it would cause a breach of the peace. In view of the general suspicion and hostility towards assemblies of Africans, demonstrations and processions of a political or quasi­ political character find no favour with the authorities. In most cases they are prohibited. A recent example is the protest against the Bantu Education Act. Where meetings were planned in locations, they were promptly banned. In April 1955, when pupils and parents in the Benoni locations decided to stage demonstrations against the introduction of the new system of “Bantu” education, a proclamation was issued immediately, banning all meetings in the Benoni locations for four days. Outside the townships and locations, in the vicinity of the factories and workplaces of the Africans, there are other restrictions upon public 16 meetings. Traffic and municipal bye-laws are often invoked to prevent meetings. These, of course, affect all persons but more particularly the Non-Whites. In Johannesburg, for example, no meetings can be held in a public place without the prior permission of the City Council. To obtain permission it is necessary to give fourteen days’ notice in writing, supported by the signatures, voting numbers and full addresses of twenty- five registered voters. As Africans, Coloureds and Asians cannot be registered as voters, it is impossible for them to petition on their own account for permission to hold a meeting. In Cape Town, permission for a public meeting can be withheld on the grounds that it would “endanger, obstruct or interfere with traffic or is likely to be injurious to public health”. Early in 1955, a trade union meeting held outside a factory in one of Cape Town’s suburbs was stopped by the police and two trade union officials were prosecuted for failing to obtain the necessary permission. Subsequently, the union made two further applications to the City Council, both of which were refused, no reason being given. As the meeting place was nowhere near traffic, it is clear that the bye-law can be widely interpreted by a hostile Council. The pass laws are also invoked to harass African workers engaging in trade union activities. In March 1956, when the S.A. Congress of Trade Unions held a public meeting on the Parade in Cape Town, to protest against the Industrial Conciliation Bill, the police arrested five persons, and charged them with infringing the Pass Laws. Many of those attending the meeting were delegates to the annual national Conference of the S.A. Congress of Trade Unions.

(ii) No Place to Meet. The impact of these restrictions is felt most by the poorest, for necessity compels them to gather in open places rather than in distant and costly halls. For those who seek to follow the ways of democracy by making full use of the open-air forum to propagate their views, the restrictions upon public gatherings are a grave handicap. As far as Non-Whites are concerned, there is a compulsion to meet in open places. Except in the Cape, few public halls are open to them. Many Africans and mixed organisations, including trade unions, find great difficulty in holding domestic meetings and Conferences because the practice of apartheid closes the doors of most halls against them. African organisations are not granted the use of communally-owned halls outside the locations and African townships, or near to their places of work. Popular meeting places like City Halls are for the exclusive use of Whites. Inside the locations and townships, where halls exist, they are hired only to “approved” organisations or persons, and only for “approved” purposes. Political and trade union activities are not approved. In fact, 17 they are usually suspected of being subversive. Recently, a branch of the African National Congress applied for the use of the hall at Chaiwelo Centre, a community centre provided in Moroka township for the use of the residents, but were refused on the grounds that the hall could not be used for political purposes or for any gathering with a political flavour. This serious state of affairs is further aggravated by the increasing difficulty in obtaining headquarters. There are no offices for hire in African townships. Even if there were, it would be impractical, if not impossible, for trade unions to operate from there. Regulations under the Natives (Urban Areas) Act prohibit non-residents from entering locations and villages without special permission. Trade union organisers and officials would always be in trouble. In fact, this is happening already. In August 1955, trade union organisers were refused permits to enter Duncan Village, East London and New Brighton Location, Port Elizabeth, after having been arrested and evicted for entering without permits. On the other hand, offices in other places are hard to get. In city areas, they are reserved for White occupation. There are a few offices in older buildings which can be hired by Africans but they are becoming fewer and will disappear altogether as the Government applies the Group Areas Act. (iii) The Threat of Suppression. If, in spite of all obstacles, African trade unions flourish—as they seem to be doing in some industries—the Government has another weapon to destroy them. Should all other devices fail, the Government has the power to declare militant African trade unions to be unlawful organisations in terms of the Suppression of Communism Act of 1950. Section 2, paragraph 2, of the Act provides that:— “If the Governor General is satisfied that any organisation engages in activities which are calculated to further the achievement of any of the objects of communism . . . he may declare that organisation to be an unlawful organisation.” This must be read with the definition of “communism”, which reads:— “any doctrine or scheme which aims at bringing about any political, industrial, social or economic change within the Union by the promotion of disturbance or disorder, by unlawful acts or omissions or by the threat of such acts or omissions . . .” These definitions are so wide that they constitute a grave danger to trade union activities. They expose workers to dire penalties if they violate industrial laws in the course of fighting for decent treatment at the hands of unreasonable employers. Organised labour raised this objection when the Suppression of Communism Bill was before Parliament and succeeded in persuading the Government to insert certain safeguards. It is significant that these safeguards were not made applicable to African workers. Clauses were inserted specifying that “registered” trade 18 unions may not be declared unlawful organisations, nor may lawful strikes called by “registered” unions be deemed to fall under the Suppression of Communism Act. African trade unions are not recognised by law, and are therefore excluded from this protection. Their trade unions can be declared unlawful organisations; their strikes can be declared to be “activities calculated to further the achievement of any of the objects of communism”; and their officials and members can be deemed to be communists. They are particularly vulnerable if they take strike action. The Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act makes all strikes by African workers illegal. In terms of the Suppression of Communism Act, a strike could be declared to be an act aimed at “bringing about economic change by the promotion of disturbance or disorder or by unlawful acts or omissions”. In these circumstances, too, the unions concerned could be declared unlawful organisations and their members deemed to be communists. After that is done, the trade union would be liquidated by the Government, its assets confiscated and its members “named”, making them subject to severe restrictions upon their liberty. A hint of such possibility comes from recent police action in cases of African strikes. Not only have the usual forces of police arrived on the scene of the strike, but also members of the Special Branch (i.e. political police). This reveals the Government suspicion that African strikes are connected with subversive political activities. It is no exaggeration to say that the official mind is quite unable to conceive any occasion when a strike may be the result of intolerable conditions or unbearable treatment by harsh employers. (iv) The Banning of Leaders. Under the Suppression of Communism Act, many leaders of trade unions have been removed from office. Those who have been “named” have been ordered to resign from their unions and banned from attending meetings of any kind. In this way, unions have been deprived of experienced and trusted officials, who have been difficult to replace. Of those “named” so far, nearly half are Africans. Here again, the law discriminates against the African worker. Section 5 of the Suppression of Communism Act makes it obligatory upon the Minister of Justice to consult the Minister of Labour before applying sanctions against an official or member of a trade union who has been “named” as a communist. Again, African trade union officials and members are excluded from this safeguard; it applies only to “registered” trade unions. If one bears in mind that this law operates on two dangerous assump­ tions—the one, that “you are a communist if the Government says so”, and the other, “once a communist always a communist”—its threat to ordinary civil liberties must be apparent. 19 It is not often that employers are moved to comment upon the hardships suffered by employees’ organisations. However, the Transvaal Chamber of Industries found it necessary to say of the Suppression of Communism Act1:— “• • • Trade unions which until recently were extremely militant in their approach to the regulation of minimum conditions of employment, have become less so. . . . The real cause of the comparative docility of trade unions is the bewilderment and fear complex instilled in the rank and file of those unions who have been deprived of their veteran leaders through the implementation of the Suppression of Communism Act.” Of course, the Chamber of Industries was referring chiefly to the “registered” unions. Their remarks are no exaggeration. Nor would it have been an exaggeration to say that the Suppression of Communism Act is a permanent threat to the freedom of association of all workers.

(v) The Banning of Meetings.

The Suppression of Communism Act has also been invoked against trade unionists who have not been “named” (i.e. persons who cannot be branded as communists even under the Government’s wide definition). Section 9 of the Act empowers the Minister of Justice to prohibit any person from attending any gathering, and to prohibit any meeting or assembly, if he has reason to believe that such gatherings would further any of the objects of communism, as defined in the Act. Most African trade unions have been hit by the bannings under the Suppression of Communism Act. At one stage the entire African trade union movement was in danger of disintegration. So many officials had been ordered to resign from their unions, or had been prohibited from attending union and other meetings, that it became impossible for many unions to carry on. In the best of times there is great difficulty in finding competent or trained Africans to fill organising or secretarial posts in the unions. This is not only because of educational handicaps, but also because these offices demand outstanding men. Nearly all African unions are poor. They cannot afford to pay the salaries which the right kind of man expects. They must depend upon men who are willing and able to make great personal sacrifices. Such men are usually idealists, fired with a determina­ tion to lead their fellows to a better life, and therefore most likely to fall foul of a Government which has other plans for the Africans. In spite of the difficulties related above, the unions have succeeded in carrying on. But there are yet other impediments to their progress. 1 The Industrial Review of Africa—January 1954. 20 CHAPTER THREE LABOUR LAWS Discriminatory industrial laws are usually justified on the grounds that they have been drafted in the light of the “degree of civilisation” or “standard of development” of the African. If this were strictly true, such laws should be disappearing, in view of the remarkable forward strides the African is making in the fields of industry and commerce. But the opposite is happening. Laws of this kind are increasing. Since the Nationalists were elected to power in 1948, important changes have been made in the law. The purpose of all these changes is to further the policy of baasskap or White supremacy, in the economic sphere. Because this policy conflicts with the normal advancement of the working classes and is obstructed by inevitable social and economic changes, the Government is compelled to apply harsh, discriminatory laws to enforce it. To the majority of White South Africans, economic justice means economic equality—something to be feared because it may lead to social and political equality. This fear prompts many otherwise rational people to act unfairly towards others of a different race and leads them to support policies that they might otherwise oppose. This is particularly true where South Africa’s labour laws are concerned. White workers too easily lend themselves to the imposition of harsh restrictions upon Non-White workers. Even if they do not openly support such measures, they rarely protest against them. The powerful pressure of racialism has established White workers as an aristocracy and imbued them with the illusion that it is against their interests to ally themselves with Non-White workers. Because of this the authorities are able to discriminate at will. That discrimination emerges clearly in the laws which are examined here.

I. THE INDUSTRIAL CONCILIATION ACT The Industrial Conciliation Act is an act to provide for the prevention and settlement of disputes between White, Coloured and Asiatic workers and their employers. It establishes machinery for collective bargaining, arbitration and conciliation and affords legal recognition to self-government in industry. Trade unions recognised under this Act are commonly known as “registered” trade unions. African trade unions cannot be registered. A separate law, the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act, which does not recognise African trade unions, applies to African workers. It is examined in the next part of this Chapter. The first Industrial Conciliation Act, passed in 1924, excluded all Africans from its scope. Unfortunately the Act made no allowance for those Africans who might become qualified to participate in trade union activities and collective bargaining. 21 This total legislative discrimination, instead of upholding White supremacy, actually created a threat to the security of White workers. Employers were quick to see that by employing Africans they could escape the obligations of industrial council agreements and legally pay lower wages. Some employers promptly changed from White to Black labour. New secondary industries also noted the advantages of employing Africans. In 1930, an attempt was made to close this loop-hole. The right way would have been to extend the Industrial Conciliation Act to cover all workers, irrespective of colour. In order to maintain the policy of racial discrimination, the authorities preferred the wrong way. It was not sur­ prising, therefore, that the 1930 amendments to the Act failed to stop the evasions. In 1937, further amendments were made. These empowered the Minister of Labour to extend any or all the provisions of industrial council and conciliation board agreements to cover all workers in the industries concerned. In effect, this meant that African workers, although they took no part in the negotiations, were bound by agreements made between White employees and their employers. The callous disregard shown by some “registered” unions for the interests of African workers and the greedy “robbing-Peter-to-pay-Paul” attitude of some employers, was the subject of criticism by the Industrial Legislation Commission1 . . the interests of Native workers have suffered in the process of collective bargaining. . . . In some cases it would seem that their interests are deliberately sacrificed by the European employees in order to gain benefits for themselves, while in other cases, employers refused to bargain in regard to Native wages, as Natives are not represented on the employees’ side . . . and merely stipulate the wage rates they are prepared to concede in respect of occupations in which Natives are employed.” These evasions and injustices could have been remedied by establishing a common code for all workers, by covering them all under the Industrial Conciliation Act. To their credit, this is what many White unions con­ stantly demanded. But it was not enough. General recognition for all workers was only possible if special steps had been taken to organise all workers. Some trade unionists did make an effort in that direction, but they were continually hampered by the rising crusade of the racialists, to say nothing of discouragement from official quarters. When the Minister of Labour extends an Industrial Council agreement to include African workers, they are immediately bound by its conditions and are subject to all its penal sanctions. In view of the manner in which their interests have been neglected or sacrificed, Africans have every justification for complaining that they are the victims of injustice. Only in those industries where they are organised, such as the printing, clothing and textile industries, can African workers claim to have had some measure of consideration. 22 n. THE NATIVE LABOUR (SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES) ACT All hope of securing a common labour code for all workers disappeared in 1953 when the Government introduced its Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act. This law excludes African workers from the Industrial Conciliation Act and places them upon a different and inferior basis to other workers. While White, Coloured and Asiatic workers enjoy the fullest benefits of industrial democracy, Africans are subjected to the autocratic rulings of officialdom. Only the African workers are denied the right to argue their own case and negotiate with their employers. They are compelled to accept the wages and conditions decided upon between their employers and White officials of the Government. African trade unions are denied legal recognition and the Government has ordered employers to have no dealings with them. Addressing the Annual Conference of the Federated Chamber of Industries in November 1954, Mr. B. J. Schoeman, then Minister of Labour, said:— “I appeal to employers to use only the machinery of this Act in connec­ tion with Native Labour disputes and to carry out its intentions and not do anything to embarrass its functioning. I do not want what is happening in Rhodesia to occur here . . . Employers must, in their own interests, stand firm . . . Employers must on no account discuss or negotiate with Native political organisations, such as the African National Congress . . The “machinery of the Act” is clumsy and complicated. Should a dispute arise, a Native Labour Officer (White) must report accordingly to an Inspector (White), who in turn informs a Regional Committee (comprising a White Chairman and three African members—all appointed by the Minister). If an Industrial Council, established in terms of the Industrial Conciliation Act, exists in the industry concerned, the Regional Committee must report the dispute to that Council. Between them, all the foregoing persons and committees must endeavour to settle the dispute. If they fail, they must refer the matter to the Native Labour Board (comprising a Chairman and as many members as the Minister may decide to appoint—all White) which body will bring everyone, except the workers, together, in order to seek a basis of settlement. If this further effort fails, the matter goes to the Minister of Labour who, if the Board recommends it, may request the Wage Board to investigate and make recommendations. After this long and involved procedure, the Minister will finally publish an order declaring the terms of the settlement, which is binding upon employers and employees. This law is yet another example of the complicated processes that are contrived to preserve a system of domination over the Africans, rather than open the way for them to share in the well-tried and universally approved methods of industrial democracy through trade union organisation. 23 The Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act totally prohibits strikes, under the severe penalty of a fine of £500 or three years’ imprison­ ment, or both a fine and imprisonment. This places the workers in an impossible position. If they ask their employers for increased wages, or try to satisfy a grievance or to remove some injustice, they may be ignored by their employers, or threatened with dismissal, as they so often are. What, then, can they do ? Their trade unions not only are not recognised but are deliberately excluded from intervening on their behalf. They must depend upon the labour officials who are imposed upon them as their representatives. Although they have the right to set up Works’ Committees, these are of doubtful value. They may well be puppet committees, comprising “boss boys”, Africans who, in many respects are like Company police. This law came into operation on May 1, 1954. According to the Minister of Labour, Senator Jan de Klerk,1 by June 1955 only four Works’ Committees had been established in the whole Union. In his opinion this was proof that the Africans do not feel the need for them. He is quite wrong. The main reason why African workers have not set up such committees is that they do not like them. Another reason is that they do not know the complicated provisions of the law and are not afforded the means of learning them. If they had legally recognised trade unions, they would have the guidance of organisations equipped to provide them with accurate information and expert assistance in regard to their rights under the law. Usually, Africans discover about the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act only when they go on strike. On being informed about Works’ Committees, Inspectors, Regional Committees and the other appurtenances of the Act, they reject them in favour of their trade unions. They discern that the intention of the Act is to prevent them from building trade unions by isolating them as separate groups in each factory. Their own desire is to follow in the footsteps of the White workers and organise industrial or craft unions. At present, Government officials tell employers to have nothing to do with African trade unions and they advise African workers to resign from the unions. Employers who have operated stop-orders for trade union subscriptions have been advised to end this arrangement. Trade union organisers are barred from factory premises. If they are employees inside the factories they are soon victimised once it becomes known that they are recruiting members for the union. Native strikes usually have the same origins and follow the same sequences. They begin with a request for higher wages. This the employer refuses. He attributes the demand to the mischief of “agitators” whom he ferrets out and dismisses. The workers strike in protest. The employer 1 Hansard, Vol. 89. Col. 8085—17th June, 1955. 24 informs the Department of Labour. The factory is immediately visited by a Labour Official. Probably before he arrives, the police pick-up vans are on the scene. Soon, members of the Special Branch are there too. The Labour Official investigates the dispute and tries to persuade the strikers to return to work and orders them to appoint spokesmen to act on their behalf. If they declare that they prefer to negotiate through their trade union, they are told that the Regional Committee can help them and not the trade union. With the police and the pick-up vans standing by, the workers suffer intimidation which it takes great courage to resist. Often they are put under arrest for striking illegally, for all strikes of African workers are illegal. There has been a wave of strikes since the passing of the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act. They illustrate how greatly African workers are prejudiced by the provisions of the law. In 1954 there were 33 strikes of African workers and in 1955 the number had increased to 72^. The J2 significance of these figures can better be appreciated if compared with the strikes of all other workers. Strikes involving non-African workers totalled 39 in 1954 and 34 in 1955—the lowest in any period recorded. Thus, while conditions were most favourable for industrial peace, strikes of unprotected and unorganised African workers showed an alarming increase. Government spokesmen usually attribute these strikes to irresponsible agitation or incitement. This is not so. The stoppages of work generally arise from genuine grievances. I quote the following cases as typical examples.

The Case of the Durban Dock Workers. In Durban, some 1,500 African stevedores went on strike in July 1954. These were dock labourers, who were paid at the rate of 10s. 3d. per nine-hour day. Work is available only when ships are in port and consequently average earnings were never more than £7 to £8 per month. The dockers submitted demands for an increase of 4s. per day and were first offered an increase of 9d. and eventually Is. 9d. per day. Before the workers could consider this, the Chairman of the Native Labour Board appeared on the scene. After discussion with him, the employers withdrew their offer and insisted that the dispute be handled in terms of the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act. To this end, the workers were ordered to go back to work, appoint a deputation to appear before the Native Labour Board and await its decision. This the strikers refused to do. However, the employers had another weapon. As the dockers were housed in employer-owned compounds they were then threatened with eviction if they remained on strike. Consequently, they were forced back to work. Eventually the Native Labour Board “settled” the dispute on the basis of the employers’ offer. 25 The Case of the Golf Caddies. One hundred and twenty-seven caddies at the Wanderers’ Golf Club, Johannesburg, earning £1 per month, free food and tips amounting to about £3 per month, asked for an all-in wage of £5 per month. They offered to forego all tips and to provide their own food. According to the Secretary of the Club, their demands “were not put in the proper way” and were therefore not acceded to. After waiting for two months, the caddies went on strike. They were arrested and brought before the Courts. The Magistrate, in finding them guilty, told them that “it was through strikes that the oiled wheels of industry were thrown into dis­ ruption”. Twenty-three of the caddies, between the ages of 14 and 18, were sentenced to three strokes with a light cane, while the remaining 104 were fined £3 or thirty days each. They appealed against the conviction, but lost. After receiving their punishment, the caddies discovered that there was some merit in their claim after all, for they were granted higher wages and better rations. The Case of the Randfontein Textile Workers. In August 1955, 200 Africans employed in a Randfontein textile factory demanded an increase in wages and were refused. A Labour officer, who investigated the dispute, told them that their employers were not willing to increase their wages and ordered them to return to work. They refused and were arrested and charged with striking unlawfully. One hundred and sixty-nine workers were each fined £10 or one month’s hard labour. Their average wage was 50s. per week. An Aid to Exploitation. These are but a few examples of what is happening under the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act. As the Government intensifies its application, this Act will reveal its true nature and astound even those who believed that it had good points. It may yet be the cause of major upheavals in industry. Its bias in favour of employers is arousing resent­ ment and bitterness amongst African workers. They do not look upon the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act as a law to protect them from injustice or to save them from exploitation at the hands of bad employers. They suspect that it has been devised to oppress them further. To them it means rough justice, with bullying employers, domineering Labour officials, armed police, pick-up vans, arrest and severe punishment.

HI. THE WAGE ACT (Act No. 44 of 1937) The purpose of the Wage Act is to provide machinery for the fixing of wages and conditions of employment for those not able to use the Industrial Conciliation Act. As Africans are excluded from the provisions of the Industrial Conciliation Act, it is obvious that they must depend 26 almost entirely upon the Wage Act for protection against exploitation. However, there are various barriers which prevent them from securing the benefits apparent in the Wage Act. One difficulty is that the wages and conditions of African workers are often fixed in Industrial Council Agreements in which the African workers have no say. Such agreements are often extended to cover workers otherwise excluded from the Industrial Conciliation Act. Wage determinations are automatically suspended during the operation of agreements made under this Act. In practice it has been shown that Africans are often shabbily treated under such agree­ ments or that it is virtually impossible for them to get a Wage Board investiga­ tion because of the intervention of an Industrial Council agreement. The second difficulty experienced by African workers is one of organisa­ tion. The Wage Act defines a “trade union” as “a trade union registered under the Industrial Conciliation Act” . This immediately disqualifies all African Trade Unions. Consequently, African workers have no machinery for requesting an investigation, nor have they the means of preparing evidence, drawing up memoranda, or organising deputations. Being poorly educated, they are compelled to be very much dependent upon outside assistance in their struggle for a better standard of life. Trade unions are the obvious bodies to render this service. Yet Africans are not allowed this channel of communication. In terms of the Wage Act, the Wage Board conducts investigations only if ordered to do so by the Minister of Labour or on the application of a trade union or employers’ organisation, or, where no trade union or employers’ organisation exists, by a group of employers or employees. In the latter case, the Board may refuse to act on the grounds that the group is not sufficiently representative. This makes it quite plain that the lowest paid workers—the Africans—have the least chance of obtaining an investigation into their conditions. The Wage Act is not applicable to domestic service or agriculture. This means that the many thousands of Africans in the urban areas who work as servants in private homes—and almost every householder keeps a servant—can be paid any wage. In spite of this wide exemption, and in spite of the obstacles that stand in their way, a large number of African workers are covered by Wage Determinations. They form the greatest part of all workers covered, as these figures show:— Employees in Trades R egulated by Wage D eterminations made D uring the Years 1937 to 19531 Number Percent. White 106,472 27-6 African 216,881 56-3 Asian 18,949 5 Coloured 42,908 11-1 1 Report of the Wage Board for the Year, 1953. 27 The percentage of Africans covered would be much higher if they had the means to prevail upon the authorities to order more Wage Board investigations into their wages and conditions of employment. Of course, it does not follow that such investigations in themselves would achieve improvements. For example, the Wage Board shows a reluctance to recommend wage increases to unskilled workers. In its Report for the year 1948, the Wage Board stated that African workers, basing their claim upon the finding of the Non-European Bus Service Commission, 1944, that “the essential average minimum expendi­ ture of an African family was £12 18s. 6d. per month in Johannesburg” were asking for a minimum wage of £3 per week for unskilled labourers on the Witwatersrand. To this the Board replied that “it must have regard to the ability of employers to bear the additional costs involved and also to the effect which such a drastic departure from established policy would have on the economic structure of the country”. The Board concluded that “the proposals of the employees can only be regarded as revolutionary”, and advised that “if the unskilled worker strives to better his output of work and reaches the stage where more reliance can be placed upon him by his employer he will presumably be in a position to command a higher wage”. Eventually, the Wage Board, despite its fears for the ability of the employers to pay, did recommend higher wages and improved annual leave and sick leave conditions for the unskilled workers of the Reef. However, the Minister of Labour, with whom the final decision lay, decided not to give effect to the Board’s recommendation.1 His excuse was twofold. Firstly, that the municipalities had advised him that the proposed increases would compel them to raise assessment rates; and, secondly, that cost-of-living allowances had recently been increased. Yet, taking wages and cost-of-living allowances together, and taking account of the small rise in wages granted to them in 1942, unskilled workers on the Witwatersrand are receiving less real wages than they did before the war. For the Minister of Labour to argue that cost-of-living allowances are a substitute for wage increases is to assert that, in spite of technical progress and the general economic advancement of other sections of the community, workers should expect no improvement in their real earnings.

IV. THE NATIVE LABOUR REGULATION ACT (No. 15 of 1911) The Native Labour Regulation Act was designed to consolidate and extend various laws affecting the recruitment and employment of Africans, particularly in the mines. It contains many penal offences, devised rigidly to control and discipline young tribal Africans recruited under contract to 1 Hansard Vol. 84—Col. 297/8—9th February 1954. 28 work in the mines, and empowers Inspectors of Native Labour to impose summary judgment upon offenders. In 1949, an amendment was made to extend this law by including all African workers under the original definition of “Native Labourer”. In 1952, a further step was taken by adding a new definition “workseeker”, being “any Native over the age of fifteen years who is unemployed and is mainly dependent upon employment for his means of subsistence”. Taken together, these amendments make it possible for the Minister of Native Affairs to apply all the provisions of the Native Labour Regula­ tion Act to African workers in commerce and industry, thereby subjecting them to its penalties for breach of civil contract. The effect is that the rigorous laws of the days of the mining camp are imposed upon detribalised, urbanised African workers in a modern industrialised society. The Act empowers an Inspector of Native Labourers to try African workers accused by their employers of neglecting to perform their work, drinking, refusing to obey orders, using insulting language to superiors, being absent from work without lawful cause, and other offences. If the Inspector finds the worker guilty, he may fine him up to £2.

V. THE NATIVE BUILDING WORKERS ACT, 1951 Before 1951, there had been only one statutory industrial Colour Bar— the Mines and Works Act, which reserved certain occupations in the mines exclusively for White workers. The Native Building Workers Act became the second. When introducing the measure in Parliament, the Minister of Labour stated that it had a dual purpose, (a) “to protect European artisans in European areas against the undermining of their standard of living by cheap Native labour” and (b) “to enable Natives to build their own houses on an economic basis in their own areas”. The first purpose is being secured by totally prohibiting Africans from performing skilled building operations in all urban areas “other than Native areas”. Until now, numbers of Africans earned a living by doing odd building and repair jobs. They painted roofs and ceilings, plastered walls, laid floors, erected walls and made minor alterations, all of which required a certain amount of skill. This skill had been acquired in many ways, although not through the actual serving of apprenticeships. Operating on their own, without the heavy overheads of White building contractors, they were able to do odd building jobs at a lower price. This gave them a satisfactory wage, often in excess of that earned by the average factory worker. The number of these independent African building workers can be estimated from the fact that after they were compelled by law to apply for testing and registration, 1,546 applied. Henceforth, they will not be permitted to earn a living as they have done in the past. If they pass the trade tests and are registered as “Native Building Workers”, 29 they will be confined to working in Native Townships, “building houses for their own people” as the Minister put it. On the face of it, this is a laudable occupation. Unfortunately, it brings with it a reduction in wages. Of the 1,546 Africans who applied to be registered as “Native Building Workers” 545 passed the trade test. They will be entitled to work in “Native Areas” for the maximum wage of Is. 5|d. per hour, which will amount to £3 5s. 8d. for the statutory 45 hour week; to this is added a cost-of-living allowance of £1 11s. 9d., making the total weekly wage £4 17s. 5d. Previously it was possible for these same workers to earn as much as £10 a week. But what of those who did not pass the trade test? If they have been classified as Grade “A” learners, their wages are even less, viz. Is. 0|d. per hour. In comparison with these rates, it should be noted that the White Building artisan earns a minimum of £15 per week, but generally more. When it suits the authorities, the Native Building Workers Act does not apply. During 1953-4, the State-owned Oil-from-Coal plant was being erected at Sasolburg and a large number of houses for African employees was built. The Native Building Workers Act does not apply to the rural areas and Sasolburg was then considered a rural area. Yet about 90 Africans built the houses, completing nearly 200 in six months. The manager in charge of the enterprise declared that he found that by keeping Natives on special tasks and encouraging them they eventually became more efficient in repetitive work than European builders. This experiment seems to prove that the approach to training Native building workers, as approved by the Native Building Workers Act, is antiquated. What will happen to trained Native building workers if such mass- production methods become general? As far as wages are concerned, there is something for the African to worry about. According to the Report of the Native Building Workers Advisory Board, 68% of the African Building workers at Sasolburg were paid a total average wage of £2 I4s. 3d. per week; 22% an average of £3 7s. 7d.; and only 10% the rate fixed for Native Building workers, viz. £4 17s. 5d. The Government has not only created two classes of building workers, but also some peculiar problems for the future. One question, which some White building artisans are asking already, is whether they will be given employment in “Native” areas, should there be insufficient work for them in “White” areas? Although the law forbids White artisans to work together with African building workers in a Native area, it remains to be seen whether the Government will allow Whites to be out of work while Non-Whites are fully employed. The Native Building Workers Act empowers the Minister of Labour to exempt certain areas or certain classes of work, if it can be shown that 30 insufficient White workers are available. In such cases Africans can be employed. This is not to suit the African, however. It has been devised because householders, estate agents, property owners, and industrialists who in the past have employed Africans for renovating and jobbing work, protested that it will be too expensive to use White workers in the future. The Government has promised to be reasonable to these employers and has invited applications for exemption from, not the African workers, but “Chambers of Industry, or organised commerce, trade unions, employers’ organisations and local bodies”. The trade unions referred to are, of course, not African trade unions.

VI. MASTER AND SERVANTS LAWS In addition to all the other laws ensuring the obedience and proper behaviour of African workers towards their employers, there are the perennial Master and Servants Laws, which can be invoked under most circumstances. Although the Master and Servants Laws make no distinction between White and Non-White workers, it is rare to find them enforced where White workers are concerned. These laws have been widely used to punish African workers who break their contracts with their employers. Such contracts are usually oral and are assumed to have been made as soon as the African enters the service of an employer. The Master and Servant Laws have been carried over into the Union from the four provinces. The Natal law is dated 1850, the Cape 1856, the Transvaal 1880 and the Orange Free State 1904. Like the Native Labour Regulation Act, these laws make ordinary breaches of civil contract subject to criminal penalties. The average number of prosecutions under these laws is 24,000 per year. In the past it has been the practice to use these laws to punish African workers who went on strike. The Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act, passed in 1953, specifically provides for severe penalties for striking and may be expected to replace the Master and Servants Laws in future cases of this kind.

CHAPTER FOUR THE TRADE UNION ROAD TO DEMOCRACY I have reviewed the labour organisation and labour laws relating to the three million African workers who serve the needs of the White man in the urban and peri-urban areas of the Union. More could be added to what I have written. Consideration of such matters as the Pass Laws, the Industrial Colour Bar, the Natives (Urban Areas) Act, housing, transport, social amenities and political rights would emphasise the unhappy burden 31 that is imposed upon urban Africans. Harsh, discriminatory laws and practices are defended on the grounds that they are temporary evils only, while the White lawmakers are planning and preparing for a territorially segregated South Africa with the various races enjoying full opportunity for progress in their own reserved areas. I do not believe that we shall ever see total territorial segregation in South Africa. The Whites and Non-Whites are too inextricably inter­ mingled. No clearer statement on this subject can be found than that of South Africa’s Prime Minister, Mr. J. G. Strijdom, who has said1:— . .we cannot in the present circumstances propagate or apply a policy of total territorial apartheid. . . . What we are doing in fact is by means of our policies and measures, to steer matters in such a direction and to lay such foundations which will in future, if that should appear to be desirable, enable such further progress to be made that Whites and non- Whites can be separated territorially and kept apart. . . . The essential point is so to promote segregation, even territorially, in our times and in the future . . . that clashes between White and non-White may be prevented, that the domination and continued existence of the Whites will be ensured, whilst at the same time doing justice to the non-Whites . . . those are the foundations we are laying on which we and future generations after us will have to continue building, unless we and they want to commit suicide as a White race.” In arguing the problem in terms of the distant future one gets lost in the pipe dreams of those politicians who excuse the evils of today by praising the purgatory of tomorrow. Africans who suffer under prevailing conditions are not consoled by promises. They realise the significance of Mr. Strijdom’s words, when he says that present patterns are the “foundations on which we and future generations will have to continue building unless we and they want to commit suicide as a White race.” The system which operates in South Africa today pleases those with a master-race outlook; it suits the mining interests and unreasonable employers; it benefits political opportunists who seek the support of the White electorate by appealing to colour prejudice. They will fight to the bitter end for its continuation. Those who should take a different view and rally to the side of the African workers are the White workers. Unfortunately many of them have succumbed to the slogans of apartheid or have been intimidated by extreme racialists. If they have not been frightened by the bogeys raised by the master-race minds, they have been confused by the propaganda cries of the political opportunists and self-seekers. A large section of the “registered” trade unions have been in a flurry because the Government rejected their appeal to drop the Industrial Conciliation Bill. The S.A. Trade Union Council embarked upon a 1 Hansard— 17th January, 1956. Column 43 32 campaign of criticism, warning that this measure would have dire results. However, it has not been able to go beyond that. The pathetic weakness of the trade union movement has been exposed by its feeble resistance to the passing of the Industrial Conciliation Bill. Years of white-anting by racialists debilitated many of the larger unions. By maintaining policies of “no politics”, the unions eventually found themselves powerless to meet a political attack. They were unable to rally their members in practical opposition to the Bill. There were no public demonstrations or stoppages of work. It was impossible to stage any united, mass protest to demonstrate workers’ solidarity in defence of their rights. The S.A. Trade Union Council which took the initiative in rallying trade unionists against the Industrial Conciliation Bill made earnest endeavours to bring all the unions together. Their efforts revealed the fundamental disunity that has developed as a result of colour prejudice. In its campaign for Trade Union unity, the S.A. Trade Union Council discovered that it could not reckon upon support from the 27 right-wing unions. These unions had no real objection to the Industrial Conciliation Bill, for many of them are ardent supporters of the Nationalist Government. Then the T.U.C. itself feared to enlist African workers in the campaign. This left only a section of White and Coloured workers who became easy victims of Government attack. The opposition to the Government’s measures to separate White and Coloured members of their unions was weakened because in their own federation they had adopted the practice of apartheid by the exclusion of African workers. If the established and legally recognised trade unions are to survive as genuine workers’ organisations, they must uphold certain basic rights for all workers. They must support and fight for:— (a) the legal recognition of African trade unions, (b) equal treatment of all workers under all industrial laws, (c) no direction of labour, (d) equal pay for equal work, coupled with equal opportunities for advancement. The “registered” trade unions must implement the provisions of the T.U.C. constitution for collaboration with African trade unions. They must help them financially, assist them in organising and establishing themselves and provide them with training in trade union administration. They must also help them overcome all other hardships. In this way they will secure the friendship and co-operation of the Africans. Other White South Africans also have a responsibility. If they are at all concerned about the evil results of the laws that purport to preserve “White Civilisation”, they must do something about it. The factor which should stir their conscience is that the African cannot use the major 33 weapon of democracy—the vote. Because he has no vote, the African worker cannot exert the necessary pressure upon politicians and their parties; nor can he use the vote to remove Governments which oppress him.

Lessons of History. In these despairing days for African workers, I often remind them of the history of the trade union movement. In other times and in other lands, workers suffered even worse discrimination. In spite of the ruthless tyrannies of their oppressors, they won through and secured justice and human rights that had been denied them for generations. The workers of Britain during the period of the Industrial Revolution had their days of despair, too. The enclosure of common ground drove thousands of British peasants off the land into the towns, where great new factories were rising, just as the Head Tax and other measures have driven Africans from the Reserves to work in the mines and the factories of South Africa. In Britain, men, women and children slaved from twelve to eighteen hours a day in ill-lighted, congested and fume-ridden factories, for starvation wages. There was no Factory Act, Wage Act, or Workmen’s Compensa­ tion. Most of the miners were serfs, whose womenfolk had to haul coal trucks underground, like pit ponies. Children, some only four years old, toiled in the textile mills, kept awake by the foreman’s whips. There were no trade unions. Workers were prohibited by law from combining or organising to fight for better conditions. The penalty was imprisonment, flogging, branding or transportation. Parliament was for the rich only. The workers had no vote; they were considered unfitted for the franchise. Even the bravest reformer shrank from suggesting that the vote be given to the mass of the unwashed, illiterate, uneducated workers who slaved in the mines and factories of Britain. Such a proposal would have been considered tantamount to proposing the destruction of Britain herself. Yet the people eventually got the vote. They entered Parliament. They won the right to organise, to have trade unions. Today, trade unionism is an essential part of British democracy. Reforms that were bitterly resisted have long been achieved. Rights that were denied yesterday are cherished today. And so it will be in South Africa. Of course, the circumstances are not strictly comparable. In South Africa today one section of the working class already enjoys most of the rights of trade unionism in a democracy. That section comprises White and Coloured workers. It is to them that the Africans in the urban areas must look for help in their own struggle. The White and Coloured workers cannot protect their own rights and freedoms if they abandon those of the Africans. 34 Before it is too late we must seek a solution to our racial problems in the direction of bringing the African people into the framework of democracy. There could be no better way to do that than by schooling urban African workers in the ways of sound trade unionism, which is today recognised as an essential institution of civilised society.

35 APPENDIX WORKERS EMPLOYED IN SOUTH AFRICAN INDUSTRY {Excluding Government and Local Government undertakings and Railway Workshops)

NUMBER OF PERSONS OF EACH RACE, SHOWING PERCENTAGE OF EACH TO TOTAL

Year Total European % African % Coloured % Asiatic %

1936-7 332,668 140,103 42% 145,785 44% 34,367 1 0 % 12,413 4%

1946 456,946 144,065 32% 235,974 52% 58,812 1 2 % 18,059 4%

1951 678,625 206,061 30% 363,161 53% 87,547 13% 21,856 4%

Source: Bureau of Census and Statistics, Pretoria. Publications Now A vailable

AFRICA DIGEST News and opinions concerning events in Africa and Britain— obtainable by annual subscription of £ 1. Is. EXPERIMENT IN TIME A Sermon preached in New York Cathedral by the Reverend Michael Scott. Price sixpence. BECHUANALAND AND SOUTH AFRICA by Tshekedi Khama, with an introduction by Miss Margery Perham: the case for a Legislative Council in Bechuanaland. Price one shilling. JUSTICE IN SOUTH AFRICA by the Rt. Rev. Ambrose Reeves, Bishop of Johannesburg. A factual statement of the situation in South Africa. Price one shilling. BASUTOLAND ENQUIRY by Miss Isobel Edwards: a discussion of the background to the Moore Report on administrative reforms. Price one shilling and sixpence. WHAT HAVE THEY TO DEFEND? by Mr. Arthur Gaitskell—the Africa Bureau Anniversary Address for 1955. Price one shilling and sixpence. PARTNERSHIP IN PRACTICE published by the African Development Trust. An illustrated description of an inter-racial project in Southern Rhodesia. Price one shilling and sixpence. BRITAIN’S WARDS IN SOUTHERN AFRICA a factual leaflet examining Britain’s responsibilities to the inhabitants of the High Commission Territories. Price fourpence. THE FUTURE OF EAST AFRICA A summary of the Report of the Royal Commission with an Index to the Report. Price three shillings. PROTECTORATES OR NATIVE RESERVES? A Political and Constitutional Survey of the High Commission Territories in South Africa—Basutoland, Bechuanaland and Swaziland. Price two shillings. TH E AFRICA BUREAU *

HONORARY PRESIDENTS Miss Mary Attlee, The Very Rev. Principal John Baillie, d .d ., d .litt., ST.D., ll.d ., The Rt. Rev. The Bishop of Birmingham, Sir Maurice Bowra, d .litt., The Rev. T. Corbishley, s.J., Mr. James Crawford, c.b.e., The Rt. Hon. Isaac Foot, Mr. Tshekedi Khama, Professor Arthur Lewis, p h .d ., The Rev. Professor C.E. Raven,d .d ., The Rev. Dr. W. E. Sangster.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Lord Hemingford (Chairman), Lady Pakenham, Rt. Hon. A. Creech Jones, m .p ., Mr. Philip Fothergill, The Rev. Trevor Huddleston, c.R., D.D., Mr. Peter Lake (Hon. Treasurer), Rev. Michael Scott (Director).

SECRETARY Miss Mary Benson *

THE AIMS OF THE AFRICA BUREAU To inform people in Britain and elsewhere about African prob­ lems and African opinions thereon, and to convey to Africa accurate reports on events and attitudes in Britain that concern them. To help peoples in Africa in opposing unfair discrimination and inequality of opportunity and to foster co-operation between races. To promote policies for furthering the economic, social and political development of all communities in Africa, and especially the establishment of responsible self-government in countries where this does not exist. To promote projects in Africa, or for Africans elsewhere, of education, development and inter-racial co-operation. To establish and administer, through its Executive Committee or Trustees, Trusts and Trust Funds for any of the foregoing purposes.

PRINTED AT THE GRANGE PRESS, SOUTHWICK, SUSSEX THE AFRICA BUREAU *

HONORARY PRESIDENTS Miss Mary Attlee, The Very Rev. Principal John Baillie d d d .litt., st.d ., ll.d ., The Rt. Rev. The Bishop of Birmingham’ Sir Maurice Bowra, d .litt., The Rev. T. Corbishley, s j ’ Mr. James Crawford, c.B.E., The Rt. Hon. Isaac Foot’, Mr. Tshekedi Khama, Professor Arthur Lewis, p h .d ., The Rev. Professor C.E. Raven, d .d ., The Rev. Dr. W. E. San’gster.

EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Lord Hemingford (Chairman), Lady Pakenham, Rt. Hon A Creech Jones, m .p ., Mr. Philip Fothergill, The Rev. Trevor Huddleston, c .r ., d .d ., Mr. Peter Lake (Hon. Treasurer), Rev Michael Scott (Director).

SECRETARY Miss Mary Benson *

THE AIMS OF THE AFRICA BUREAU 7o inform people in Britain and elsewhere about African prob­ lems and African opinions thereon, and to convey to Africa accurate reports on events and attitudes in Britain that concern them. To help peoples in Africa in opposing unfair discrimination and inequality of opportunity and to foster co-operation between races. To promote policies for furthering the economic, social and political development of all communities in Africa, and especially the establishment of responsible self-government in countries where this does not exist. To promote projects in Africa, or for Africans elsewhere, of education, development and inter-racial co-operation. To establish and administer, through its Executive Committee or Trustees, Trusts and Trust Funds for any of the foregoing purposes. b

PRINTED AT THE GRANGE PRESS, SOUTHW ICK, SUSSEX

/ x / ' -CX3 .

* -•- -

^ U x i l (

T^Kjl, b v & k .

~ ic r ? -» vJL. 6 L l. ^ ^ O r f

£A

/ h C L j t ^

^ e t L / t ^

<^r>x- Jo£,e cy~y^j

By ALEX HEPPLE, M.P.

P U B LISH ED BY UNITY PUBLICATIONS (PTY.) LTD. P.O. BOX 4719 J O H A N N E SB U R & - 1954. “There must be changes in the foreign British system, which does not conform to the character and traditions of the Afrikaner . . . the present (labour) system must be destroyed and a netv one created ...” — Mr. B. J. Schoeman, now Minister of Labour. (“Die Transvaler” — 4th July, 1944).

“The Afrikaner worker is to-day forced to subject himself to the existing trade unions so that approximately half the Afrikaner nation is to-day ensnared in the powerful machinery of the trade unions . . . an enormous task awaits to rescue the Afrikaner nation from the claws of this un-national power ...” — Rev. Jac. Conradie in his Chairman s address to the Reddingsdaadbond Congress. (“Die Transvaler,” 3rd October, 1952). CONTENTS

Page Preface______5 Chapter 1 THE BEGINNINGS______6 „ 2 THE SECRET BROEDERBOND AND ITS TENTACLES______10 „ 3 “CHRISTIAN-NATIONALISM” ______24 „ 4 THE NATIONALIST PARTY AND ITS POLICY______2 9 » 5 THE MINEWORKERS’ UNION______38 „ 6 THE GARMENT WORKERS’ UNION______47 » 7 THE BUILDING WORKERS __ ...... 51 ^ „ 8 THE LEATHERWORKERS — AN EXAMPLE AND A WARNING______5 5

» 9 THE SUPPRESSION OF COMMUNISM ACT 58 » 10 t h e NATIVE WORKER______6 6 ,

„ 11 MIXED TRADE UNIONS______75; „ 12 THE INDUSTRIAL LEGISLATION COM­ MISSION ______78r „ 13 TRADE UNION FEDERATIONS______84 „ 14 CONCLUSION ______8 8 Index______

3 PREFACE

PMSTURBING events are taking place in South Africa to-day. ^ Workers and their organisations are suffering one shock after another. Unfortunately, too many people, including workers them­ selves, stand and look on. To them, there is no connection between one incident and another. They are unable to see the changes that are being made in the labour pattern of South Africa. They have forgotten recent history and refuse to look the facts of to-day squarely in the face. Readers will find in this book the story of propaganda, agitation and deep laid plans to capture control of the trade unions and re­ model them on lines which its advocates have conveniently described as “Christian-National.” There have been included in this story some very enlightening and valuable excerpts from important declarations, reports and documents relating to the trade union and political history of South Africa. These expose the real objectives of the Nationalist Government and refute their assertions that they are good democrats waging a war on Communism. This book has been written in a changing situation, where one event follows fast upon another. For this reason it is possible that by the time it appears in print, parts of the story may no longer be up-to-date. Nevertheless, the facts set out here should help towards a better understanding o f what is taking place in the trade union movement in South Africa. They contain a warning and a challenge to every worker in this country, especially those who voted for the Nation­ alists in the false belief that they are the friends of the workers. Chapter One

T H E BEGINNINGS.

QER1NG the closing years of the Nineteenth Century, and in the c ,llrf I’art of the Present Century, the trade union movement of South Africa received its initiative, energy and strength from the skilled artisans who had flocked here from Britain and other over­ seas countries. These men had a trade union background and tradition and they naturally saw to it that they were strongly organised in order to fight economic exploitation. The industrial history of this country particularly the Witwatersrand, records how desperately and valiantly they had to fight against those who sought to take advantage of them., theirs is a story of sacrifice, persecution, deportation, victimisation: it is a story of being shot down in the streets and provoked into- bloody revolt. But those struggles were not in vain. They resulted in great im­ provements in wage standards and working conditions for the skilled workers of South Africa. They also brought about some legal- recognition of the rights of Labour, as enshrined in our Wage Act Industrial Conciliation Act, Shops and Offices Act, Workmen’.^ Compensation Act, and Silicosis Act. Those were the days when the Miners’ unions and the Craft unions held the field almost alone. The Afrikaans-speaking worker was still very much in the minority both in industry and commerce; the trickle of such workers into the towns was just beginning. The Native worker was merely a pick and shovel labourer, few people, caring whence he came or whither he was going. The industrial revolution in South Africa, and the trek of both' Whites and Blacks from the farms to the towns, has changed the- whole complexion of the country’s labour force. In addition to- that, it has created new social and economic problems and aggra­ vated old ones. In the trade union movement, the old stalwarts have passed on. Their successors, especially in the older Unions, have rarely suf­ fered, if at all, the type of bitter struggle that was commonplace- in the early days.

6 It is not surprising that the changed industrial conditions have Brought new attitudes in workers’ organisations. This is most evident where both the workers and their leaders lack the harsh experience of their predecessors. For this reason it is necessary for the workers of South Africa to take stock of the position to-day. They should have a good look at recent developments and current happenings and try to determine where they are going. The first thing they should do is to examine the policy and the acts of the present Government.

GOVERNMENT POLICY.

Briefly stated, the Nationalist Government’s attitude towards trade unionism is as follows:— 1. It does not want Native Trade Unions. 2. It does not want Mixed Trade Unions. 3. It wants all recognised trade unions to conform to its ideal of the “Christian-National” State. As Native workers comprise sixty percent of the country’s labour force the Government’s opposition to Native trade unions immediately reduces the potential of organised labour to forty per­ cent of the total. This forty percent, in terms of Government policy, is to be further divided and separated, and in addition, reduced in power and authority to the role of friendly or benefit societies. It is no exaggeration, therefore, to say that events in South Africa to-day are leading to the destruction of the trade union movement. Since coming into power in 1948, the Nationalists have taken the following action directly affecting the workers and their unions:— 1948— Commission of Enquiry into affairs of the Garment Workers’ Union. —Commission of Enquiry into labour laws, trade unions and trade union policy. 1949— Amendment to Unemployment Insurance Act to exclude all Natives earning less than £3 10s. Od. per week. 1950— Passing of Suppression of Communism Act. 1951— Suppression of Communism Act made retrospective and more severe. '• —Native Building Workers’ Act, fixing shorter training period, lower wages for Native building artisans, and

7 prohibiting them from employment in White areas, ex­ cept on farms. —Passing of Training of Artisans Act to provide a short cut to qualification without apprenticeship. 1952— Extension of Native Labour Regulation Act 1911 to embrace all Natives, skilled or unskilled, over the age of 15 years. 1953— Passing of Public Safety Act, which gives the Minister of Justice despotic powers, and enables him to declare an emergency, suspend all Acts of Parliament and estab­ lish a Dictatorship. —Passing of Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act, setting up special machinery for settling disputes between Native workers and their employers, and denying them the right to negotiate through trade unions. 1951/3—Removal of trade union leaders from jobs and unions by means of the Suppression of Communism Act.

In addition to this Mr. B. J. Schoeman, the Minister of Labour, has threatened action “to curb malpractices in the Unions’ and to prohibit mixed trade unions. All these laws and actions are steps in the implementation of Nationalist Party policy. This is obvious if one examines their policy. Before doing so one should also look at its background. It is a fascinating story of the birth of an ideal in the secret circles of the Broederbond and its subsidiaries in the early 1930’s, when the influences of Nazi Germany and Lascist Italy were intoxica­ ting some of the leading political theorists of South Africa; it tells how the Broederbond group linked with the Ossewabrandwag and the Nationalist Party as an alliance to fight for “a free independent, Republican, Christian-National State . , with the strongest emphasis upon the effective disciplining of “the people.” i1) . with the Nationalist Party, under Dr. Malan, as the leaders of the political struggle. To-day, as the Government of South Africa, the Nationalists are fulfilling their pledge to implement that policy and, to quote the proud words of Dr. Malan himself, it is being applied “step by step.” In the story which follows, it will be seen that the alliance which

( I) Die Transvaler, 13th June, 1941. set out to establish the “Christian-National” Republic concentrated its attention upon the Afrikaans-speaking section of the community. All propaganda and campaigning have been directed towards indoc­ trinating Afrikaners with the belief that they are a group apart; that their ideals are different from those of the rest of the people; and that their problems can be solved only through the agencies of so-called “Afrikaans” organisations. fn factories, workshops and offices Afrikaans and English-speak­ ing workers have always associated in the greatest harmony. As far back as 1922 they had shown their strong fellowship and common outlook. The names of many brave Afrikaner workers will long be remembered for the heroic part they played in the 1922 strike on the Witwatersrand, where they fought, suffered and even died alongside their English-speaking comrades. Perhaps it was that working-class unity which inspired the brains- trust of the Broederbond to set about separating the Afrikaner worker from his fellows in the trade union movement. The Broeder- bond-Nationalist alliance has pursued their line of “Apartheid” for Afrikaner workers with skill and determination. The Afrikaner worker has been entangled in the meshes of all the social and cultural off­ shoots of the Broederbond. Consequently, it has been easy to be­ guile these workers with such slogans as “Afrikaner unity,” and to frighten them into the camp of the Nationalist Party by condemning organisations like trade unions as “un-national,” “un-Afrikaans” and “foreign.” It has also been easy to condemn all criticism or oppo­ sition as “attacks upon the Afrikaner.” In fact, this subterfuge has become the most popular weapon of the Nationalists, and whenever they find themselves on the defensive they resort to accusing their opponents of being “enemies of Afrikanerdom.” There are many Afrikaner workers who are not deceived by these political tricks. They are on the side of those who are fighting Broederbond-Nationalism and consequently helping to raise the stan­ dards of all workers including Afrikaner workers. But too few workers are fully aware of this deception of naming the enemies of Broederbond-Nationalism, “enemies of Afrikaner­ dom.”

o Chapter Two.

THE SECRET BROEDERBOND AND ITS TENTACLES.

"|"HE Broederbond was founded in 1918. Its membership is less than 3,000, among whom are several Cabinet Ministers and a number of leading Nationalist Members of Parliament.

t ,has feeen described by its General Secretary, Mr. 1. M. Lombard, in the following words:— The Afrikaner-Broederbond is born from a deep conviction that the Afrikaner nation has been planted in this country by trod s hand and is destined to remain here as a nation with its own character and its own mission.” f1) . During the last quarter of a century, the Broederbond has be­ come a powerful political force, operating from behind the scenes and influencing every sphere of Afrikaner activity. Its operations are conducted through a system of control from the top in the following order:— BROEDERBOND I I F.A.K. (2)

REDDINGSDAADBOND

BLANKEWERKERSBESKERMINGSBOND. We shall see how these organisations have not only formulated policies but also actively campaigned and organised to impose those policies upon various groups and associations, including the trade unions. As far back as 1935, the Prime Minister of South Africa, General J. B. M. Hertzog, the ex-leader of the Nationalist Party and' himself an ex-Broederbonder, revealed the link between the Broeder­ bond and the Nationalist Party, when he declared at a public meeting:-— (3).

( I) Die Transvaler, 4th December, 1944. (2} Federasie van Afrikaanse Kultuurverenigings. (3) Smithfield, O.F.S. — November, 1935.

10 There is no doubt that the secret Broederbond is nothing else but a Purified Nationalist Party busy underground, and the Purified Nationalist Party is nothing else but a secret Afrikaner liroeaerbond continuing its activities above ground In December 1944 the then chairman of the Broederbond Professor J. C. van Rooy and the Secretary, Mr. I. M. Lombard published a statement in “Die Transvaler”, the Nationalist daily ■newspaper, in which they set out the aims of the Broederbond. The main objective was stated to be:— '. The Afrikanerisation of our public life and our education in the direction of Christian-Nationalism, while leaving un- N'dered the internal development of all sections of the popule twn, in so far as this is not dangerous to the State.” j1) . It is not the purpose of this book to examine all the ramifi­ cations of the Bond. It is sufficient to deal with the tentacles which reached out to embrace the trade union movement, down from the T.A.K., through the Reddingsdaadbond into the Blankewerkers- beskermmgsbond, which was entrusted with the practical tasks that were directed from above.

THE F.A.K. {Die Federasie van Afrikaanse Kultuurverenigings). (3). This so-called cultural subsidiarv is really the “great son” that controls all. It has become a powerful economic-political-cultural machine working to mould South Africa into a disciplined Christian-National State. Its policy of “Christian-Nationalism” became the common plat­ form of the Broederbond, the Federasie van Afrikaanse Kultuurver- enigings, the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond, (3) the Nationalist Party and other organisations. It has inspired, initiated and directed ■the campaign for Christian-National trade unions. In 1946 its committee members included Professor J. C. van Rooy as Chairman (he was also chairman of the Broederbond) and Mr. I. M. Lombard (Secretary of the Broederbond). Another of its well known activities has been a campaign for Christian-National education along specific lines which it has laid down.

(1) Die Transvaler, December, 1944. (2) Federation of Afrikaans Cultural Societies. (3) W hite W orkers' Protection Society.

11 A current example of how the F.A.K. operates is shown in the following report:—

“The executive of the Federation of Afrikaans Cultural Asso­ ciations has, at the request of a group of Afrikaans nurses, decided to appoint a committee to support the nurses irv their great struggle for the maintenance of their mother tongue and national identity in the South African Nurses’ Association”, says a letter from the general secretary of the F.A.K., Mr. G. L. H. van Niekerk.”

“Although, adds the letter 70 per cent, of the Nurses’ Associa­ tion is Afrikaans speaking, the demands for their mother tongue are being ‘callously ignored’ by the higher levels of the associa­ tion. Afrikaans nurses have no quarrel with their English- speaking colleagues, but feel that they are entitled to a strict and fair implementation of the bilingual policy.

The F.A.K. is contemplating the appointment of a full-time woman organiser to this end, for which extra money would be required.” f1).

If the F.A.K. interferes in the internal affairs of the S.A. Nurses’ Association, they will stir up trouble and cause disunity. Complaints will multiply of “discrimination against Afrikaans nurses”, and nurses will find themselves involved in a racial struggle. In this way the F.A.K. can destroy the genuine functions of an employees’ organisation and leave it weakened, divided and use­ less to its members. One of the subsidiaries of the F.A.K. is the Reddingsdaadbond.

THE REDDINGSDAADBOND. The Reddingsdaadbond was born of the desire of a distinguished South African, the Rev. J. D. Kestell to do something practical for poor white Afrikaners. By the late 20’s the Poor White problem in South Africa had reached alarming proportions. The Carnegie Commission gave as a conservative estimate that of a white population of less than 2 ,0 0 0 ,0 0 0 in 1931, there were 300,000 Poor Whites. These unfortunate folk were farmers and farm workers and their families, who had been

( I) R.D.M. — 26th October, 1953.

12 forced off the land through various causes, mainly changing econo­ mic conditions. At the time of the Centenary celebrations of the Voortrekkers in 1938, Rev. Kestell issued an appeal for a tangible tribute to the memory of the Voortrekkers and said that their memory would be honoured if “something were done for their ‘sunken’ descendants.” I1)- At the celebration at Bloukrans he made an inspiring speech, as a result of which “Reddingsdaad” Committees were formed in all parts of the country, with the object of raising “at least half a mil­ lion pounds.” In order to decide how the money was to be used a National Economic Conference was held at Bloemfontein on the 3rd, 4th and 5th October, 1939. At this Conference the entire complexion of the original idea of the Reddingsdaad was changed. The Conference was dominated by prominent Nationalist politicians, including Dr. H. F. Verwoerd, Dr. T. E. Donges and Dr. A. J. van Rhyn, who are to-day Cabinet Ministers, Dr. Albert Hertzog and Dr. N. Diedrichs, now Nationalist M.P.’s. The Conference decided first of all that there should be a large fund available to finance the objects of the Reddingsdaad. For this purpose the Reddingsdaadsfonds was established, under the direc­ tion of the Economic Institute of the F.A.K., the chief subsidiary of the Broederbond. The National Economic Conference discussed at length the uses to which the fund should be put. Although the Reddingsdaad was conceived to rescue poor whites, it now began to exhibit a greater desire to build up Afrikaner Capitalism. Dr. M. S. Louw, Managing Director of SANLAM, an Insurance Company with assets now nearing £20,000,000, advised the Con­ ference:— “If we want to achieve success we must use the technique of capitalism, as it is applied in the most important industry in this country — the gold mining industry. We must establish something like the finance houses of Johannesburg (2). This tempting prospect of their own National-Capitalism was immediately popular with the delegates. In it they could see them­ selves as independent, powerful and benevolent towards their less fortunate fellow Afrikaners. Unfortunately for the latter, the Con­ ference decided that their salvation should be sought by an all-out

(1) "Fees by die Waens." Gedenkalbum — Nasionale Pers 1938. (2) Die Vaderland — 4th October, 1939.

13 attack upon the trade unions, in order to purify them and reform them along proper “Christian-National” lines. Dr. Albert Hertzog held the Conference spellbound in his long discourse on the trade unions and the menace they had become to the Afrikaner workers According to a Press report:— (1).

Dr. Albert Hertzog, who spoke on labour organisation, pointed out that the trade unions in this country collected £290,000 annually. He wished to embrace these organisations in the objects of the Congress and so put an end to the trade unions completely ruining the Afrikaner in the cities’ . . . he warned against the control of trade unions by foreigners who had con­ siderable financial self-interest at stake. The Congress approved Dr. Hertzog’s proposal that a large portion’ of the Reddingsdaadfonds should be used for the reforming of the trade unions.”

Subsequent events have shown how well this pledge was ful­ filled, and considerable sums have been expended over the years from the Reddingsdaadfonds for the purpose of “reforming the trade unions.” Unfortunately for all workers, Afrikaners and others, this reformation movement has brought nothing but division to workers’ organisations.

The National Economic Conference at Bloemfontein also decided that the time had arrived for the formation of one great Volks- pr?iar*SaSje’ ^ase<^ UP°V Christian-National principles. Backed by the Reddingsdaadfonds, this organisation was to work in all directions to establish the “economic independence of the Afrikaner” Thus came into being the REDDINGSDAADBOND. Among its objects the R.D.B. proposed:—

“To make the Afrikaans labourer part and parcel of the Nat­ ional life and to prevent the Afrikaans workers devloping as a class distinct from other classes in the Afrikaans national life.”

To this end the R.D.B. established a special Labour Section, the Chairman and driving force of the Reddingsdaadbond for many years has been Dr. Nico Diederichs, Nationalist Party M.P for Randfontein, leading economist of that party and a Director of

{ I) Die Vaderland — 6th October, 1939. (2) Ons^ Reddingsdaad" — Brochure issued by the Head Offcie of the Reddingsdaadbond — p. 27.

14 many Companies. j1). The Reddingsdaad movement was off to an ambitious start- It had appointed itself the saviour of the oppressed Afrikaner worker and at the same time the instrument to make Afrikaner Capitalism a mighty force. It is obvious that one of those conflicting objectives would suffer at the expense of the other. Events have shown that while Afrikaner Capitalism has become powerful, the workers of South Africa — Afrikaner and other — have been divided, their organisations dis­ rupted, their leaders banned, and their ability to resist economic ezxploitation gravely weakened. The Broederbond had decided that success lay in indoctrinating Afrikaner workers with ■ the bdlief that traditional forms of trade unionism were hostile to their traditions, unfaithful to their Church and disloyal to their country. Reddingsdadbond Goes Political. If the National Economic Conference of 1939 had departed radically from the ideal of the Rev. J. D. Kestell, the Reddingsdaad- bond was to drift even further in the following two years. Under the Chairmanship of Professor L. J. du Plessis a pro­ visional Committee of National Unity (Voorlopige Volkseenheids- komitee) had begun working energetically to bring about a united “Afrikaner Front.” The F.A.K., the Reddingsdaadbond, the Ossewa- brandwag, (2) and the three Dutch Reformed Churches were repre­ sented on this Committee. After they had prepared a Constitution and Programme, based exclusively upon “Christian-National” prin­ ciples, they were ready to tell the public that the next practical step was political action, through the Nationalist Party.

(1) H is philosophy is best stated in his own words:— "W e are not concerned here purely with a fight between two ordinary political parties . . . No, . . . what is at issue is two outlooks on life, funda­ mentally so divergent that a compromise is entirely unthinkable . . . The fight in South Africa is between Nationalism and Liberalism . . . this doc­ trine of liberalism that stands for equal rights fo r all civilised human beings . . . It is almost the same as the ideal of communism ..." (Hansard — Vol. 64. Cols. 500/5, 19th August, 1948. Among the Companies of which Dr. Diederichs is a Director is the Rem­ brandt Tobacco Corporation (S.A.) Ltd., which recently acquired a large interest in Rothmans, Ltd., of London; an amount" of £750,000 is said to be involved. (Die Transvaler —• 3rd December 1953). (2) The Ossewabrandwag (Ox-wagon Sentinel) was a National-Socialist organ­ isation having as its objective a one-party, authoritarian State, it merged with M r. N. C. Havenga’s Afrikaner Party in 1946.

15 This carefully conceived arrangement had made sure that every important sphere of Afrikaner activity was enveloped, in order that all sections of the Afrikaner people would be drawn into the “Afri­ kaner Front”. Social, cultural, religious, educational, recreational and political activities were now firmly bound together. It was a set-up beyond the widest expectations of the Nationalist Party. It offered them a political monopoly of the Afrikaner people. The announcement of the “Afrikaner Front” was presented in the form of a “Declaration on behalf of the People’s Organisations” (Verklaring namens Volksorganisasies), (*) in which the common objective was stated to be:— . . . a free, independent, Republican, Christian-National State, based upon the word of God, eschewing all foreign models with a Christian-National Educational system . . . and the strongest emphasis upon the effective disciplining of the people . . . .” This declaration was signed by:— I. M. Lombard — as Chairman of the F.A.K. J. F. J. van Rensburg — as Commandant-General of the Osse- wabrandwag. L. J. du Plessis — as Chairman of the Economic Iinstitute of the F.A.K. N. Diederichs as Organisational Leader of the Reddings- daadbond. Rev. J. P. v.d. Spuy — Chairman of the Church Council. Rev. I. D. Kruger Chairman of the Inter-Church Commission of the Dutch Reformed Churches. Rev. D. F. Erasmus — Vice-Chairman of the Calvinist Associa­ tion. The three Ministers of the Dutch Reformed Churches signed in their personal capacities. Dr. Malan, as Leader of the Nationalist Party promptly an­ nounced that he accepted the Declaration without hesitation. He said:— (2). “I can give you the assurance that my acceptance of your Declaration and your offer includes also the sincere and enthusiastic acceptance of my whole party and its leaders in all four provinces, especially as the decisions at our recent Union Congress, which were unanimous and without a single dissen­ tient, are in full accord with everything expected of us in (1) Die Tra nsva ler— 13th June, 1941. (2) Die Tra nsva ler— 13th June, 1941.

16 your Declaration.” The Nationalist Party had every reason to be delighted. “Afri­ kaner unity” had been achieved with every Afrikaans organisation, and even the Churches, lined up behind the Nationalist Party. This meant for the Party an unlimited number of tireless workers, plenty of opportunities for raising money, boundless fields for party propa­ ganda and numerous other advantages.

Henceforth, the National Front would go forward demanding a disciplined, Republican, Christian-National State, under the political leadership of the Nationalist Party.

An Afrikaner Unity Committee (Afrikanereenheidskomitee) was set up, comprising representatives of the Nationalist Party, the Ossewabrandwag, the F.A.K., and the Reddingsdaadbond, to devise the best means of imposing their common policy upon the people of South Africa.

Although rivalry for the leadership and authority between the O.B. and the Nationalist Party resulted in squabbling and eventually a break between these two groups, there was never any disagreement over policy. _) The role of the F.A.K. and the Reddingsdaad was maintained. They were to continue to pursue an intensive campaign among the Afrikaner workers, urging them to abandon their support for the traditional trade unions and to seek salvation in “Christian-National” trade unions. For preference, they were to get control of the existing organisations and re-mould them upon “Christian-National” lines. This policy was expounded at the Bloemfontein Congress of the Reddingsdaadbond in October, 1952, by the Chairman, Rev. Jac. Conradie, who stated among other things:—

“The Afrikaner worker will for many years to come still repre­ sent the largest number of white workers of our land. That means Jtk&t they will still in the future form the kernel of our nation. That is why we must see the inclusion of the Afrikaner worker as one of the main objects of the Reddingsdaadsbond. The Afrikaner worker is to-day forced to subject himself to the existing trade unions so that approximately half of the Afrikaner nation is to-day ensnared in the powerful machinery of the trade unions . . . an enormous task awaits to rescue the Afrikaner nation from the claws of this un-national power

The task of the R.D.B. to “save the Afrikaner worker,” in the light of their declarations and from experience of their activities, has no other result than to undermine and destroy the trade unions. In view of the fact that the R.D.B. is the driving force of Afrikaner Capitalism and Big Business, it is not surprising that it considers powerful trade unionism a danger. The practical work of the Reddingsdaadbond in “saving the Afrikaner workers is conducted through its own subsidiary, the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond (2) .

DIE BLANKEWERKERSBESKERMINGSBOND.

The Objects (Grondslag) of the Bankewerkersbeskermingsbond are:—

“The Society is founded on Christian-National traditions of the people of South Africa. (a) To study carefully the social problems and evils, especially those that affect the workers’ community on the Witwaters- rand; to find ways and means to combat those evils and to bring pressure to bear, ivhere necessary, on responsible bodies, so that the necessary measures can be taken to adopt legislation which will promote the best interests of the workers.” (3). The compass of “Christian-Nationalism” is severely narrowed by tne reservation in the Constitution of the Blankewerkersbeskermings­ bond that membership is open to :— “White persons only, who are members of the Protestant Church.” (4). This select organisation lists among its aims:— (/') To support and propagate the undermentioned relation­ ship between European and non-European workers. 1. that there should be a clear determination of which

( 1) Die Transvaler — 3rd Oct. 1952. (2) The Whiteworkers Protection Society. (3) Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond Konstitusie en Statute. VoortrekkerDers Jhb (4) Ibid.

iu1 ° occupations must be reserved for Europeans and which for non-Europeans. 2. that no undesirable contact between European and non-European workers should be tolerated in their employment. 3. that mixed membership of trade unions of European and non-European workers shall be prohibited.” (1).

It is significant that these are the very things which the Minister of Labour. Mr. B. J. Schoeman, promised to put into effect when he addressed the Nationalist Party Congress in Pretoria on the 23rd September, 1953. (2) . The link between this organisation and the F.A.K. is con­ tained in Section 12 — ONTBINDING (Dissolution) of its Consti­ tution, which provides that on dissolution its assets should be trans­ ferred to organisations with similar aims, as may be indicated by members, or failing which, by the Federasie van Afrikaanse Kul- tuurverenigings.

BLANKEWERKERSBESKERMINSSBOND AND NATIONALISTS

Despite persistent and emphatic denials that the B.W.B.B. ha~ anything to do with the Nationalist party, it is interesting to observe how many prominent Nationalists hold or have held official posi­ tions in this organisation. Here are the facts in the words of Mr. J. Loubscher in his evidence before the Garment Workers’ Commis­ sion of Enquiry. (3). "CROSS EXAMINED (Mr. Loubscher) : "Mr. PHILLIPS: Mr. Loubscher, what did you do before you were appointed as assistant secretary to the Blankewerkers- beskermingsbond? . . . I was a special representative of SAN- LAM. (4). Had you any experience of trade unions? . . . No, I gained my experience in the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond. I had a bit of theory, but very little. Who was the secretary when you were appointed secretary?

(1) Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond Konstitusie en Statute. Voortrekkerpers, Jhb, (2) Cape Times — 24th Sept. 1953. (3) Garment W orkers' Commission of Enquiry. 22nd. February. Proceedings. Page 1166. Translated from the Afrikaans. (4) See page 13.

19 . . . Mr. Jan de Klerk. Is that the Mr. de Klerk who is at present secretary of the Nationalist Party? . . . That is correct. Who is the chairman of the “Bond” ? . . . At the present time, Rev. C. B. Brink. And who are the other members of the Executive? . . . Rev. du Preez, Rev. du Plessis, Rev. P. van der Hoven, Rev___ ” MR. PHILLIPS (continuing) : Mr. Loubscher, you were busy giving the names of the executive of the bond . . . The fol­ lowing are — Rev. C. B. Brink and Mr. J. C. B. Schoeman, Dr. S. P. van der Walt. I think I have already mentioned Rev. van der Hoven. Is that the whole Executive? . . . Yes. As you already said Mr. Du Pisanie (*) was a member of the Executive till the end of 1947? . . . Until the end or the middle of 1947 . . .Yes. So far as you know he was a member of the executive since the inception of the Bond? . . . Yes. And in 1945 the Bond took over the whole work and everything of the Bree Kerklike Komitee? (2) . . . Yes.” In 1945? . . . Yes. And Mr. Du Pisanie was a member of the Executive Com­ mittee since 1944? . . . Yes.. (3). “MR. PHILLIPS. And a further member of the Executive of the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond in the beginning, in 1944, was Mr. Schoeman? . . . Mr. Ben Schoeman, Yes. Yes, the present Minister of Labour . . . Yes. Until when was he a member of the Executive? . . . Until the end of 1946.” (4) . MR. PHILLIPS: What did you keep yourself busy wiifr? . . . Well, the first six months was a strange period for me. We

(1) Nationalist M.P. for Germiston since 1948. (2) Bree Kerklike Komitee — Enlarged Church Committee. (3) G .W .U . Commission of Enquiry. 22nd February, 1949. Proceedings I 168. (Translated from the Afrikaans). (4) G .W .U . Commission of Enquiry. 22nd February 1949. Proceedings. Page I 169. (Translated from the Afrikaans).

20 had various church conferences and congresses. What did the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond have to do with the church congresses? . . . Oh, to discuss the interests of the B.W.B.B. in industry. The churches must do this? . . . Yes. But what does the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond do then? - . . Well, there are also the moral interests, the cultural interests and the religious interests. But is it necessary that the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond must come in contact with the churches? Can’t the individual workers do this themselves? . . . Yes they can, but the mentality is so that it must be trained; they know nothing of procedure.” i 1). “What salary did they pay you? . . . A beginning salary of £40. Per month? . . . Yes. And this is naturally the basic salary? . . . Yes. And later on more? . . . Yes, I was put on a scale. And what do you get now? . . . Now, including Cost of Living Allowance, about £67. And where does the money come from? . . . From sympa­ thetic organisations such as the church, the Armsorgraad, (2) party organisations and individual members. Which party organisations? . . . Well, for example indi­ vidual members of the Nationalist Party. But party organisations? . . . Yes. Are contributions paid to the Blankewerkersbeskermings­ bond every year? . . . No, not every year. Not every year? . . . No, it depends on how they feel. This is from the Nationalist Party? . . . Yes. And any other political party? . . . So far as I know, no.” (3).

(1) G .W .U . Commission of Enquiry, 22nd February, 1949. Proceedings. Pago 1170. (Translated from the Afrikaans). (2) Armsorgraad (Poor Care Council). (3) G .W .U . Commission of Enquiry, 22nd February 1949. Proceedings. Page 1173/4. (Translated from the Afrikaans).

21 Is Dr. Diederichs a member of the Blankewerkersbesker- mingsbond? . . . Yes. Has he been a member for a long time; from the begin* ning? . . . I doubt whether he was a member from the beginning.. I think he was a member from the time of the affiliation of the Reddingsdaadsbond with the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond.”' f1)- From the above sworn evidence of this official of the Blanke­ werkersbeskermingsbond it will be seen that at least four prominent members of the Nationalist Party are, or have been active members- of the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond. They are:— Mr. Jan de Klerk — Secretary of the Nationalist Party. Mr. B. J. Schoeman — Minister of Labour. Mr. J. du Pisanie—Nationalist M.P. for Germiston. Dr. N. Diederichs—Nationalist M.P. for Randfontein,. Leader of the Reddingsdaadbond. This evidence also reveals that in 1945 the Blankewerkersbe­ skermingsbond took over the functions of the Bree Kerklike Komitee- This was the oragnisation which became active in the affairs of the Garment Workers’ Union in Germiston in 1944 and embarked1 upon a campaign to “preserve Christianity and white civilisation.” The story of that campaign and its outcome was told in a subsequent Court Action for defamation, which was brought by the General Secretary of the Garment Workers’ Union against one of the mem­ bers of the Bree Kerklike Komitee. (2) . The Commission of Enquiry into the affairs of the Garment- Workers’ Union, 1949 tells part of the history as follows:— (3).

“As a result of the expulsion of Mrs. Moll and Mrs. Nel (from the G.W.U.) an Action Committee was established, consisting of members of the three Afrikaans Churches in Germiston. Rightly or wrongly, this Committee deplored the expulsions: and felt that a grave injustice had been done. On the 6th March 1944, the Action Committee was merged into a larger Committee, called the “Bree Kerklike Komiteeconsisting of Ministers and well-intentioned members. This Committee was in turn replaced by the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond.”

(1) G .W .U . Commission of Enquiry, 22nd February 1949. Proceedings. Paga, 1180. (Translated from the Afrikaans). (2) Sachs vs. A. B. du Preez W . L. D. 1944. j3) Report of the Commission of Enquiry, G.W.U. — U.G.16/1950. The ex-General Secretary of the Garment Workers’ Union, Mr. E. S. Sachs deals with the activities of this Church Committee in his book “The Choice before South Africa.” t1). He states that the Union received a confidential report on the 1st March, 1944 of a meeting which was held in Germiston to plan the campaign against the Garment Workers’ Union, at which one of the principal speakers was a member of the Reformers’ Association of the Minewmrkers’ Union. (2). The Bree Kerklike Komitee probably found its inspiration in the Special Report of the Algemene Kerkvereniging of 1937 on the question of Communism in trade unions. This report, its background, and its purpose are set out in a jramphlet entitled ‘‘Kommunisme en die S.A. Vakunies.” (3). According to this treatise:— “. . . the algemene Kerkvergadering (General Church Meeting) at its meeting in May, 1937, deemed it necessary to appoint a Commission of Enquiry which had to report on Communism and its movements in the South African trade unions.” The approach and attitude of the authors towards trade unionism is revealed in the following passage. It is typical of all those who do not know the history of trade unionism, and do not understand its functions in a modern democratic society. “It is surely not without reason that one of the best known figures in the American industrial life, Henry Ford, was bitterly opposed to the trade unions, and the question is actually whether the existence of the trade unions is necessary in a country where the State considers itself called upon, and regards it is a national duty to regulate the relationship between worker and employer to the smallest detail and whether the existence of trade unions should be regarded as being nothing but a necessary evil.” (4).

The Broederbond Octopus did not shrink from using even the Churches to achieve its ends. Its clever slogan of “Christian- Nationalism” ensnared many innocents. Slowly but surely it was closing in to crush the trade unions.

(1) pp. 1 7 4 - 8 . (2) For Story of which see page 38. (3) Communism and the S.A. Trade Unions, by Dr. H. P. Wolmarans, 1938. (4) Kommunisme en die Suid-Afrikaanse Vakunies. Chapter Three.

“CHRISTIAN-NATIONALISM.”

JN the previous Chapter we have seen how the term “Christian- National” has been invoked constantly to give a special character to the Nationalist movement to create a State organisation which conforms to their ideals. Before examining this policy of Christian-Nationalism, let us- briefly set out here, in their own words, the basis of all the organisa­ tions discussed in this book. 1. The Nationalist Party, in its programme of principles de­ mands :— “that the life of our State and Nation shall be based on- Christian and National principles.” f1).

2 . The Broederbond declares its objectives to be:— “the Afrikanerisation of our public life and our education, in the direction of “Christian-Nationalism.” (2) .

3. The F.A.K. . . one of the decisions of this Congress (on the 5, 6 and* 7 July, 1939) was that the F.A.K. must call an institution into being to propagate and promote the now historical ideal of Christian and National education . . .” (3). 4. The Reddingsdaadbond resolved at the Bloemfontein Nat­ ional Economic Congress in 1939:— “that the time has arrived for one great Volksorganisasie,. Christian-National in outlook.” (4) . 5. Die Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond.

(1) Road to a New South Africa. (Programme and Principles of the National Party). Page I. (2) Transvaler. December, 1944. (3) Preface to "Christelik-Nasionale Onderwysbeleid" by Prof. J. C. van Rooy., Chairman of F.A.K. (Translation). (4) pie Vad^rland — 4th October, 1939.

21 “The Association is based on the Christian-National prin­ ciples of the people of South Africa.” I1). 6. The Reformers Group in the Mineworkers’ Union. . .to convert the existing Mineworkers’ Union along constitutional lines into an Afrikaans Christian-National trade union.” (2). An obvious question arises. Why was it necessary for all these •organisations to establish themselves as a crusade on behalf of Chris­ tianity and the Nation? Were there forces, especially among the workers, which were organised to destroy the Churches or South Africa? Of course not. Despite all their propaganda none of the apostles of “Christian-Nationalism” have ever been able to prove, or even show the right or justification for the use of these two words. The Broederbond-Nationalist combine are guilty of a fine piece of political deception. They have brazenly appropriated the words “ Christian” and “National”, hyphenated them for added impressive­ ness, to create a convenient adjective with which to describe their objectives. Instead of offering the people a “Nationalist Party Republic” they prefer to use the term “Christian-National Republic” ; rather than advocate “Nationalist Party trade unions”, they see greater chance of success by calling their proposed organisation “Christian- National trade unions.” By taking this line they have been able to delude many innocent and well-intentioned people. Many South Africans have taken the adjective “Christian-National” at its face value, without examining its changed significance as a political catchword. If they are Christians, they feel it is right to place their faith in an organisation which describes itself as “Christian” ; if they are patriotic citizens—as most people are—they believe that in support­ ing a movement calling itself “National” they are expressing their patriotism. In the circumstances, it is difficult to expose the dangers behind the political use of these powerful words. Any criticism of the move­ ments which use the title “Christian-National” is immediately con­ demned as an attack upon the Afrikaans Churches or as being the propaganda of “un-national or un-Afrikaans elements.” It is common practice for the Nationalist Party to describe their jl) Konstitusie en Statute. Voortrekkerpers. (Translation). (2) Rule 3 of Constitution. (See page 39).

25 opponents as “un-national.” For example, the Minister of Lands. Mr. J. G. Strydom, has described even the United Party as “un­ national.” Speaking in his constituency, he said:— (1). “The United Party ivas un-national and followed in the foot­ steps of Rhodes and Jameson. The Nationalist Party on the other hand, had as its motto “South Africa First.” The “Christian-National” campaign has had a bad effect upon the honest efforts of many Churchmen, social workers and economic- theorists, who have succumbed to the intensive propaganda of the Broederbond-Nationalist combine. In seeking a solution to the grave economic problems of the White workers, they have been trapped by the crude and simple arguments laid for them by the “Christian- National” Crusade. There are two trade unions which became the first target of the campaign to transform their character from genuine trade-unionism to Christian-National subsidiaries of the Broederbond. They were the Mineworkers’ Union and the Garment Workers’ Union. The members of both unions are predominantly Afrikaans speaking, and closely attached to their church and there­ fore easily influenced in many spheres of their lives by this Chris­ tian-National propaganda. Lacking a traditional trade union back­ ground and inexperienced in the ways of organised labour, many of them succumbed to the ingenious arguments that were used by the Broederbond octopus, that their loyalty was to the Church and the State and not to their trade unions, which were branded as hostile to those institutions. As far back as 1938 the activities of the Broederbond-Nationalist combine had become a matter of grave concern to legitimate trade unions. At the 1938 Annual Congress of the Trades and Labour Council, then the only Federation of trade unions in South Africa, a delegate from the Furniture Workers’ Union, Mr. D. R. de Wet is reported as follows:— (2). “Dr. Hertzog and his colleagues ivere trying to break up the trade unions, up to the present their main attack being made on the Mineworkers’ Union. The young Afrikaner who had grown up in a particular industry became a loyal member of that industry, and worked in harmony with the English-speak­ ing and other members. In the furniture industry they had

( 1) The Star — 2nd October, 1950. (2) Report of 8th Annual Conference. S.A .T. & L.C. Page 50, l3/22nd Apr. 1938.

26 raised the Coloured member out of the gutter and had put him in equal economic level ivith the European. Consequently, Dr. Hertzog has been unable to break into that industry. Most of the miners, however, had originally been farmers who had drifted on to the Rand and having no trade in their hands, they had gone to the mines. They had no trade union experience, no industrial experience, and consequently they had been more open to attack by Dr. Hertzog and his friends. He was very pleased that the South African Mine Workers’ Union had not dealt too drastically with those members who had originally gone over to the Mynwerkersbond. Continuing, Bro. de Wet said that Dr. Hertzog tried to justify the formation of Afrikaans unions by calling them cul­ tural organisations. That culture teas no use to his children if he was not able to provide them with food. The Afrikaner could be a good trade unionist, and still have his culture. He thought that any attempt by these people to break into existing organisations would be strongly resisted by the Afrikaans- speaking people themselves.” The following year the President of the Trades and Labour Council, Mr. A. A. Moore found it necessary to warn delegates of the growth of the campaign to divide the trade unions. He said:— i1)- “Turning to the European trade Unionist, his solidarity is being threatened by shameless appeals to colour and racial prejudice, which must be combated by every means in our power. That this movement is gaining ground is evident and therefore we must close our ranks and get on to the attack before it becomes much stronger. Started originally as a political aid to power of a certain political party, the movement is taking more definite shape and is slowly but surely being welded into an ‘'Afrikaner Front’, which, among other objects, has that of organising Afrikaans workers into separate trade unions in which they will (so it is declared) retain their Afrikaner traditions and ideals. I am sure that you will agree that if this separate organisation of Afrikaner workers should ever come about, it ivill bring into being consequences so disastrous that it must, be tackled in earnest before it is too late.” From the foregoing it will have been seen that the so-called ■“Christian-National” movement was making great strides and the campaign for “Christian-National” trade unions was showing results.

,j I ) Report of Ninth Annual Conference. South African Trades and Labour Council. I0 / I4 th A p ril 1939.

27 Inside the trade unions dissention was being created on issues that really had nothing to do with the normal activities of the unions, and served to aggravate the new problems that were arising as a result of the challenge to the power of the old established craft unions from the rising industrial unions. On the political front, the Nationalist Party was finding the slogan of “Christian-Nationalism” to be a useful weapon. Our story has now reached the point where we should look at the progress record of the Nationalist Party itself.

28 i Chapter Four.

THE NATIONALIST PARTY AND ITS POLICY.

JILSEWHERE (*) I have told how, in the middle of 1941 the Nationalists took over from the F.A.K. —- R.D.B. — O.B. __ \ OLKSEENHEIDSKOMITEE, the policy of a “disciplined, Chris­ tian-National Republican State.” Thereafter, this became the official policy of the Nationalist Party and was eventually elaborated in their official Programme of Principles. Looking ahead for a moment, it should be noted here that by 1948 Dr. Malan had at last reached his goal of Afrikaner unity under his single leadership. Not only had his Party appropriated the policy of the National Unity Movement of 1941, but they had ab­ sorbed all rivals and now reigned supreme. This did not mean that the Broederbond and its subsidiaries were no longer necessary. All that had happened to them was that they now truly fulfilled General Hertzog’s description (2) of being “nothing else but a purified Nationalist Party underground.” The first detailed exposition of the Nationalist Party’s labour policy, based __upon the principles of the “disciplined Christian- National State”, was given in Parliament on the 19th March, 1942, when Mr. B. J. Schoeman, the present Minister of Labour, said: (3), I want . . . to briefly touch upon a few of the main underlying principles (of the policy of my party). . . Firstly, we contend that wage control and wage fixation should be entirely in the hands of the State and that the power should be exercised through the medium of this permanent board.” “Secondly, and this is the most important principle — self-government in industry must be eliminated . . . Self-gov­ ernment in industry and collective bargaining are things of the past . . . the time has arrived that in the interests of the State, in the interests of employers and employees, self-government

( 1) Pages 16 and 17. (2) Smithfield, O .F.S., November, 1935. (3) Hansard Vol. 44. Col. 4190. 19th March, 1942.

29 in industry and collective bargaining should be eliminated from our economic life . . . ”

“In regard to the tton-Europeans, the unhealthy economic competition which is gradually arising and which will become more and more intense should be entirely eliminated. My party maintains that this can only be done by fixing a definite quota for Europeans and non-Europeans in unskilled, semi-skilled and skilled occupations in industry. We contend that only along those lines will the non-European in industry problem be solved . . ”

“The people of South Africa want something entirely new, something radical, and it is for the government of the future to give the people a new economic order. That is the only government that in future will ever command the support of the people of this country. I want to assure the people of South Africa that when my party soon takes over the government of this country we intend giving the people the new economic order.”

The following year, when seconding a motion by Dr. Malan, She then Leader of the Opposition, and present Prime Minister of South Africa, Mr. Schoeman said:— I1). “. . . This system of collective bargaining has outstayed its usefulness entirely. It was an essential part of our economic life in the past, and it is still so under the present capitalistic sys­ tem where the worker himself is responsible for his livelihood. Under the new economic system which ive ivant to bring about, it will, however, be redundant. The body by means of which this so-called collective bargaining takes place is the trades unions, but if the State accepts full responsibility for the fixing of ivages and the regulation of working conditions, the principal function of the present trade unions will disappear . . . under the new system the trade unions will be largely converted into actual workers’ organisations which tvill be representative of the work­ ers. These organisations will not so much be entrusted with the junction of obtaining better wages and better working con­ ditions by means of collective bargaining with the employers, they tvill be mainly entrusted with the task of regulating domes­ tic matters as between the employers and the employees. And for the rest of looking after the spiritual welfare of the ivork- 99

( I ) Hansard — Vol. 45. Col. 87/88 — 19th Jan., 1943.

30 In their Election Manifesto of 1943, the Nationalist Party stated :

Trade unionism on National lines has love and respect for its own culture, language and Church, which it consciously en­ deavours to cultivate among all the workers within the boun­ dary of the State and perpetuate from generation to generation. Just so shall the Church, the body par excellence, which in the past concerned itself with the poverty and sufferings of the Afrikaner throw in its weight behind National trade unionism and help to alleviate the lot of the worker.”

By 1948, the Nationalist Party had prepared what they de­ scribed as “A Dynamic and progressive policy,” which thev issued in a pamphlet entitled “THE ROAD TO A NEW SOUTH AFRICA.” (2). They declared that the “life of our State and Nation shall be based upon Christian and National principles.” However, an exami­ nation of the policy reveals that it has a remarkable resemblance to the machinery of the Fascist Corporate State.

This is immediately evident when one considers their statement: The Nationalist Party . . . recognises the right of private property and the claims of private initiative. In addition, how­ ever, it protects any one section against exploitation by another by a system of effective central supervision.” This “effective central supervision” is to be secured by a Central Economic Council, which will be the link between the Government and a “remodelled system of regulatory boards, each board being representative of its own trade, profession or industry.” Among other things this Central Economic Council will “advise the Government on the steps to be taken . . . to co-ordinate the diversified economic interests properly, to maintain social justice and to eliminate usurious activities.”

(1) Die Kruithoring (official Nationalist Newspaper) June, 1943. (2) Nasionale Pers — Capetown.

31 There is no significant difference between this proposal and Mussolini's Chamber of Corporations. The use of such phrases as “social justice” cannot conceal the true nature of the proposed State at the end of the “Road to a new South Africa.” As far as the workers — i.e. the majority of the people — are concerned, they will have to accept what their masters decide. Their affairs will be strictly controlled. This is laid down in Chapter IX — LABOUR, where the powers of workers’ organisations are defined. Despite the earlier assertion that they are in favour of the organisation of the working classes, the Nationalists lay down condi­ tions which would make such organisations a farce.

Here is their policy:— “ (c) Organisation of Labour. 1. The Party considers the organisation of the working classes just as that of any other economic section of its own terrain, as desirable and necessary for protecting and serving their own specific interests. Such organisation must therefore be encouraged by the State. Conversely, the State ought to guard against such organisation being misused, for pur­ poses inimical to the country and its people, or in order to disturb the proper and necessary equilibrium between the respective sectional interests in our economic structure. 2. The party considers the present system of wage control and the regulation of working conditions as ineffective, and proposes that the system of collective bargaining be supplemented by a system of State responsibility, exercised by means of the Central Economic Council f1) and the Labour Council as described above. 3. The Labour organisations will indicate, on their own, the members who are to represent them on the Labour Council and its subordinate councils or committees, and will have the right to make representations to the Government, to whom the Labour Council is to be responsible. 4. The Labour Council will exercise control over the appoint­ ment of officials by, and the general activities of, the trade unions and workers’ organisations.” The Nationalists have never changed this policy and they stand just as firmly by it now as they did when they first proclaimed it. To-day, as the Government of South Africa they are applying this

(I) Which see (page 31).

32 policy step by step. Their Commissions of Enquiry, their legislation, and their removal of trade union leaders are all part of the process of re-moulding the trade unions to conform to their own ideals. They do not care if those ideals horrify people who believe in real trade unions and their traditional freedom and functions. The Nationalist Party and Mr. Schoeman have been challenged to repudiate this policy or to deny that they are systematically apply­ ing it. That challenge has not been accepted. Nor will it be, for the Government is determined to achieve its “disciplined, Christian- National State”, which will have no place for trade unions of the usual kind.

We should not forget that it was the present Minister of Labour, Mr. B. J. Schoeman who threatened the workers of South Africa:— f1)- “ . . . There must be changes in the foreign British system, which does not conform to the character and traditions of the Afrikaner . . . the present (labour) system must be destroyed and a new one created . . .” Four years earlier, the same philosophy provoked him, in the face of such horrors as the concentration camps of Germany and the rape of neutral Holland, to say:— (2) . i “the whole future of Afrikanerdom is dependant upon a German victory.” Before examining the Labour Policy of the proposed new order, I would like to add some recent evidence of the Nationalist attitude to trade unionism and some of their reasons for condemning trade unionists as “dangerous leaders.” This can he found in a letter to the Star from Mr. J. du Pisanie, Nationalist M.P. for Germiston, in which he said: (3). “. . . there were and still are dangerous leaders in important positions in the trade unions who do not act for the benefit of the workers only. Although they are paid by the workers they use a great deal of their time against the ivish of the workers to

(1) Besmirch South Africa in foreign countries. (2 ) Preach equal rights for Europeans and non-Europeans . . .

( 1) Die Transvaler — 4th July, 1944. (2) Nationalist Party Congress, Bloemfontein. 3rd November, 1940. (3) The Star — 6th September, 1952.

33 {3) Persuade Christian ivorlters to accept the Communist doc­ trine, thus breaking the anchors which bind them to the church, their oivn people and their precious traditions ...... I told them to act against the leaders in their own interest. I asked them what they could possibly gain by only concentra­ ting upon money and so-called other benefits in the meantime while at a given moment they are robbed of their whole nation­ hood, their national pride, their white skin and their Christian religion.” Now let us consider some aspects of the Labour policy of the Nationalists and examine the conditions which they intend to im­ pose upon workers’ organisations.

Condition No. i. f1). “The State ought to guard such organisation being mis­ used for purposes inimical to the country and its people, or in order to disturb the proper and necessary equilibrium between the respective sectional interests in our economic structure.” It must be obvious that employers, for example, could deem a demand for higher wages, or a strike as “inimical to the country and its people.” A union seeking to take political action, as the British and the American trade unions do, could likewise be con­ sidered as acting against the “country and its people” particularly if they happened to oppose the economic policies of the party in power. K The second part of this paragraph is even more sinister. What is the necessary equilibrium between the . respective sectional in­ terests^ our economic structure” ? Who shall decide what is “equili­ brium ? Apparently the intention here is that workers’ organisations should do nothing to disturb the profit system. They should do nothing to get a larger slice of the cake, or to secure what they con­ sider to be economic justice. The Nationalist Party stands firmly behind the system of Capi­ talism, but not laissez faire. They are determined to protect the profit system by extensive Government intervention. When they talk of “equilibrium between the respective sectional interests in our eco­ nomic structure,” they are talking in terms of the Corporate State and National-Socialism.

( I ) See page 32.

34 Condition No. 2. (x). “The system of Collective Bargaining will be supplemented by a system of State Responsibility exercised by means of the Central Economic Council and the Labour Council

This condition should be read with Mr. Schoeman’s declarations that collective bargaining would be abolished altogether. To deal merely with the proposal to supplement collective bargaining with outside control, what better way could there be of destroying indus­ trial democracy? This would be unwarranted interference in the affairs of the Industrial Councils, which would consequently be ren­ dered useless. It is a proposal which conflicts with the accepted em­ ployer-employee relationships in modern democratic society.

Condition No. 3. (2). “The responsibilities arid duties of the Labour Council will include, inter alia . . . the flow of labour and its adjust­ ment to more than one industry . .

Surely this is nothing else but the direction of labour? It can be interpreted to mean that workers can be sent wherever the Labour Council may decide or that they may be diverted from one occupation to another, should such action be considered in the “national interest.” j

Condition No. 4. (3).

“The Labour Council will exercise effective control over the appointment of officials by, and general activities of the trade unions or ivorkers’ organisations.” This is the worst condition of all. It denies trades unions the democratic right to elect their own officials and conduct their own affairs. This is a most blatant proposal to shackle the unions and put them completely under the control of the Government. Perhaps more than anything else, this exposes the real intentions of Nationalist policy towards the workers. Free trade unions would disappear, to be replaced by mock unions, serving the interests of the hierarchy which controlled the “disciplined State.” At the present time, the Nationalist Government is fulfilling the

( 1) See page 32. (2) See page 32. (3) See page 32.

35 i f n f lhei -abfUu C°unci 1’ in that il is “suPe^ising the appoint, ment of officials of the trade unions, by removing all those trade union leaders of whom they disapprove.

., . *n J?16 *u.ture ^ may expect the Government to proceed with their policy of taming the trade unions until they no longer possess the united bargaining power which is so essential to them, and are reduced to impotence.

Condition No. 5.

it Th*s ^ n°t !tatad in specific terms in the “Road to a New South Africa, but it is an important part of Nationa ist Policy The concession that “the organisation of the working classes is desirable and necessary” does not apply to Native workers. According to the Nationalists, Natives can­ not be treated as ordinary workers. This year, when piloting his Native Labour (Settlement of Dis­ putes) Act through Parliament, Mr. B. J. Schoeman repeated time and again that he would under no circumstances agree to recognise or allow employers to negotiate with Native trade unions.

Speaking in the Senate, he said:— t1). I am convinced that the official recognition of Native trade unions will be detrimental to the interests of South Africa We can realise that if there is a strong, well-organised Native trade union movement in South Africa, and they uitilise those trade unions as a political weapon, at a given time they can create chaos in South Africa.”

In the House of Assembly, Mr. Schoeman expressed the view__ (2)- It is obvious that the stronger the Native trade union move­ ment should become, the more dangerous it would be to the Europeans in South 'Africa . . . we would probably be commit­ ting race suicide if we give them that incentive.”

With all these facts in relation to the Labour policy of the Nationalists, it does not require a wide stretch of imagination to visualise its effects upon the traditional forms of trade unionism in South Africa.

(1) Senate Hansard — 25th September, 1953. Cols. 943/4. (2) Assembly Hansard — 4th August, 1953, Col. 870.

36 ■

A great danger lies in the fact that the wild economic theories of the Nationalists have yet to be tested. The fact that similar theories for a new economic order in Europe led to devastation and death does not deter the economic theorists of South Africa. They believe that their policy for a “disciplined, Christian-National State,” will work. History can teach them nothing. During the formative years of Nationalist Party policy, the philosophy of the Corporate State found many admirers in that party. They saw in it hope for their own plans for a “New South Africa.” Meanwhile, things were stirring in the trade unions. The activi­ ties of the “Christian-National” movement were becoming more marked, particularly in the Mineworkers’ Union and the Garment Workers’ Union, the majority of whose members were Afrikaans­ speaking. Having examined the record and the policies of the Broe- derbond Octopus and that of its ally the Nationalist Party, we should now see what inroads they were making in the trade unions.

37 Chapter Five.

THE MINEWORKERS’ UNION.

"j"HE story of the Mineworkers’ Union would require a book in itself. It is the story of the fanaticism of Dr. Albert Hertzog (1) , son of the late General J. B. M. Hertzog, and the present Member of Parliament for Ermelo, representing the Nationalist Party. An ardent Broederbonder and its chief apostle of Christian* National trade unionism, he has played a leading role in the affair* of the Mineworkers’ Union since 1936. That was the year when a rich woman of Stellenbosch, Cape Province, donated £10,000 to­ wards a campaign to rescue Afrikaner miners from “the evil mate­ rialistic influences of the Witwatersrand.” On the 4th October, 1936,. a body was established under the name “Die Nasionale Raad van: Trustees”. It provided all the funds for Die Afrikaner Bond van. Mynwerkers, which was established in the 7th April 1937. On the 13th February 1938, the latter organisation changed its name to- “Die Hervormings Organisasie (in die Mynwerkersunie)”, or, as they became more commonly known, “The Reformers”. Under the leadership of Dr. Albert Hertzog, the Reformers, became very active among members of the Mineworkers’ Union In, 1941, as the result of serious discontent among the miners, the Government set up a Commission to enquire into the affairs of this. Union. The Commission found, among other things, that the activities- of the Reformers were “disruptive and detrimental to the interests of the miners” and that “if the Nasionale Raad van Trustees had not been established and not supplied the sinews of war, there would have, been no Reformers.” The Report of the Commission contains some revealing infor­ mation about the activities of these two groups, worth repeating here:—- “The Reformers openly informed the Commission that they had

(I) Dr. Albert Hertzog is a Director of Afrikaner Pers Bpk., publishers of the- newspaper "D ie Vaderland." He is also a Director of Volkslcas Bpk., a* nation-wide banking organisation with assets exceeding £30,000,000.

/ 38 already decided who should hold the various paid officials' posts in the Mineivorkers’ Union when they took it over. The *Shadow Cabinet’ was cdready in existence. Rule 6 of the Reformers reads as follows:— In order to link the Mineivorkers with all other Christian National trade unions throughout the whole country, the Reformers’ Organisation seeks contact with such move­ ments and the General Council is empowered to take the necessary steps in this connection.’ The Reformers further stated that in accordance with this rule, as and when the Mineivorkers’ Union was controlled by them, they would make a start with the Garment Workers’ Union and carry out the same reform methods there (from within) after which they would tackle trade union after trade union in the same manner.

The Commission desires to draw particular attention to -Rule 3 of the Reformers in which their aim is described as follows:— "“(a) To convert the existing Mineworkers’ Union along consti­ tutional lines into an Afrikaans Christian-National Trade Union. (b) Through such conversion to place the South African Mine- workers’ Union at the real service of the mineworkers, and to protect and promote their economic, social and cultural interests; -(c) Through the Reformed Mineworkers’ Union to place the mutual relationship between mineworker and mineworker, and between the mineworker and the rest of “Die Afri- kaanse Volksgroep” on a sound foundation for the benefit of the ivhole community; (d) To cleanse the Mineworkers’ Union of all foreign and wrong influences and to free it from the international and communistic Trades and Labour Council; (e) to guard and to strive for the maintenance of the colour bar in the Mining Industry as well as in all the ramifica­ tions of our industries.’. . . . For the reasons which appear in this finding the Commis­ sion is fully satisfied that the powers behind the Reformers are much less actuated by an honest desire to reform the affairs and administration of the Union in the sole interests of the

39 Deport fiom its delegates to the Trade Union Conference at Port Elizabeth at Easter, 1947, then gave three months’ notice that it would disaffiliate from the Irades and Labour Council, because:— . . . the Trades and Labour Conference is now dominated by communistic influences and the Conference was comprised of a record number of Coloured and Native d e le g a te s (1). Dr. Albert Hertzog was welcomed as an honorary member of the Union’s General Council. With characteristic vigour, he became •extremely active in its affairs and it is no exaggeration to say that he was looked upon as its guiding star. In many things, however, he had to take second place to another strong personality. That was the new General Secretary of the Union, Mr. D. E. Ellis, who was later (July 1951) described by a 'Commission of Enquiry as being “very much in the position of a Dictator, ruling the Mineworkers’ Union with a firm hand.” (2) . With this new enthusiasm, things began to move in the Union. Dr. Hertzog, excited in the glimpse of an ambition achieved, brazenly •challenged his own Party and its National-Capitalist policy, by de­ manding the nationalisation of the gold mines. He told the Mine- workers:— (3). “/ am satisfied that for all those who look to the future of South Africa, there is only one solution, and that is that, irre­ spective of any, other key industries, the Cold Mining Industry- should be nationalised by the State.” His leader, Dr. Malan, was overseas at the time, but reacted Immediately. He repudiated Dr. Hertzog’s impulsive suggestion with a blunt statement that the Government contemplated no sweeping measures such as the nationalisation of the gold mines.” This long­ distance rebuke, and a rap over the knuckles at home, silenced Dr. Hertzog on the burning question of nationalisation. He has not mentioned it since. However, the Mineworkers’ Union was forging closer links with the Nationalist Party. At an Executive meeting of the Union, held in April 1949, several Nationalist Party members of Parliament were made “honorary mineworkers”. In a press statement it was announced:— (4). “A Vigilance Committee is to be formed for closer co-operation

( 1) Rand Daily Mail — 30th A p ril, 1947. (2) Report of the Mineworkers Commission of Enquiry U S. 52/1951. (3) Die Transvaler -— 27th A p ril 1949. (4) Die Burger — 27th A p ril 1949.

41 with the Head Committee of the Nationalist Party, to promote the interests of the mineivorker.

This information was given to the representative of Die Burger by Air. Paul Visser and Mr. Daan Ellis, Chairman and Secretary, respectively, of the Mineworkers’ Union. The Parliamentary sub-committee consisting of Nationalist M.P.s, who will look after the interests of the mineworkers while in Cape Town, was also approved by the Council. Hon­ orary membership of the Union has been granted to these mem­ bers. The members are:— Dr. Albert Hertzog, Dr. N. Diederichs, Mr. M. ]. van den Berg, Mr. de Villiers Visser, Minister Ben Schoeman, Prof. A. I. Medan, Mr. Franz Mentz, Mr. Dirk Mostert, Mr. J. du Plessisr Mr. A. J. B. Deysel. They have already declared themselves to be prepared to under­ take this special task.” The wisdom of making this public announcement did not seem to strike the enthusiasts of the movement at the time. However, there were soon murmurings inside the Union and on the Government side, the Minister of Labour some time later casually denied that he hadf accepted this proffered role of “honorary mineworker”. There was no* public reaction from the Mineworkers’ Union. The vigour and determination of Dr. Albert Hertzog brought activity and enterprise into the affairs of the Mineworkers’ Union. At the beginning of 1950 the Union established its own publishing house, Die Werkerspers Uitgewers Maatskappy (Edms.) Bpk., which produced not only the official organ of the Union, “Die Mynwerker,” but also two other papers, “Die Bouwerker” and “Die Klerewerkers- nuus”. The purpose of the latter two publications was to campaign among workers in the building industry and the clothing industry, urging them to throw out the leaders of their trade unions and replace them with “right-thinking officials with a true South African out­ look.” Very soon the publishing house was involved in a number of libel suits. The story is best told by quoting the comment of a Com­ mission of Enquiry, (-1) viz.:—

(I) Mineworkers' Union Commission of Enquiry Report UG. 52/1951. This Commission was appointed by the Government to enquire into certain financial transactions of the Union, particularly the purchase of Transafrika House for £ 176,000, on which a certain Dr .Kritzinger made a profit o f £23,000.

42 •“36. DIE WERKERSPERS LITGEWERS MAATSKAPPY (EIENDOMS), BEPERK.

The Union issues its own newspaper “DIE MYNWERKER Up to the beginning of 1950 the paper was printed by the Voortrekkerpers and distributed by the Union. Then the publishing Company was formed. We have not been able to ascertain any valid reason for the flotation of the Com­ pany. The Editor-in-Chief was Dr. Albert Hertzog, ivho was the Chairman of the Board of Directors, but the real editor teas Gleisner. In addition to publishing DIE MYNWERKER the Company published two other papers, known as DIE KLEREWERKER and DIE BOUWERKER. The inner con­ tents of all three papers are the same, but in the case of the KLEREW'ERKER and the BOUW'ERKER, the outside covers contain a different editorial, and other matter which is different from that contained in the MYNW'ERKER. We are told by Gleisner that the material utilised for the BOUW'ERKER and the KLEREW'ERKER was derived from persons known as Laubscher and Beetge, who were persons working against the existing controlling authorities in the Garment Workers’ Union and in the Building Trade Union, respectively.

Material published in these two papers have led to a number of libel actions. To date, judgements of £2,800 and £1,800 have been given against the Company. Other judgements are likely to follow and we are informed that the Company has suspended business and is likely to be liquidated. The Union stands to lose an amount of £4,027 invested in this Company. We are of the opinion that it is proper for the Union to publish its own neivspaper, but we see no reason why a publishing company should be formed for such publication. The Union was ill-advised to meddle in the affairs of other Unions and such meddling appears to us to fall outside the powers of the Executive Committee under its Constitution, and perhaps outside the objects of a trade union as envisaged by the Industrial Conciliation Act.

W'e also consider that the Union Executive should not associate itself with any political group; its members are drawn from all political groups and by reason of the closed- shop principle miners have no option but to belong to the Union.”

43 damages and legal costs awarded against them for defamation, re­ peated the charges against Mr. Huyser in Parliament on the 9 th September, 1953. This time Mr. Huyser could not sue for defama­ tion because Dr. Hertzog was protected by Parliamentary immunity. The Commission of Enquiry, which had commented in such severe terms upon the newspaper venture of the Mineworkers’ Union, was even more blunt in its findings on the matter of the property transaction:— (1).

*’• • • we have no doubt that Ellis was promised a reward by Kritzinger if he ivere to use his influence to bring about the purchase of Transafrika House by the Union . . . We are un­ able to determine the exact terms of the original promise, as obviously neither Ellis nor Kritzinger will tell the truth on this subject; but it is clear that the interest in the bottle store was given in pursuance of some promise.”

The Commission then suggested that the Union should decide for itself what action, if any, should be taken in regard to their findings. The Union decided to take no action. However, in March 1953, Mr. Paul Visser, the ex-President of the Union brought a private prosecution against Mr. Ellis on a charge of falsitas. Ellis was found guilty of accepting a bribe and sentenced to eighteen months’ im­ prisonment with hard labour. He appealed against this conviction and on the 4th December, 1953 the Transvaal Supreme Court set aside the conviction and sen­ tence, on the grounds that the private prosecutor, Mr. P. J. Visser had no title to prosecute. Application has now been made for the case to be taken to the Appellate Division. The case between Ellis and Visser brought to light other mat­ ters upon which members of the Mineworkers’ Union were voicing dissatisfaction, one of them being a Funeral Benefit Scheme. The Government appointed a Commission of Enquiry “to investigate the Union’s assets and the financial benefits it undertook to furnish to its members, etc.” (2). ihe Report of this Commission was released in November 1953. It declared that “the negotiations in connection with the funeral in­ surance scheme were carried out in an impractical and unbusiness­ like manner and that before the contract was made, no proper in-

( 1) See Footnote Page 42. (2) Government Notice 1088 — 22nd May 1953.

45 vestigation was made, no expert advice was obtained and no refe­ rendum was taken among the members of the Union.” (1). The Commissioners recommended that the scheme be thoroughly investigated de novo and that the Union should try to have the existing contract amended, failing which, it should be terminated. They commented upon the fact that while the Union should have accepted the most advantageous contract, it seemed as though the members of both the sub-committee and the Executive Committee had decided to place the contract with the firm which quoted 2 / 3 per member per month for 15 years, rather than with the firm which had tendered 1/- per member per month for 3 years or 1/3 per member per month for 10 years. As far as the administration of the funds of the Union are concerned, the Commission recommended that expenditure and in­ vestments should be undertaken by the Executive Committee only after the approval of either the General Council or members of the Union, has been obtained. The Report contains other criticisms and recommendations affecting the general administration and manage­ ment of the Union. Despite all its troubles and the many Commissions that have been appointed to investigate its affairs, the Mineworkers’ Union does not fall within the scope of those unions which the Nationalists deem to be under “dangerous leadership” or subject to “corrupt influences.” In this Chapter we have shown that this Union is now under “Christian-National” leadership, which is strongly pro-Govern- ment. It is, therefore, like Caesar’s wife, above suspicion. Nevertheless, the events in the Mineworkers’ Union contain grave dangers for trade unionism generally. The Government, seeking excuses for interfering in the affairs of the unions, may well quote some of the unsavoury happenings inside the Mineworkers’ Union to justify action against trade unions generally. At the time of writing, there are further rumblings of discon­ tent among the miners. Yet there are few signs that the Mineworkers’ Union is moving in the direction of militancy and reform along true and traditional trade union lines. One of its greatest handicaps is its refusal to recognise and support the economic needs of the Native mineworkers.

11) Die Vaderland — 26th November, 1953.

46 Chapter S ix .

THE GARMENT WORKERS’ UNION.

"j~HE Garment Workers’ Union has been the target of the Christian - National movement for twenty years.. The-Mineworkers’ Union Commission of Enquiry (1941) stated in its Report that the Re­ formers (created hy Die Nasionale Raad van Trustees) had openly declared that their objective after getting control of the Mineworkers’ Union was “to make a start with the Garment Workers’ Union and carry out the same reform tactics there, after which they would tackle trade union after trade union in the same manner.” (1). In view of this it is not surprising that the Garment Workers’ Union has constantly been engaged in defensive battles against at­ tackers from within and without. In his book “The Choice before South Africa,” Mr. E. S. Sachs, the ex-General Secretary of the Union has told an amazing story. In 1931 gangs shouting: “We are Nationalists,” tried on many occasions to break up meetings of garment workers in Germiston In 1932 following upon a strike of garment workers, Mr. Oswald Pirow, as Minister of Justice in the Nationalist Govern­ ment of that time, banished Mr. Sachs from the Witwatersrand. In 1937, Sachs was waylaid by a gang of hooligans and violently assaulted. Again in 1940 he was assaulted and laid up for a week. In September 1948, a general meeting of the Union in the Johannes­ burg City Hall was broken up. In 1949, the Minister of the Interior, Dr. Donges cancelled his passport, but Sachs successfully appealed to the Courts, and had it restored to him. In the campaign to oust Sachs and gain control of the Garment Workers’ Union, vilification and slander were popular weapons. Determined to expose these methods and to protect the members of his Union from the disrupters, Sachs always took action against his slanderers, who either settled out of Court or had damages awarded against them. In 1939, “Die Oosterlig”, a Nationalist party paper in Port Elizabeth, paid Sachs £250 damages and costs. “Die Vaderland” paid him £1 0 0 . “Die O.B.,” official organ of Die Ossewabrandwag,

( I) See Page 39.

47 a pro-fascist organisation which later was absorbed by Mr. N. C. Havenga’s Afrikaner Party, paid him £250 and costs. Dr. ff. P. Wolmarans, the author of a pamphlet entitled “Communism and the South African Trade Unions”, paid him £300 and costs. The printers of the pamphlet, Die Voortrekkerpers, were taken to Court and had £600 damages and costs awarded against them. In 1945, Sachs was awarded £300 and costs against the Rev. Dr. A. B. du Preez. That was not the end of his successful Court actions. On the 30th May, 1951 he won £2,900 and costs against Die Werkerspers Uitgewers Maatskappy (Edms.) Bpk., for defamatory articles appear­ ing in a newspaper it published under the name of “Klerewerkers- nuus.” (1). This series of successful legal actions proves that throughout the years Sachs never hesitated to test his honour and integrity before the Courts of the land; and it also establishes the guilt of his de- famers. The more he was attacked from outside, the greater his sup­ port grew inside the Union. But there were other means of dealing with Sachs. With the advent to power of the Nationalist Party, Sachs' 24 years as Secretary of the Garment Workers’ Union were coming to an end. A vigorous and determined fighter, Sachs had shown his ability as a negotiator on behalf of the employees in the clothing industry. He was instrumental in raising the standards of garment workers’ to a remarkable degree. Between 1928 and 1951 the average weekly wage of women workers rose from £1 to £7, and that for men from £3 to £15, while working hours dropped from 50 to 40 per week and paid annual holidays increased from 2 days to 28 days. These changes were brought about because the Union was strong and well organised and its leaders were competent and courageous. It is worthy of note that while wages increased and the conditions of the workers improved the Clothing Industry prospered. This material progress seemed to inflame the elements who were desperately striving to capture the Union. On the 26th May, 1948, the Nationalist Party won the general elections and became the Government of South Africa. On the 16th September 1948, the Garment Workers’ Union held a general meeting at the Johannesburg City Hall, to consider a new Wage Agreement. There were about 3,000 members of the Union present. In the midst of the proceedings a mob stormed the Hall,

( I ) See Page 44 for full story.

48 lighting broke out and the meeting ended in disorder. Workers were assaulted, furniture broken and papers torn up. The following morning the Union telegraphed the Minister of Justice, asking him to take action against those who had broken into the meeting. Instead, the Minister of Labour Mr. B. J. Schoeman, appointed a Commission to investigate not only the disturbances but also “the •circumstances which gave rise to such disturbances and the affairs •and administration of the Garment W orkers' Union.” The Commis­ sion sat for almost a year and, according to Sachs, cost the Union over £5,000 in legal costs. Its Report f1) waJs submitted on the 24th September, 1949 but provided the Government with nothing upon which it could take action against the Garment Workers1 Union •or any of its officials. In one regard the Report is a remarkable docu­ ment. It has wandered far from the “affairs Und administration of the Garment Workers’ Union”, and has embraced the whole trade union movement, making recommendations that strike at the very fundamentals of free trade unionism. For example, the Commission wants the law to empower the Minister “upon receipt of proof which he deems sufficient” to investigate whether funds are being applied in an unconstitutional manner and also to institute an inquiry “where •a trade union seeks to promote personal, political or ideological aims which are foreign or contrary to the interests of such trade union •or members of such trade union.” Those who had hoped that the Commission of Enquiry would provide the excuse to purge the Garment Workers’ Union were dis­ appointed. Three years passed. In that time, the so-called Suppres­ sion of Communism Act became law and Sachs’ name was put on the secret list of the Liquidator. The Government had acted upon the legal right under the law: “You are a Communist if the Gov­ ernment says so.” The days of Sachs as General Secretary of the Garment Workers’ Union were over. On the 8 th May, 1952, a Gov •eminent edict succeeded where the apostles of “Christian-National” trade unions had repeatedly failed. The Minister of Justice ordered Sachs to resign from the Union and “not again to become an office­ bearer, officer or member of the Union.” He was also prohibited from attending any gatherings and was confined to the Transvaal Province. This time Sachs could not seek protection in the Courts. The Suppression of Communism Act denied him the right of trial in a Court of Law.

U ) Report of the Garment Worker's Union, Commission of Enquiry 1948/9. UG. 16/1950.

49 The members of the Union were aroused and rallied to his defence. They held a meeting on the City Hall Steps, Johannesburg on Saturday, 24th May, 1952, to protest against the banning of their leader. The police arrived and arrested Sachs. There was immediate uproar and the police made two brutal baton charges upon the crowd. The Government refused to hold an Enquiry into the events of that morning. Indignant citizens came forward and gave eye-witness accounts of the assaults upon the audience. The Trades and Labour Council, in conjunction with the Civil Rights League sponsored a Private Commission of Enquiry, the members of the Commission being three leading Advocates of the Supreme Court, Messrs. N. E. Coaker, Q.C., H. C. Juta and W. S. McEwan. The Commissioners found that the Police Report of the affair was full of inaccuracies and quoted examples where the Report erred on points of fact, ft concluded that “in our opinion all force used by the police upon members of the crowd from the time of the first baton charge amounted in law to assault.” j1). After Sachs had been removed, the Union elected Miss Johanna Cornelius to the position of General Secretary. In April 1953, the Union held its elections for the positions of President and General Secretary. During the elections, Mr. G. L. H. van Niekerk, a candi­ date for the position of General Secretary, declared himself to be a Nationalist “and proud of it.” (2). He campaigned together with Mr. Carel Meyer, who stood for the position of President. The results of the elections were as follows:— For President. Miss A. Scheepers______12,570 Mr. Carel Meyer___c ______3.569 For Secretary. Miss J. Cornelius______12,970 Mr. G. L. H. van Niekerk______3,679 In the light of these figures, there can be no doubt that the vast majority of the members of the Garment Workers’ Union are loyal to those who have led them these many years. The support received by Miss Scheepers and Miss Cornelius is in effect a vote of confidence not only in them, but also in the man who was thrown out by the Government — Solly Sachs. However, that does not make the Union safe from those who wish to divide the Union on racial lines and to convert a section of it into a “Christian-National” appendage of the Nationalist Partv.

(1) Report to the sponsors of a Private Commission of Enquiry into certain events in Johannesburg on the 24th May, 1952. (2) Die Transvaler — 3 1st March, 1953.

50 Chapter Seven.

THE BUILDING WORKERS.

REFERENCE has been made in a previous chapter to the story of how the Minew'orkers’ Union, having established Die Werkers- pers (Edms.) Bpk. began to issue a newspaper called “Die Bou- werker,” designed to carry its “Christian-National” propaganda to workers in the building industry. This newspaper began a campaign against the leadership of the Amalgamated Unibn of Building Trade Workers of South Africa. It referred to the National Organiser. Mr. P. J. Huyser and the General Secretary, Mr. W. Blake as the “Huy- ser/Blake clique”, and accused them of being communists. In view of the great play that is being made by the Government •of the “Communist” bogey, and the protestations of its spokesmen, •such as Dr. Albert Hertzog, M.P., that they are on a holy mission to save South African workers from the evils of communism, the fol­ lowing excerpt from one issue of Die Bouwerker, l1) is revealing. It illustrates what the Nationalists and their allies consider to be a communist:— “There is a simple way open to the Huy serf Blake clique of dis­ proving Die Bouwerker s accusations that they are communistic- ally inclined and that they are using typically communistic methods which will result in the weakening and disruption of their trade union” “CHALLENGE TO HUYSER/BLAKE.” “This is what the clique will have to do:— ( 1 ) to declare that they are opposed to the “full legal recogni­ tion” of trade unions for Natives (as far as Die Bouwer­ ker knows they were among the chief promoters in getting that policy adopted by the Trades and Labour Council.)” There follow two other points affecting the election of officials, which are not relative here. Under the Suppression of Communism Act, with its

( I) 13th March, 1950.

51 wide definition of ‘'Communism” and “communists”, it is not sur­ prising that Mr. Huyser has now been ordered by the Government to resign from his position as National Organiser of the Amalgamated Union of Building Trade Workers of South Africa. Proof of a per­ son’s “communism or communistic outlook” apparently lies in their support of the principle of legal recognition of trade unions for Natives.

Mr. Huyser instituted an action for damages against Die Wer- kerspers (Edms.) Bpk., Die Voortrekkerpers Bpk. (the printer) and' Mr. Jan Gleisner (the Editor) for various attacks made upon him: in “Die Bouwerker”. The case was heard before Mr. Justice Bams- hottom, part of whose Judgement, delivered on the 26th June. 1951, is worth quoting:— The facts are as follows . . . As I have mentioned above, the first defendant, the Company, was formed to publish “Die Myn- werker of which Gleisner ivas the Editor. The Chairman of the board of directors was Dr. 'Albert Hertzog a member of Parlia­ ment; no member of the board was employed in the building industry. As a result of his association with Dr. Hertzog, so Gleisner told the Court, he became convinced that the trade union movement had got into the hands of persons who were not “national minded” but whose ideas ivere “international,r rather than “National”, and that these people should be re­ moved from the position they held and replaced by others who had a truly South African outlook. This divergence of outlook appears to have manifested itself in the view that was taken of the colour bar and of natives in trade unions. According to Gleisner, the “national minded” worker was opposed to natives in trade unions, and in favour of a colour bar, whereas those whom he wishes to displace held the opposite view. Having become thoroughly convinced of the truth of this doctrine, Gleis­ ner was willing to fall in with the suggestion put to him by Dr. Hertzog that the company should increase its activities and publish a newspaper that would serve as the organ of those employees in the building industry who were “National minded.” Beetge teas introduced to him as the man who had knowledge and who would give him all the necessary information. As I have said above, the intention was that various bodies should produce their own newspapers which should be published by the Company, but it ivas decided not to wait for that, but to proceed at once with the production and publication of Die Bouwerker. Whose interests ivas this paper to serve, and for whom was it to be the organ? As far as the evidence before me shows, it teas to be the organ of a faction led by Beetge, who candidly admitted that in his opinion it was impossible to keep

52 politics out of trade unionism, and a few others who were a self appointed “action committee”. What was the struggle about which so much has been said? The evidence does not , satisfy me that there was any struggle or conflict among the members until this faction decided to create a conflict, to oust the officials of the Union, and to take their places. That, I think is the true background against which the activities of Die Bou- werker must be viewed. The technique was simple. The executive group was labelled as a “clique”, and that group was given the name Huyser/ Blake; Die Bouwerker then embarked upon a campaign of abuse, the target being the “Huyser/Blake clique” or Huyser himself. Although, as a public man in the B.W.I.U., the plaintiff was a person whose official activities were a sub­ ject for lawful criticism, what was done bore no resemblance to the legitimiate criticism of public men. In each of the four articles which / have found to be defamatory the facts were falsely stated and the so-called criticism consisted of abuse and the imputation of dishonourable conduct to the persons abused. The argument that no ill will was felt towards the plaintiff personally is untenable. The plaintiff was named- time after time, and was singled out for attack. The argument that the articles constituted arguments in favour of the policy of the “opposition” cannot be taken seriously; there is not a word of argument in favour of any policy in any of the articles. Now that Mr. Huyser has been removed from his position as Trade Union organiser by Government edict, the Building Workers’ Union will be exposed to renewed activities on the part of those who struggled unsuccessfully for so many years to “kick out all the com­ munists.” The convenient Suppression of Communism Act has provided the Government with the means to clear the path for the disrupters. In the process the Union suffers. It loses a man with a fine record of service. His achievements on behalf of his fellow building work­ ers are contemptuously ignored. He is a forceful and determined opponent of the Nationalists and their policies and is therefore thrown out on the street, for him and his family to starve for alb the Government cares. A brief summary of the benefits obtained for the building work­ ers during the period that Mr. Piet Huyser was an official of the Amalgamated Union of Building Trade Workers is as follows:—

1. Paid public holidays and paid annua! leave. 2. Reduction of working hours from 44 in a six day week to 40 hours in a five day week. 3. A sick fund. 4. An inclement weather fund, whereby the basic wage is made up to £7 per week, should workers be put off in bad weather. 5. A pension fund, which includes old-timers who made no contributions.

6 . Death benefits. 7. Greatly increased Cost-of-living allowances.

8 . A Tool Insurance Fund. 9. Tool allowances. 10. A Safety Code, and Compensation in case of accidents. 11. Two days’ notice, instead of instant dismissal as previously. 12. Travelling and Country allowances and the provision of accommodation and other facilities for those working on jobs in distant areas. This is a formidable list of achievements. They were not easily obtained. They were won through the ability and determination of those whom the Nationalist disrupters describe as “The Huyser- Blake Clique.” To-day Mr. Piet Huyser is forbidden to remain a member of the trade union for which he has done so much. He is also unable to work at his trade where the “Closed Shop” operates. If he were to go back to his trade, he would be compelled to suffer the shame of being a “Non-Union” employee amongst trade unionists. In other rvords, he would have to be a “scab” amongst his fellows. For a man writh a long record of trade unionism and a contempt for non­ union workers, this would be insufferable shame. Thus works the tyranny of Nationalism.

54 Chapter Eight.

THE LEATHERWORKERS’ UNION - AN EXAMPLE AND A WARNING.

THE Leatherworkers’ Union comes in for special mention to illustrate _ what can happen to a peaceful, well-conducted union, once it is subjected to interference by the Government. Mr. Willie Kalk had been secretary of the Leatherworkers’ Union for 2 2 years, having been elected to that position in 1931. He was an active trade unionist, following in the strong trade union footsteps of his father, who, incidentally had fought on the side of the Boers in the Anglo-Boer War of 1900/2. But Mr. Willie Kalk was one of those trade union officials whose name had been placed upon the Liquidator’s List under the Suppression of Communism Act. On the 20th August, 1953, he was ordered to resign from his post as Secretary of the Union. Immediately there was a crisis in the Union. A minority group became active, attacking the Union's Executive, labelling them the “Kalk-Scheepers Clique”. On their demand, a special general meeting of the Union was called to con­ sider a motion of no confidence in the Executive. The meeting soon got out of hand and became so disorderly that the Chairman de­ clared it closed. The minority group, numbering about 74, and led by the Assist­ ant Organiser, Mr. E. A. Socher, remained behind and proceeded to elect a new Chairman and Secretary. Mr. Socher was the Secretary elected. However, the Executive of the Union declared this meeting unconstitutional and refused to recognise its decisions. In addition, the Executive dismissed Mr. Socher “because of his unconstitutional behaviour at the general meeting”. I1). Meanwhile, a secret ballot for the election of a General Secretary to replace Mr. Kalk was proceeding amongst the members of the Union, under the supervision of a firm of auditors and scrutineers elected by the members at a special general meeting on the 8 th September, 1953.

(I) "Saamtrek" — 2nd October, 1953.

55 result of the ballot revealed the weakness of the minority group. x\lr. L. C. Seheepers received 2,056 votes and Mr E A hocher 422. The minority group, led by Mr. Socher then began to agitate for the formation of a separate Union. At first they' accepted the support of about 50 or 60 Coloured workers but later rejected it, declaring that the new union would be confined to European leather- workers Meetings of the breakaway section were held, which were attended by Mr. J. Loubscher of the Blankewerkersbeskermingsbond 4 > and Nagel of the S.A. Iron & Steelworkers’ Association of Eretona these two gentlemen were the principal speakers at a meeting held at the Selborne Hall, Johannesburg, on the 14th Octo- ber, 1953, which was called to discuss the formation of a new Union. It should be noted that neither of them is a member of the Leather- workers Union, nor are they employed in that industry. The main theme of the meeting was a complaint that White workers were outnumbered by Coloureds in the existing Union and consequently swamped and placed in a dangerous and inferior position. To this Mr. A. H. Henry, Chairman of the Leatherworkers’ •Union replied:— (2).

On no occasion have the Coloured workers voted along racial lines in the leather industry. Never has there been a rift on any question on the lines of colour. Had this been so, the Europeans would have broken away long ago and not waited 2 2 years. This is also borne out by the present composition of the Execu- live Committee, consisting of 9 Europeans and 4 Coloured mem- hers. Had the Coloured workers been motivated by sectional in­ terests they would have elected an all-Coloured Executive Com­ mittee.”

It is obvious, therefore, that the disappointed candidate, Mr. E. A. bocher, and his followers are taking full advantage of the situa­ tion created by the Government in order to further their own emb Ihey have now applied to the Industrial Registrar for registration of a new union, which they have named “Die Leer- en Aanverwante Bedrywe Werkersorganisasie” (The Leather and Allied Trades Workers Association). Commenting upon this move, Mr. L. C. Seheepers, the General Secretary who has been elected to replace Mr. Kalk in the Leather- workers Union, observes that the proposed Union could at best

U ) Mr. Laubscher (or Loubscher) is the Organiser of the Blankewerkersbesker- rningsbond. For more about him see page 19 (et seq.). '(2) "Saamtrek" — 23rd October, 1953.

56 cater for a minority of European workers only. He estimates this minority at not more than 300, about one-third of the total number of Europeans in the trade. The final outcome of the whole affair has yet to be seen. Fortu­ nately, tfm majority of the members of the Leatherworkers’ Union have remained loyal. \et, under Government pressure, their position remains precarious. Chapter Nine.

THE SUPPRESSION OF COMMUNISM ACT.

THE Suppression of Communism Act became law on the 17 th July, 1950. The following year it was drastically amended to throw the net wider and to make offences retrospective. This law is the means whereby the Government is clearing the way for the conversion of South African Trade Unions into organi­ sations which conform to their “Christian-National” ideology. Not only Communists but all militant, anti-Nationalist trade union lead­ ers are being removed from their posts. The Government has merely to place their names upon a Liquidator’s List and thereafter dispose of them without the embarrassment of having to prove their case in the Courts. The accused persons have no recourse to law. The South African anti-communist law has little, if anything, to do with communism. Its definitions of “Communism” and “Commu­ nist” are so wide that any person with liberal, radical, progressive or even eccentric opinions can be deemed a communist or guilty of “ furthering the interests of communism.” The Suppression of Communism Act (Act No. 44 of 1950 as amended by Act No. 50 of 1951) confers despotic powers upon the Government, giving it the unfettered right to:— ------Compile a secret list of persons who are “deemed” to be communists or members or active supporters of any organi­ sation declared to be illegal under the Act. (Before being listed, persons are given a “reasonable” opportunity to show why they should not be listed, but they are denied the right to prove their innocence before Courts of Law.) (Sub-section 10 of Section 4.). ------Order persons whose names are on the Liquidator s list to resign from public office or from membership of any or­ ganisation, including trade unions. In the case of Members of Parliament and Provincial Councils, a Select Committee of Parliament, always with a majority of Government members, sits in judgement.

58 Two such Select Committees have already sat and, as a• result, tivo Native Representatives in Parliament and one in the Cape Provincial Council, have been expelled from office. ------Prohibit persons whose names are on the Liquidator s List from attending gatherings of any kind (Sections 5 and 9) and order them to remain in one particular area (Section 10 ). - • ------Enter any premises at any time, without previous notice, seize documents and books, question individuals, either alone or in the presence of others. (Section 7). ■ --- Close doivn newspapers or publications without notice or without reason. (Section 6 ). ----- Prohibit gatherings. (Section 9). ■ --- Presume anyone to be guilty of being a member of an illegal organisation or of defending its objects, unless such per­ son can prove otherwise. (Section 12 as amended). ------Confiscate property. (Section 13). ------Deport persons and deem them to be prohibited immi­ grants. (Section 14). The law is retrospective and persons can be deemed guilty of an offence for having done something which was perfectly lawful before this Act was passed. Slanderers are protected in Section 17 bis, which makes it lawful and nori-libellous to call a person a “Communist” once his name is upon the Liquidator’s List. The application of the Suppression of Communim Act proves- that its chief objective was to purge the trade unions. As a matter of fact, the original Bill which the Government introduced in Par­ liament actually made it possible for the Government to declare trade unions to be illegal organisations. However, as a result of protests from the trade unions, a proviso was added, exempting trade unions registered under the Industrial Conciliation Act. As Native trade unions are not legally recognised and are now specifically excluded from the Industrial Concliation Act, as a result of the passing of the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act (Act No. 48 of 1953), they can be declared to be “Communist” organisations and therefore illegal and their officials and members can be made subject to the severe penalties provided in the Suppres­ sion of Communism Act. While certain strikes of workers are excluded from the provisions

59 of the Act, in many instances it will be possible to declare Native strikes “acts of communism” and the strikers can be deemed com­ munists. Section Five of the Act makes it obligatory for the Minister of Justice to consult the Minister of Labour before placing the name of any trade union member, officer or official upon the Liqui­ dator’s List. In practice this has become a mere formality and has not saved a single trade unionist from being listed. In reply to a question in Parliament, I1) the Minister of Justice said that the names of 53 trade union officials had been placed upon the List and that in every case the Minister of Labour had been consulted in terms of Section 5 (3) of the Act. In no case did the Minister of Labour object. Once a trade uqionist’s name goes on the List, the Minister of Labour has no more say. By the 18th September, 1953, no less than 33 trade union officials had been removed from their posts by the decree of the Minister of Justice. (2). Since then about another fifteen have been ordered to resign their posts. In all cases these officials have also been prohibited from attending gatherings of any kind. The following are some of the trade union officials concerned, together with the names of their unions. Name of Official Trade Union

P. J. Huyser Amalgamated Union of Building Trade Workers. E. S. Sachs Garment W orkers’ Union R. H . Fleet S.A. Hairdressers' Employees' Union. Miss Joey Fourie — Ditto. — W . Kalk Leatherworkers' Union. M. Muller Textile Workers' Industrial Union. A. Selby — Ditto — I. Wolfson Tailoring Workers' Industrial Union E. Weinberg National Union of Commercial' Travellers. Miss E. S. du To it National Union of Laundering, Cleaning Dyeing W orkers. D. J. du Plessis — Ditto — Miss R. Alexander Food & Canning W orkers' Union. S. Rosenblatt National Baking Employees' Union Miss H . le Roux Sweet Workers' Union. M iss J. Wolfson Jewellers' & Goldsmiths' Union. Miss N. Dick Textile W orkers Ind. Union (Cape)

(1) Hansard — 21st July, 1953, Col. 237. (2) Hansard — 18th September, 1953, Col. 3674.

60 Among the ]\on-European trade union officials who have been ordered to resign from their unions are the following:—

Name of Official Trade Union. John Gomas Chemical & Allied W orkers’ Union James Phillips Garment Workers' Union. A. T. Mat! S.A. Railway & Harbours’ Em­ W . Kodish ployees (Non-European). T. H . Gwala — Ditto — S. V. Reddy Howick Rubber Workers' Indus­ tria l Union. I. E. Bhoola S.A. Tin Workers’ Union. G. X. Tshume — Ditto J. J. Marks African Textile Workers’ Union. Dan Tloome Council of Non-European Trade Unions. One of the arguments used by the Government to justify the banning of these trade union officials is that they constitute a danger to the safety of the State, because, in their official positions, they could create chaos in times of emergency. They are considered to be a potential fifth column that could paralyse the country in the event of war with Russia or other communist countries. The Nationalist politicians might enjoy providing this sort of cloak-and-dagger excitement for otherwise bored audiences, but as a valid defence of Government tyranny, it collapses at first exami­ nation. Trade union officials can do little without the support of their rank and file. They certainly could not bring about a stoppage of work merely on ideological issues. In order to have any hope of suc­ cess, trade union action is dependant upon the unity, understanding and enthusiasm of the majority of the members of the union. Unless that majority of members had a strong desire to support the political -actions of their communist leaders, the latter could never risk an attempt to call a strike. The controlling factor, however, is that workers must always decide for themselves on the question of strike action. They usually ballot. Can the Government name any South African trade union which has a majority of communist or pro-communist members? Can the Government point to any trade union, whose members would ballot in favour of a strike merely to paralyse the country in an emergency? Of course not. In any case, many of the so-called “Communists” in South Africa are only statutory communists and some of them are pro­ bably anti-communist or anti-Russia.

61 “You are a Communist if the Government says so” is a true description of this law. It is worth quoting here the comment of a- Magistrate:— l1). “Whether or not the accused agrees with the definition of “Com- munist'~ is immaterial to the case. He was a communist in terms of the definition and as such the Act is applied to him . . . In terms of Section 4 (10) a Liquidator was appointed to compile- a list of persons to whom the Act should be applied. Accused’s name appears on that List . . . The Legislature . . . intended to- restrict the rights of certain individuals . . . I find that the in­ tention of the Legislature was to encroach upon the rights of the persons to whom the Act applies. It intended to abrogate the ordinary law and as such must be strictly construed and interpreted.” Another feature of this law is that it operates upon the dictum “Once a communist always a communist.” There is no benefit of the doubt for those who change their minds or who have recanted. When the newspaper “Die Bouwerker” was conducting its cam­ paign against the leaders of the Amalgamated Union of Building: Trade Workers, it declared that these officials, in order to disprove the accusations that they were “communistically inclined,” should de­ clare that “they are opposed to the full legal recognition of trade unions for Natives.” (2) This is a good example of the kind of things that are branded as “Communism” by the Nationalists. According to many of themT anyone who preaches racial equality is a communist. Even the Labour Party is skating on thin ice. The Prime Minister, Dr. Malan com­ plained to his constituents:— (3). “All six members of the Labour Party in the House of As­ sembly were “LiberaliStic”. Some of them came very close to communism. The Native Representatives wanted equal rights for Natives in all ways and they were also not far from com­ munism.” At the present time South Africa has work for almost everyone. But when trade becomes slack and jobs are hard to get and employ­ ers try to lower wage rates, the Suppression of Communism Act will hold the workers in chains. Without their trusted and experienced leaders and cowed by the fear of persecution and tyranny, workers of all races will be completely at the mercy of those who wish to> exploit them. (1) Rex vs. Sachs, 15th July, 1952. (2) See page 51. (3) Cape Argus — 15th March, 1952.

62 “You are a Communist if the Government says so” is a true- description of this law. It is worth quoting here the comment of a- Magistrate:— f1). “Whether or not the accused agrees with the definition of “Com­ munist” is immaterial to the case. He ivas a communist in terms of the definition and as such the Act is applied to him . . . In terms of Section 4 (10) a Liquidator was appointed to compile- a list of persons to whom the Act should be applied. Accused' s name appears on that List . . . The Legislature . . . intended to- restrict the rights of certain individuals . . . I find that the in­ tention of the Legislature was to encroach upon the rights of the persons to whom the Act applies. It intended to abrogate the ordinary law and as such must be strictly construed and interpreted. ” Another feature of this law is that it operates upon the dictum “Once a communist always a communist.” There is no benefit of the doubt for those who change their minds or who have recanted. When the newspaper “Die Bouwerker” was conducting its cam­ paign against the leaders of the Amalgamated Union of Building: Trade Workers, it declared that these officials, in order to disprove- the accusations that they were “communistically inclined,” should de­ clare that “they are opposed to the full legal recognition of trade unions for Natives.” (2) This is a good example of the kind of things that are branded as “Communism” by the Nationalists. According to many of themT anyone who preaches racial equality is a communist. Even the Labour Party is skating on thin ice. The Prime Minister, Dr. Malan com­ plained to his constituents:— (3). “All six members of the Labour Party in the House of As­ sembly were “ Lib erali Stic”. Some of them came very close to communism. The Native Representatives wanted equal rights for Natives in all ways and they were also not far from com­ munism.” At the present time South Africa has work for almost everyone. But when trade becomes slack and jobs are hard to get and employ­ ers try to lower wage rates, the Suppression of Communism Act will hold the workers in chains. Without their trusted and experienced leaders and cowed by the fear of persecution and tyranny, workers of all races will be completely at the mercy of those who wish to exploit them. (1) Rex vs. Sachs, 15th July, 1952. (2) See page 51. (3) Cape A rg u s— 15th March, 1952.

62 As far as the Government is concerned, as things become more difficult for them, they will use this and other despotic laws to stifle protest and resist the demands of the people. The effects of the Gov­ ernment’s actions to-day will be severely felt in the future. Two recent developments in the application of the Suppression of Communism Act should be quoted to show the increasing harsh­ ness towards its unfortunate victims. The first relates to the form of the orders directing officials to resign. Until recently these orders were couched in the following terms:— , t “Whereas your name appears on the List in the custody of the Officer referred to in Section 8 of the Act . . .1 do hereby direct you:— (a) to resign within a period of thirty days as from date of this notice as an office bearer, officer and member of the____ _ trade union, not again to become an office bearer, officer or member of the said organisation and not to take part in its activities. (b) not to become an office bearer, officer or member and not to take part in the activities of any trade union registered under the Industrial Conciliation Act (Act No 36 of 1937).” Now a new form of notice has appeared. Recently a Native trade union official received a banning order directing him:— “not to become an ofjice bearer, officer or member and not to take part in the activities of any organisation consisting of any number of employees in any undertaking, industry, trade or occupation associated together primarily for the purposes o f:—- (i) regulating relations between themselves or some of them and their respective employers; or (ii) protecting or furthering the interests of the employees, or some of the employees in that undertaking, industry, trade or occupation^ (1). This prohibition could have been lifted from the Combination Acts of Britain 150 years ago. The second development which should be noted is the harsher form of the notice prohibiting persons from attending gatherings. The usual form of notice read:— “Under the powers vested in me by Section 9 of the Suppression

U ) Saamtrek, 16th October, 1953.

63 of Communism Act (Act No. 44 of 1950 as amended), you are hereby prohibited from attending any gathering whatever within, the Union of South Africa and the Territory of South-West Af­ rica, for a period of two years from date hereof, other than re­ ligious, recreational or social nature.” The leniency in regard to religious, recreational and social gatherings has come to an end. The Government is now making it obligatory for banned persons to make separate application for per­ mission to attend bioscopes, sporting events and even funerals. The latest notices read:— “I ■ ■ • d° hereby prohibit you from attending during a period of two years as from the date that this Notice is delivered or tendered to you, any gathering in any place within the Union of South Africa Mr. John Gomas, a Cape Town trade union leader who was- banned recently under the Suppression of Communism Act, wrote to the Minister of Justice in this regard and received a reply to the effect that “he would have to obtain permission individually for each event he wisehed to attend.” f1). Since the above was written an Appeal Court decision has given* temporary respite to persons who have been banned from attending gatherings under Section Nine of the Act. On the 26th November,. 1953, the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court (in Johnson Ngwevela vs. Rex) ruled that persons prohibited from attending gatherings in terms of Section 9 of the Act, had the right to be heard by the Minister of Justice before having their activities restricted. The Minister promptly announced that “the loophole which the Appear Court has found, must be closed” and declared that the law would be amended at the first opportunity. This Appeal Court judgement does not affect trade union officials who have been “named” and: thereafter banned from taking part in the affairs of their unions, including attendance at Union meetings, under Section 5 of the Act. The facts which have been set out in this Chapter show that the Suppression of Communism Act is a vicious and despotic law. The sweeping powers it confers upon the Government and its officials* constitute a grave danger, not only to the trade union movement, but to all free institutions. Despite anything they may say, the INationalists cannot deny that this law is achieving the very results which they have been vainly seeking for more than two decades. Until now, the rank and file of the trade unions have frustrated their ambitions; to-day, holding the reins of Government, the Nationalists are frustrating the rank and file.

( I) "Saamtrek" — 6th November, 1953. ■

Unfortunately, the trade union movement has not reacted strong­ ly to this wicked law. Some trade union leaders are not opposed to the Government using the Suppression of Communism Act to remove other leaders. Others meekly accept this Government interference, often through fear or confused thinking. By failing to resist the Gov­ ernment, these trade unionists are abrogating the old-established right of trade unions to elect and dismiss their officials. Some of those who endorse the Government’s policy, do so be­ cause they are supporters of the Nationalist Party. Others are afraid to offend the Government or fear the wrath of Nationalist agitators in the ranks of their unions. A few are actuated by personal motives, jealousy or rivalry, and are glad to see their enemies thrown out of the trade union movement. Common to all these groups, however, is their attitude towards the Non-European worker. They feel that trade unionism is the pre­ serve of the white man and find the intrusion of the Non-European an embarrassment, although they know that the Non-European worker is waging the same economic struggle as themselves. Their balance is upset by prejudice and emotional thinking. As a result they have come to believe that the spreading of trade unionism among the Non-Europeans is merely another form of Communist activity. This factor is a powerful weapon in the hands of the Govern­ ment, which wields it with a will. The Suppression of Communism Act can be the instrument to suppress trade unionism and eventually, democracy in South Africa.

65 C h a p t e r T e a .

THE NATIVE WORKER.

/A^NT consideration of the Government’s Labour policy, particularly in regard to the rights of workers’ organisations, must take par- ticular note of its impact upon the Native workers, who comprise- sixty percent of South Africa’s Mining and Industrial Labour force. Native workers have made rapid strides in acquiring skills and todav perform operations in the nation’s industries that, less than twenty years ago, were thought impossible for them to do. The rapid in­ dustrialisation of South Africa was only possible because this willing, docile, and therefore cheap, labour force, was available. Yet the laws of the country seek to deny them the internation­ ally accepted rights of workers. The laws also debar them from the benefits of collective bargaining, and free trade unionism. Many arguments are advanced to defend these restrictive policies, one beino- that the Minister of Labour f1), who believes that to encourage strong Native trade unions would be race suicide for the White man. Ihis is a fairly popular view. It appeals to those who do not under­ stand the workings of trade unionism and are ignorant of its history, particularly in other countries. It goes without saying that most employers who are profiting out of this cheap, unorganised and Government-disciplined labour, fully support all measures to retard its progress in the trade union sphere. Evei since the Nationalist Government came into power in 1948, they have pursued this policy of restraint, on the grounds that they are protecting White civilisation and at the same time looking after the interests of the Natives. They reason that the Native is centuries behind the White man in his civilisation and therefore unable to understand and benefit from such White man’s institutions as trade unionism or democratic self-government in any sphere. „ Th?y declare that they stand by the principle that the Native must develop along his own lines, on the basis of his own tradi­ tions and his own culture.” This sounds good in theory. In practice it becomes ludicrous.

{ I ) See page 36.

66 The industrialised Native Worker lives and works under conditions that are far removed from his “own traditions and culture.” For him, the leisurely days and ways of simple tribal life in the kraal, are no more. He now labours in the harassing conditions of the indus­ trial centres, automaton of the machine age, working at a pace that would frighten his ancestors; he lives, if he can find a place, in ■crowded townships, often shanty towns and slums; he is surrounded by a cosmopolitan people and is in close daily contact with the White worker and his ways. The consequence of all this is that the Native industrial worker has acquired very much the same outlook as the White worker. This is only natural. However, because of his colour, many White South Africans, including good trade unionists, refuse to face an important fact. That fact is that South Africa’s Native industrial worker is really no different from the illiterate, uneducated and exploited white worker of the days of the Industrial revolution in Britain. In refusing to face that fact, White South Africa has generally come to accept that Native workers must be treated as “Natives” and not as “workers”. On this basis special legislation has been designed for them. In so far as such laws affect Native workers rights to organise and enjoy the normal benefits of trade unionism, the following are cited.

Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act. j1).

This Act places Native workers upon an entirely different foot­ ing from European, Indian and Coloured workers. While other workers have the right to deal with their employers through the medium of their trade unions, this is denied native workers. The Act specifically excludes Native workers from the operation of the Indus­ trial Conciliation Act, which provides for collective bargaining, the recognition and registration of trade unions, and the establishment of Industrial Councils. In the case of Natives, their disputes with their employers must be settled in an involved fashion. For them, there will be no industrial democracy. Should a dispute arise, a Native Labour Officer (White) must report accordingly to an Inspector (White), who in turn must report the event to a Regional Committee (comprising a White Chairman and three Native members — all appointed by the Minister). If an Industrial Council exists in the industry concerned, a Regional

11) Act No. 48, of 1953.

67 Committee must report the dispute to that body. AI! the foregoing persons must endeavour to settle the dispute. If they fail, they must then send the matter on to the Centra! Labour Board (comprising a Chairman and as many members as the Minister may decide to appoint — all White), which body will then bring everyone together (except the workers concerned) and try to find a basis of settlement. If this further effort fails, then the matter goes to the Minister of Labour who, if the Board recom­ mends it, must refer the matter to the Wage Board with a request to investigate and make recommendations. After all this long and involved procedure the Minister will' finally publish an order declaring the terms of the settlement. When the Bill was before Parliament, the Minister of Labour agreed to a Labour Party proposal to provide for the setting up of Works Committees. Where a dispute arises, the inspector and/or the Regional Committee must consult tbis Works Committee. However, this is no substitute for proper trade unionism, and may lend itself to the establishment of “Company Unions”.

Furthermore, it does not meet the need of consulting properly organised workers where there is a dispute covering a whole indus­ try, and not merely one factory. This law exposes Native workers to grave perils. They have no means of knowing of its complicated provisions nor of knowing that they may have the right under Section 7 of setting up Works Committees. They may learn only when they have a dispute with their employers, and then only after they have broken the law through ignorance. Should they have organised a strike, they face a penalty of £500 fine, or three years’ imprisonment, or both. This is the punish­ ment that can be imposed upon anyone “who institgates or takes part in a Strike.” One serious result of the Native Labour (Settlement of Dis­ putes) Act and its exclusion of Native workers from the Industrial Conciliation Act, is that it robs these workers of their trade union membership. Not only does this deny the Native workers the bene­ fits of trade unionism, but it also weakens the trade unions them­ selves. The first practical example of this comes from the Garment Workers’ Union. In terms of the Native Labour (S. of D.) Act, the Department of Labour has informed the Union that the 2,500 Native

68 Committee must report the dispute to that body. All the foregoing persons must endeavour to settle the dispute. If they fail, they must then send the matter on to the Central Labour Board (comprising a Chairman and as many members as the Minister may decide to appoint — all White), which body will then bring everyone together (except the workers concerned) and try to find a basis of settlement. If this further effort fails, then the matter goes to the Minister of Labour who, if the Board recom­ mends it, must refer the matter to the Wage Board with a request to investigate and make recommendations. After all this long and involved procedure the Minister will finally publish an order declaring the terms of the settlement. When the Bill was before Parliament, the Minister of Labour agreed to a Labour Party proposal to provide for the setting up of Works Committees. Where a dispute arises, the inspector and/or the- Regional Committee must consult this Works Committee. However, this is no substitute for proper trade unionism, and may lend itself to- the establishment of “Company Unions”.

Furthermore, it does not meet the need of consulting properly organised workers where there is a dispute covering a whole indus­ try, and not merely one factory. This law exposes Native workers to grave perils. They have no­ means of knowing of its complicated provisions nor of knowing that they may have the right under Section 7 of setting up Works Committees. They may learn only when they have a dispute with their employers, and then only after they have broken the law through ignorance. Should they have organised a strike, they face a penalty of £500 fine, or three years’ imprisonment, or both. This is the punish­ ment that can be imposed upon anyone “who institgates or takes part in a Strike.” One serious result of the Native Labour (Settlement of Dis­ putes) Act and its exclusion of Native workers from the Industrial Conciliation Act, is that it robs these workers of their trade union membership. Not only does this deny the Native workers the bene­ fits of trade unionism, but it also weakens the trade unions them­ selves. The first practical example of this comes from the Garment Workers’ Union. In terms of the Native Labour (S. of D.) Act, the Department of Labour has informed the Union that the 2,500 Native

68 women workers must resign from the Union. (1). They must comply with the law and will probably form a union of their own. Unfortu­ nately, it will be of no use to them, because the Minister of Labour has stated very clearly that his Department will have nothing to do with Native trade unions.

So not only have these 2,500 women workers been deprived of their membership of a powerful union, but they have been denied the rights of trade unionism itself.

Native Labour Regulation Act. (2).

This law was enacted in order to control the recruitment and conditions of service of Native labourers for employment chiefly in the Mines. It contained many penal offences, devised to rigidly control and discipline young tribal Natives recruited under contract to work in the Mines. Its severe code was governed by the fact that these labourers were housed in Compounds on the Mines, where it was convenient and time-saving to empower Native Labour Inspec­ tors to impose summary judgement upon all Native Labourers who transgressed this law.

Towards the end of the 1949 Session of Parliament, an apparent­ ly innocuous Amending Act (3) was put through Parliament with­ out much fuss.

Stripped of legal phraseology and obscurity, a varition in the definition in “Native Labourer” extended the Act to all Native workers, skilled and unskilled whether working in the Mines or in industry. This was merely the first step. In 1952 the Government brought in another Bill further amending this Native Labour Regulation Act 1911, in which the definition of “Native Labourer” was further- extended by the addition of another group: “ ‘workseeker’ shall mean a Native over the age of fifteen years who is unemployed . . . or capable of being employed . . . .” This simply meant that now all Native workers were brought under very rigid control. Their movement from one area to another was made subject to permit; their labour strictly directed by Labour

(1) Saamtrelc— 13th November, 1953. (2) Act No 15 of 191 I. (3) Act No 56 of 1949.

69 'Bureaux; (*) new offences for industrial workers were created. Behaviour that would normally subject an employee to dismissal or threat of dismissal, now became a criminal offence. Section 14 of the 1911 Act was amended to make a Native factory worker subject to summary trial and punishment by an Inspector of Labour. A worker is guilty of an offence if he has:— 1. Neglected to perform any work which it was his duty to perform. 2 . unfitted himself for the proper performance of his work through the use of dagga or other habit-forming drugs or by having become intoxicated during working hours; or 3 . refused to obey any lawful command of his employer or any person lawfully placed in authority over him; or . . . 4 . used insulting or abusive language to his employer or any person lawfully placed in authority over him; or . . . 5 . without lawful cause, absented himself from his place of employment. This type of military code for workers is reminiscent of the dark ages. It is the type of legislation which refuses to recognise that we are in the machine age — or rather, the atomic age. It is based on the stubborn self-deception that the laws of the Voortrekkers can be applied to this modern age. This Native Laws Amendment Act (2), must be read with the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act (3). It must also be read with the Native Building Workers’ Act, (4), which provides

( l) Replying to a question in the Senate on the 2nd February, 1953, the M inister of Native A ffa irs stated "During the period 1st March to 31st December 1952, the Native Labour Bureaux (which came into operation on the first mentioned date) succeeded in placing 10,044 Natives from the urban areas in employment in the agricultural industry. Under the heading "B O E R E KRY A RBEID U IT S TE D E " (FA R M ER S G ET LA BO UR FROM CITIES) Die Burger of 13th July, 1953 reported:— "Since October, nearly 38,000 Natives have been placed in work in Western Cape alone, by the new Native Labour Bureaux of these nearly 3,000 have been transferred from urban areas to farm work."

(2) Act No. 54 of 1952.

(3) Act No 48 of 1953.

J4) Act No. 27 of 1951.

70 for the training of Native Building workers and their employment at rates much lower than those applicable to Europeans, as well as the- prohibition of Native building workers from working in European areas, except farms. The Native Building Workers' Act. J1). The purpose of this law, in the words of the Minister of Labour,. Mr. B. J. Schoeman, is as follows:— “This Bill has a dual purpose. In the first place it aims at the protection of European artisans in the European areas, against the undermining of their standard of living by cheap Native Labour. In the second place it provides that Natives shall be entitled to build their own houses on an economic basis in their own areas.” (2) . The first purpose was isecured by the total prohibition of Native building artisans working in areas defined as “European areas”. But a new danger to the European has been created. A second class of building worker has been brought on the scene. This second class worker is paid at much cheaper rates, less' than half that paid to the white worker. How long will profit-seeking employers allow themselves to be deprived of using this cheap labour, especially as it is denied the right to organise to resist exploitation? The wages and conditions of Native building workers are fixed by the Minister. Under the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act they are unable to bargain with their employers for improve­ ments, nor are they able to use the weapon of trade union action in their interests. At the present time the comparative rates of wages for European and Native building artisans on the Witwatersrand- are as follows:— EUROPEANS______£7 10 0 per week Plus Cost of Living Allowance — £ 6 13 4 „ „ TOTAL £14 3 4 „

NATIVES (3). ______£3 5 8 „ Plus Cost of Living Allowance — _ £1 13 3 „ „ TOTAL £4 18 11

(1) Act No. 27 of 1951. (2) Hansard, Vol. 70, Coi. 1789 — 22nd Feb. 1950. (3} Govt. Notice No. 2464, 13th November, 1953.

71 Under the profit system of free enterprise this is a dangerous arrangement. The powers of profit-making will prove stronger than the protection of the White worker. The obvious safeguard of equal pay for equal work has been ignored in favour of economic discrimi­ nation on the basis of colour. The Nationalists know that this cannot work. Their hope lies in their “Christian-National” or Corporate State, which they believe will be able to design the economic structure of South Africa along pre-determined paths, maintaining capitalism, yet defying its normal processes. They operate upon the assumption that the making of laws is the solution to social and economic problems. The law provides for a Native Building Workers’ Advisory Board. It has advisory powers only and its recommendations can be ignored by the Minister. The Natives themselves have no representa­ tion on this Board, their interests being taken care of by an official . of the Native Affairs Department. However, let us see how the second object of this Native Build­ ing Workers’ Act, the building of Native houses, has been achieved. Although the law was passed over two years ago, South Africa is further away from solving the Native housing problem than ever before. The official estimate of the number of Native houses re­ quired in the urban areas of the Union is 350,000 j1). This does not include those that will be needed as a result of slum clearance and removals under the Group Areas Act, which may increase the number to something like half a million houses. In Parliament this year, (2) the Minister of Labour reported that a scheme had been formulated for the training of Native build­ ing w orkers in terms of Section 10 of the Act, but that no decision had been made as to how many would, in fact, be trained. He said that it had been ascertained that 1,065 bricklayers, 456 plasterers 432 carpenters and 359 painters already possessed qualifications and would be trade tested. It will be interesting to watch how this law' operates and to what extent it fulfills the original promise.

The Mines and Works Act. (3). This Act empowered the Governor-General to make regulations concerning the issue of certificates of competency in skilled oecupa-

(1) Dr. Bremer'— (The "S ta r" •— 17th November, 1952.) (2) Hansard Col. 857 — 4th August, 1953. (3) Act 12 of 1911.

72 tions in the Mining industry. These regulations were issued in such- a form that certificates were not issued to Natives. In 1923 the Courts declared the regulations ultra vires. In 1926 an amending Act was passed, in which it was specified that certificates of competency could be issued only to Europeans for engine driving, blasting, and all' other skilled jobs. This has been named the “Colour Bar Act.” The Minister of Labour, Mr. B. J. Schoeman, informed the Transvaal Nationalist Party Congress at Pretoria on the 23rd Septem­ ber, 1935 (r ) that legislation was being prepared to enable him to proclaim certain types of work to be reserved for Europeans only. This is an important part of Nationalist Party policy and is included in their programme as follows:— (2) . “In order to avoid the exploitation of one racial group to the detriment of another a fair and considered quota system must’ be applied . . . and certain stated industries or fields of employ­ ment may be reserved for certain stated groups . . The proposition has been stated slightly differently by the Prime Minister, Dr. Malan:— (3). “. . . there is an opening for making certain industries White and keeping them reserved for Europeans alone . . . There is, however, a large area where we shall have to use both and where a quota will have to be laid down for European labour. It can be prescribed that not less than so many White workers must be taken into employment.” In view of the Nationalist Government’s insistence upon the application of incentive bonus schemes, the need for higher productivity and the lowering of manufacturing costs, perhaps some of their economists should investigate the effect this quota system would have. The Minister of Labour has said that the principle of “equal pay for equal work” was not a protection for the White worker and that the only way of protecting all races would be extending the provisions of the Mines and Works Act. The Nationalist Party fears “economic equality” because it believes that economic equality would lead to social equality. Of course, a section of that Party, such as the big farmers and business, men, also wish to maintain a large reservoir of cheap and servile-

(1) Cape Times — 24th September, 1953. (2) The Road to a New South Africa, Page 20. (3) Hansard, Vol. 31, Col. 758. labour, which could be ensured through a planned quota system. Legislation along the lines promised is expected soon. Of course, that will not be the end. Economic pressures as well as political expediency will force the Government to intensify its laws affecting the Native worker. Because of their fundamentally unsound and prejudiced attitude, they are sure to try every solution but the right one. Unless they can be made to see reason there is catastrophe ahead.

74 Chapter Eleven.

MIXED TRADE UNIONS.

IN the Labour pattern which the Nationalists are weaving in South- Africa, there will be no place for trade unions having a mixed membership, i.e. members of different races. Speaking at the Transvaal Congress of the Nationalist Party on the 23rd September, 1953, (x), the Minister of Labour, Mr. B. j. Schoeman, declared that it was the Government’s policy to enforce- racial segregation in the trade unions and that the new Industrial Conciliation Bill which he intends introducing during the next Par­ liamentary Session, will deal with this matter. The effect of this enforced segregation can be better appreciated'' when one looks at the number of trade unions with mixed member­ ship. According to the Report of the Industrial Legislation Commis­ sion. the racial composition of the 199 trade unions registered under the Industrial Conciliation Act was as follows:— (2). M ixed______63 Open to all races but comprising Europeans only____ 54 Europeans only______38 Open to all races but comprising Non-Europeans only 22 Open to Non-Europeans only______14 Composition unknown______8 It should be noted that as Natives are not recognised under the- Industrial Conciliation Act, an insignificant number would be mem­ bers of the trade unions referred to above. The Non-Europeans con­ cerned are Cape Coloured persons or Indians. The majority are artisans or operatives of special skill. In some unions they participate in the ordinary functions of the organisation, on the same basis as all other members. In other unions they belong to separate sections, under the control of the European Executive. It may be said that in the Mixed Unions racial difficulties have been minimised by the fact that the Non-European members have been content to play a minor role.

( 1) Cape Times — 24th September, 1953. (2) Report of the industrial Legislation Commission UG. 62/1951 — par. 1038 .

75 However, it is a well known fact that in the trade unions wnere the various races have associated freely, there has been little an­ tagonism, excepting where it has been fostered by those who wish to make capital out of racial friction. This is borne out by the facts. The Industrial Legislation Com- jnission admitted:— (-1). “The evidence presented to the Commission teas overwhelmingly against the introduction of legislation compelling the segrega­ tion of the various races into separate unions, and the ivitnesses who advocated the retention of mixed unions included both em­ ployers and employees . . If there had been friction between the various races in the unions, this would have soon revealed itself to the Commission, especially as the Commissioners themselves were in favour of segre­ gation. Having been blocked by “overwhelming evidence” against segregation, the Commission produced the remarkable opinion (par. 1075), that “It does not follow, however, that they (mixed trade unions) should remain because the majority supported them.” On the basis of this unique argument they decided to recommend the division of workers into separate racial trade unions. In this, they have found a willing supporter in the Minister of Labour, whose Party has made it a mission to keep the races apart, no matter what the consequences may be. It should be mentioned, however, that two of the Commissioners, Messrs. Windsor and Smuts, did not support the unique argument of the other members of the Commission. In a minority Report, they expressed the view:— (2). “The volume and weight of the evidence presented to the Com­ mission were . . . against the introduction of compulsory mea­ sures for the separation of members of mixed trade unions into racial branches. . . . Until the bulk of opinion amongst the ivorkers favours separation on racial lines, we cannot, in the absence of adequate reasons, subscribe to the recommendation that legislation be introduced making this compulsory.” The enforced separation of trade union members will cause many complications in connection with the financial and other benefits due to the Non-European members who may be forced out of the unions

f l ) Par. 1040. <2) Pars. 1097 — I 105.

76 to which they have belonged and to whose funds they have sub­ scribed for years. Some of the largest and oldest unions in South Africa have a mixed membership. The most important factor to be considered, however, is the ex­ tent to which this forced separation will destroy working-class unity. Workers all over the world have bitter experience of the policy of “divide and rule.” If the Government persists with its policy, the time is not far off when South Africa will suffer a confusion in labour organisation that will have evil effects for all workers, what­ ever their colour. We shall see something like five separate organi­ sations representing workers in one industry;'firstly the remnants o- the original union, secondly the new “Christian-National” offshoot, thirdly the Coloured union, fourthly the Indian, and fifthly the Native. Of course, the last named, although it may constitute the largest section of the workers, will have no legal recognition, in terms of the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act. This Chapter concludes with the sad comment that so far very few of the unions that will be affected by the proposed break-up have made any protest. Inside the unions there has been a growing concern over this matter but the leaders seem to be nervous. If they hope that the Government will take no action if the unions remain silent, they are underestimating the Nationalists. The separation of the members of the unions is part of a wider policy, the policy of “Christian-National’,, disciplined, and pro- Government unions. The Nationalist Party will settle for nothing less. Those White trade union leaders who fail to appreciate that fact deceive both themselves and their followers. Chapter Twelve.

THE INDUSTRIAL LEGISLATION COMMISSION

*pHIS book would not be complete without a special comment upon- the Industrial Legislation Commission. The Report of this body (*) is likely to play an important part in the formulation of future labour policy in South Africa. It is a voluminous document, running into some 340 pages and containing recommendations affecting al­ most every aspect of labour legislation and trade union affairs. The Commission was appointed on the 1st October, 1948, “to enquire into, report upon and make recommendations” in regard to the following matters:— (1) The operation of the following Acts and the changes, if anvr to be introduced:— (i) Industrial Conciliation Act, 1937 (Act No. 36 of 1937V as amended; (ii) Factories, Machinery and Building Work Act (Act No. 22 of 1941) ; (iii) Wage Act, 1937 (Act No. 44 of 1937) as amended:: (iv) Shops and Offices Act 1939 (Act No. 41 of 1939); with specific reference to—

(a) The desirability or otherwise of providing for the co­ ordination of wages and other conditions of employ­ ment (whether or not such wages and conditions of employment are determined pursuant to the preven­ tion or settlement of disputes), so as to ensure due regard being had to the interests of the State and the general public and to the legitimate interests and' claims of the employers, employees and industries in relation to the State and the general public and to each other, and the machinery, if any, to effect such* co-ordination;

(I) Report of the Industrial Legislation Commission of Enquiry — U .S. 62/1951..

(c) the operation of “closed-shop” provisions in wage regulating instruments and the introduction of special steps to protect employers and employees against any hardship arising from the application of such pro­ visions ;

(d) the introduction by legislation of more adequate powers of control in regard to the conduct by trade unions and employers’ organisations of their affairs 1 includ­ ing their financial affairs) and their elections, so as to ensure due compliance with the provisions of their constitutions and the fair and proper conduct of the affairs of such unions and organisations in accordance with law and with the desires of the membership in regard thereto;

(e) the desirability or otherwise of defining the functions of trade unions and employers’ organisations and of their office bearers and officials in their capacity as such, as relating only to matters concerning the in­ terests of their members in their capacity as employees or employers and in relation to their employers or employees respectively, and to matters arising there­ from ; (f) the desirability or otherwise of having separate trade unions and employers’ organisations for Europeans, Coloureds and Asiatics respectively, and the manner in which any such system should operate to ensure adequate protection for all concerned;

(g) whether or not the existing wage regulating legisla­ tion operates as adequate protection for all races, and

79 if not, the steps to be taken to ensure the desired pro­ tection ;

2 . The functioning of existing trade unions or similar organi­ sations composed of Natives, and the desirability or other­ wise of regulating such organisations and determining; or otherwise the role to be played by such organisations in the functioning of industrial legislation; and

3. The setting up of machinery for the prevention and settle­ ment of industrial disputes involving Natives and the en­ forcement of measures taken to this end and the co-ordina­ tion of such measures and the enforcement thereof with measures regulating the conditions of workers of other races in the same industries.”

The terms of reference of this Commission have been quoted in full because they reveal the desires of the Government to prepare labour legislation more in keeping with its own policies than those of normal employer-employee relations. The Government attitude was further revealed in its appointment of the members of the Com­ mission. Only two representatives of the trade union movement were appointed, the one being Mr. J. Calder, Chairman of the Trades and Labour Council and the other, Mr. L. J. van den Berg, Chair­ man of the Co-ordinating Council of Trades Unions, Pretoria, which supports Government policy in relation to the trade unions.

On the 7 th September 1950, Mr. Calder died. That was fifteen months before the Report of the Commission was published. Asked in Parliament on the 2nd February 1951 whether he would appoint another trade unionist to take Mr. Calder’s place on the Commis­ sion, the Minister of Labour said that he had decided that it would be wiser not to replace Mr. Calder. He gave as his reasons, tnat the Commission had practically completed its work, and that as the written record comprised many thousands of pages, it would take a new member a long time to examine and analyse the evidence and so cause delay. In consequence, the Commission was deprived of the exper­ ienced trade union voice that could have brought a great deal of enlightenment to the Commission when it was sifting the evidence and drawing its conclusions. There is little wonder that the Com­ mission made some recommendations that startled orthodox thinkers in the trade union movement. Nor is it surprising that the Report as a whole was immediately unpopular. The South African Trades and Labour Council called a Special

80 Conference in Johannesburg on the 12th and -13th January 1952, to discuss the Report. This Conference, after a lengthy debate, passed the following Resolution:— This Conference of the South African Trades and Labour Council (1949) is convinced that the Report and Recommenda­ tions of the Industrial Legislation Commission of Enquiry are designed not to improve the conditions of the workers, nor to promote industrial peace, nor to increase the national produc­ tion of the country . . . The Report and Recommendations, if enacted in law, will deprive all workers of South Africa, Euro­ pean and Non-European, of the elementary rights of freedom °f organisation and the right of collective bargaining . . . The political doctrines enunciated in the Report are inspired by Nazi-Fascist philosophy and so-called economic theories, pre­ sented at great length in the Report, are merely a collection of anti-labour doctrines which the enemies of the workers have presented as “economic science” for generations . . . Conference rejects the Recommendations in their entirety . . . Conference re-affirms . . . that employer-employee rela­ tionships . . . are primarily the concern of employers and em- employees and should not be left in the hands of professors, economists, lawyers and administrators.”

This strong resolution was inspired by the main and overriding recommendation of the Commission, viz. that a NATIONAL LAB­ OUR BOARD be established “to co-ordinate wages and conditions of employment.” This Board would be vested with vast powers, in­ cluding the scrutiny and review of all industrial council and con­ ciliation board agreements, the taking over of the functions of the present Wage Board, the promotion of wage incentive schemes and all other activities necessary to “protect the interests of the em­ ployers, employees, the general public and the State.” In addition, the National Labour Board would act as an advisory body to the Minister of Labour and would deal with all matters relating to labour legislation.

“Co-ordination”, which would be the function of the Board, is described in the Report of the Commission as:— (1). “. . . eliminating obvious and economically unjustifiable dis­ crepancies between the conditions of employment in various and similar industries, trades and areas and establishing a sound, rational wage structure for the whole national economy.”

{ I) Par. 3 16.

81 I

The National Labour Board, in pursuance of these objectives and vested with the proposed powers, has a marked similarity with the Central Economic Council and the Labour Council proposed by the Nationalist Party. The one difference is that the Nationalist Party is at least willing to concede some representation to the employers and the employees. The Commission believes that the best results can be obtained by excluding those directly affected and its Board will consist of:— An Economist (as Chairman), A legal authority, An authority on administration in regard to labour matters, A senior official from the Native Affairs Department, A Judge.

The Minister of Labour has said that he does not favour the proposal for a National Labour Board. However, it is the theme running throughout the whole of the Report of the Commission and cannot be ignored. It will be on the basis of this Report that the Minister will plan his amendments to existing laws and formulate new ones. He has already promised to place Bills before Parliament next session.

Legislation can be expected, therefore, to deal with the adminis­ tration of trade unions, with the political activities of its members and of the unions themselves, with the prohibition of unions having members of different races, and the curbing of the powers of trade union officials.

The Minister of Labour has already taken action in regard to Native Trade Unions. The Commission proposed qualified recogni­ tion but the Minister has rejected that and decided to ignore Native trade unions, so that “they may bleed to death.” This year the Government has had discussions with a section of the trade union movement and representatives of the employers, on many of the recommendations of the Commission. The outcome of the talks is not yet known to the public. It is a great tragedy that at this period the trade union move­ ment of South Africa is not united. This lack of unity has prevented a thorough and scientific study of the Report of the Commission; it has prevented the workers from giving a firm and definite reply to those who seek to destroy their rights and freedom.

82 In the coming years the workers will find much cause to grieve that they are not united. The race attitudes which have influenced so many white workers to follow those who led the hive-off into new groups, will be their undoing.

The agencies of the Christian-National55 trade union move- ment do not only want to segregate the various races. They also want to convert the white unions into their own conceptions of what trade unions should be — “Christian” and “National”. All trade union leaders and their members should be constant­ ly awake to this objective when considering the Report of the Indus­ trial Legislation Commission and the legislation which may flow out of it.

83 i Chapter Thirteen.

TRADE UNION FEDERATIONS.

|N the previous Chapter I referred to the fact that the South African trade union movement is not united. This was not always so. Like trade union federations all over the world, there were always dis­ agreements and differences of opinion among the South African trade unions. However, these were never serious enough to cause dis­ ruption. Since the coming of the crusade for “Christian-National” trade unions, it has not taken long to create division. Until recent years, the South African Trades and Labour Council was the only co-ordinating body of South African trade unions. It officially became established in 1930 at a special conference of trade unions from all over South Africa, which met in Cape Town. This Conference resolved that a Trades and Labour Council be formed to act as the official voice of labour in South Africa. This Council represented the South African Trade Union Congress and the Cape Federation of Labour Unions, as well as other unions not affiliated to either of these bodies. The Government agreed to recog­ nise this new Trades and Labour Council as the official spokesman for organised labour. It also became recognised by all trade unions as having the exclusive right to nominate workers’ delegates to the International Labour Organisation. The Trades and Labour Council catered for all trade unions, whether the membership of such unions was purely European, Non- European or mixed. Civil servants, teachers and most Railway em­ ployees’ associations preferred to remain outside and act indepen­ dently. The Trades and Labour Council was able to withstand the on­ slaught of the “Christian-National” crusade for many years, but eventually began to crack. As with most things in South Africa, the colour question was brought to bear upon the members and some of them surrendered to race prejudice in the resulting confusion. Antagonisms and differences which had simmered for years, boiled over at the Trades and Labour Congress held at Port Eliza­ beth in April 1947. Following upon the defeat of a Motion by the

84 S.A. Iron and Steel Trades Association for an amendment to the Constitution, which in effect would debar Native trade unions from affiliation with the Council, representatives of six trade unions withdrew from the Congress. These were all Pretoria trade unions, claiming a membership of 2,929. They ultimately formed their own Federation, under the name of the Co-ordinating Council of South African Trade Unions, with membership restricted to White workers only. The 1947 Conference ended with a superficial, uneasy unity be­ tween the so-called “moderates” and the so-called “left-wing”. The real issue, though not openly declared, seemed to be the growing rivalry between the old-established craft unions and professional organisations on the one hand and the new and virile industrial unions on the other. The older unions began f© feel that their power was being challenged by the new unions, which were rapidly arising as a result of the industrial revolution that was taking place in South Africa. The new unions were meeting new problems. They were breaking fresh ground, where most of the workers were new to in­ dustry and completely ignorant of trade unionism. Furthermore be­ cause industry was absorbing all available labour, White and non- White, these new unions included increasing numbers of Non-Whites and many of them were composed of a majority of Non-Whites. In this situation, the agitation for racial segregation found sup­ port from unions which otherwise would have turned it aside. The political situation in South Africa also had its repercussions and the communist bogey was also raised against those who were fostering and supporting the Mixed and Native trade unions. To cap all this there were some serious personal rivalries which acted like petrol on a fire. Disappointed delegates returned to their unions and submitted their reports, often confused and sometimes influenced by personal prejudices and loyalties. From there on, the Trades and Labour Council was hard put to it to preserve unity. But the odds were against them. The following year the Nationalists won the Parlia­ mentary General Elections and became the Government of South Africa. This gave a new determination to the opponents of the Trades and Labour Council. In spite of these setbacks, the Council was able to boast, at the 1st January, 1950, of an affiliation of 76 unions repre­ senting 124,918 workers. However, from that point their strength began to decline. A number of unions disaffiliated during 1950 and some of them formed a new federation, which they named the South African Federation of Trade Unions. Thus in five short years, the once powerful South African

85 Trades and Labour Council, has lost much of its support, and the trade union movement has lost its greatest asset — unity. To-day, there are several federations of trade unions, viz.:__

No. of Unions Membership Affiliated S.A. Trades and Labour Council SO 83,000 S.A. Federation of Trade Unions ...... 23 100,000 Co-ordinating Council of Trade Unions — 13,000 Western Province Federation of Trade Unions — 25,000 Federal Consultative Committee of Railway Unions 7 70,000

innnrw ^ Ina^_ a“ated Engineering Union with a membership of iy,UOU is not affiliated to any federation. It is to-day satisfied to act on its own, excepting that it associates with he Mining Unions’ Joint Committee and the Mechanics’ Unions’ Joint Executive to protect the technical or trade interests of its members. These two bodies are federations on a minor scale, confined .purely to industrial matters. The Mechanics Unions’ Joint Executive comprises:— The Amalgamated Engineering Union, The Amalgamated Society of Woodworkers. The Amalgamated Union of Building Trade Workers, The Ironmoulders Society of S.A., The S.A. Boilermakers’ Society, The S.A. Electrical Workers’ Association. The last three are members of the S.A. Federation of Trade Unions. The Mining Unions’ Joint Committee comprises:— The Mechanics’ Unions’ Joint Executive (as above). The Mineworkers’ Union, The Reduction Workers’ Association, The S.A. Engine Drivers’ and Firemen’s Association. of which the three unions named are members of the S.A. Federa­ tion of Trade Unions. As far as Native workers are concerned, there are a few trade unions in Johannesburg comprising the Transvaal Council of Non- European Trade Unions but owing to the disabilities of Native work­ ers and their non-recognition under the Industrial Conciliation Act, this federation is far from representative. At the present it comprises

86 2 2 Trade Unions. Membership figures are vague but pro­ bably number 10,000 including Coloured and Asiatic Branches of unions. Some of these unions belong to the S.A. Trades and Labour Council. While repression, by acts of Parliament and otherwise, may temporarily retard the growth of Native trade unions and their federation, nothing can prevent their eventual emergence as a force in South Africa. The facts given in this Chapter reveal the tragic division among the workers of this country. This division is the greatest ally of the advocates of the “Christian-National” movement; it enables an un­ sympathetic Government to apply its labour laws without much resist­ ance from the workers. At the present time it is a simple matter for the Government to find support for all its actions against trade union leaders and certain marked unions, by the use of the time­ worn, but successful device of playing one group against another. It should be obvious to every trade union leader that the present situation is fraught with danger for every legitimate workers’ organi­ sation. There are some trade union officials who have supported the- Suppression of Communism Act. There are others who 'have remain­ ed silent upon it. When leading trade union officials, with excellent records, have been banned by the Government and expelled from their unions, few voices of trade union leaders were raised in protest. Their behaviour exposes them to similar action in the fututre. What is needed now is the unity of the trade union movement. It cannot be achieved as long as certain individuals are determined to go their own way and to rely upon the goodwill and the favours of the Government. Trade union strength comes from within. By their numbers and their determination the workers of South Africa, like those of other countries, can establish their right to manage their own affairs, elect their own officials and bargain with their em­ ployers. As long as they remain in different camps they are ex­ posing themselves to constant interference and attack.

87 Chapter Fourteen.

CONCLUSION.

| HAVE tried to set out in this book, as briefly as I can, the back­ ground and the situation which has developed in the trade union movement in South Africa. My purpose has been to show the beginnings and the growth of the movement which aims to change the nature and the character of the unions into a new form, described as “Christian” and “Nat­ ional”. I believe it is essential for workers to know and understand this story. Knowing it, they should then consider what the success of th “Christian-National” ideal will mean to them. Can it protect them from the hazards of capitalism? Will it protect their wage standards and give them the strength to demand fair shares? These are not the only questions that workers must ask themselves. The key question is “Can real trade unions survive in South Africa” ? Only the workers can answer that. If White workers persist in swallowing the propaganda that the non-European worker threat' ens their existence, and as a result, support reactionary policies, their unions will degenerate into artificial forms. On the other hand, despite discouragement and repressive laws non-European trade unions will rise and become powerful. That is the lesson of history. Lamentably few workers in South Africa to-day appreciate the full importance and significance of trade unionsm. That is why the trade union movement is divided and weak. That is why it has been an easy prey to the dangerous theories of the Broedenbond-Nation- alist combine. The industrial revolution in Africa has begun. The searchlighl is upon the Dark Continent, and changes are taking place at a breath­ taking rate. The rapid industrialisation of Africa must be paralleled by equally rapid developments in the organisation of labour, from which the Black man cannot be excluded. Trade unions cannot be looked upon simply as organisations to defend their members against capitalist exploitation. In South Africa they must be seen as part of the movement to educate and advance all the peoples to a better life. I can do no better than quote the words of Herbert Tracy, in his pam-

88 pHlet “Trade Unionism, its Origins, Growth and Role in Modern Society.” (1). “Trade Unions are as much a part of the movement towards democracy and freedom as Parliamentary institutions are, and the still older institutions of local self-government. It is not an exaggeration of the historical facts to say that the rise of the trade unions in this country coincided with the birth of Parlia­ mentary democracy. Organised labour has been the main source of the power which fostered the development of free citizen­ ship and became the mainstay of democratic government.” Racial fears may make many White trade union leaders afraid to support that view. Yes it is the true answer to the future of democracy in South Africa. With the White workers divided, the Coloureds and Indians separated and the Natives excluded from trade unionism altogether, democracy will be in chains. I have shown how Nationalist Party policy compares closely with that of the Corporate State. The crippling of workers’ organi­ sations will make the rest of the plan for a “Christian-National” Re­ public child’s play. Working-class unity is needed now. Workers should no longer allow themselves to be duped by cunning appeals to racial prejudice and cries of “Communism.” They should stand together and help to create trade union unity. If they fail to do that, they will surrender themselves to slavery.. December, 1953.

( I ) British Labour Party Publication. 89 INDEX ACTS — Factories 48 72 75, 78 72, 73 Native Building W orkers______7 , 70. 71, 72 Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) 71, 77 -8 , 69 Native Laws Amendment 70 8 —- Silicosis 7 - 7, 78 1-65, 87 8 7 — W age...... - 7, 78 — Workmens’ Compensation 7 Afrikaner Front______‘______15, 17 Alexander, R .______60 21 Beetge 43, 52 61 51, 52 24, 56 2 2 , 23 Brink, Rev. C. B. 2 0 Brodrick, B. B. 40 15, 24 Calder, J. 80 31 30, 35 54, 79 Commission of Enquiry: 75, 78 2 2 , 49 Mineworkers (1941) 38, (1947) 40, (1951), 41, 53) 45 50 23 Conradie, Rev. Jac. __ 17 Co-Ordinating Coun 8 6 Cornelius, J . ____ 44, 50 16 2 0 , 2 2 Deysel, A. J. B. 42

90 Mi Dick, N...... 60 Diederichs, Dr. N. Donges, Dr. T. E. 42 Du Pisanie, J. 13 23 Du Plessis, D. J. Du Plessis, Rev. 60 Du Plessis, J. 20 42 Du Plessis, L. J. Du Preez, Rev. 16 Du Toit, E. S. 48 60 Ellis, D. E. — — __ /in /n ao ... 5 ^^9 45 F. A. K .______----- 10, 11, 12, 16, 17, 19, 24 — Economic Institute Fleet, R. H. 16 60 Fourie, Jo ey _ J" 60 Garment Workers’ Union: 7, 22, 23, 26, 39, 43, 44, 47-50, 60, 61, 6 8 Gleisner, J a n ______------40, 43, 52 Gomas, Jo h n ______------61, 64 Gwala, T. H______------61

Havenga, N. C .______■------15,48 Henry, A. H .______------56 Hertzog, Dr. Albert __ __ - 13, 14, 26, 27, 38, 41-45, 51, 52 Hertzog, Genl. J. B. M .___ ------10- Huyser, P. J . ______------44, 45, 51-54, 60 Kalk, W ._ - — ------— — ..... — — 55, 56, 60 Kestell, Rev. J. D.______------t 12. 15 Kodish, W .______------61 Kritzinger, Dr. __ ------42, 45 Labour Council __ __ ------32, 35 Labour Party______------62, 6 8 Le Roux, H .'______------60 Lombard, I. M. ------11, 16 Loubscher, J._____ ------19, 4 3 , 56

Malan, Dr. D. F. ------8 , 16, 29, 62, 73 Malan, Prof. A. I . ____ ------42 Mali, A. T .______------61 Marks, J. J.______------61 Meyer. Carel______------50 Moll, Mrs. ______------22 Mostert, D irk______------■___ 42 Muller, M ._____ ------60

91 ■

* N a g e l------56 National Economic Conference — ------13-15, 24 National Labour Board...... — — ------81, 82 Nasionale Raad van Trustees------38, 40 Native Housing------72 — Labour Bureaux — — — ------70 Nel, M rs.______22 Ngweveia, Johnson------64 Nurses’ Association------12 Ossewhbrandwag------15, 16, 17, 47 Phillips, Jam es------61 Pirow, Oswald------47 Reddingsdaadbond — — — — — — — — — — 10, 13, 17, 24 Republic, “Christian-National” — — — ... — — — — 8 , 9, 29 Reformers (see Trade Unions - Mineworkers). Reddy, S. V______61 “Road to a New South Africa” ------>------31 35 Rosenblatt, S .------— ------— ------60 Sachs, E. S . ------23, 44, 47, 48, 60 Sanlam------13, 19 Scheepers, A. — — ------— ..... — ------44, 50 Schccpdi* L C .______. 56 Schoeman, B. J. — — — — 20, 22, 29, 30, 33, 36, 42, 73, 75, 82 Schoeman, J. C. B .------20 Selby, A .------60 Socher, E. A. — — — — — ------— — — — — 55, 56 Strike, — (1922)______9 Strydom, J. G .------26 TRADE UNIONS: — Amalgamated Engineering U nion------8 6 — Amal. Union of Building Trade Workers: 43, 44, 51-54, 60, 62, 8 6 — Amal. Society of Woodworkers — — — — — — 8 6 — Chemical and Allied W orkers------61 — Co-ordinating Council------86 — Federations — — — — — — — — — ------— 84-87 Food and Canning Workers------60 — Garment Workers’ Union 7, 22, 23, 26, 39, 43, 44, 47-50, 60, 61. 6 8 — Howick Rubber Workers — — — — — ------— 61 — Ironmoulders’ Society of S.A. — — — -- — — -- 8 6 — Jewellers’ & Goldsmiths’ U nion------60 — Leatherworkers’ Union — __ — — -- — -- 55-57, 60 — Mineworkers’ Unions — — — — 26, 27, 38-46, 8 6

92 — Mineworkers (Reformers)____— — 23, 25, 38, 40 — M ixed______— — — — — — 7, 8 , 75-77 — Mechanics’ Unions’ Joint Executive___ __ — — 8 6 — Mining Unions’ Joint Committee — — — — — — 8 6 — National Baking Emloyees’ U nion------60 — National Union of Laundering, Cleaning, etc. — — 60 — National Union of Commercial Travellers — — — 60 — Native______— — — ------— ------— 7, 69, 87 — Reduction Workers’ Association — — — — — — 8 6 — Railway Unions (Fed. Consultative Comm.) — — 86 — S.A. Electrical Workers’ Association______— — 8 6 — S.A. Engine Drivers’ and Firemen’s Association 8 6 — S.A. Federation______8 $, 8 6 — S.A. Boilermakers’ Society — — — — — — — 8 6 — S.A. Hairdressers’ Union_— — — — — — — 60 — S.A. Iron & Steel Trades Association — — — 56, 85 — S.A. Tin Workers’ U nion___ — — — — — — 60 — S.A.R. & H. Employees’ (Non-European) — — — 61 — Sweet Workers’ U nion___ — — — — — — 60 — Textile Workers’ Union------— — — — — — 60 — Textile Workers’ Union (African)------61 — Tailoring Workers’ Union — — — — — — — 60 — Transvaal Council of Non-European------61 — Western Province Federation------— — — — — 8 6 TRADES AND LABOUR COUNCIL 26, 27, 39, 40, 50, 80, 81, 84, 85, 8 6 , 87 Tloome, D a n ------— — — — — — — — — — — 61 Tshume, G. X .______61 Van den Berg, L. J . ______44, 80 Van den Berg, M. J . ------— ------42 Van Rooy, J. C .------11, 24 Van Niekerk, G. L. H .------— 50 Van Rensburg, J. F.J. — — — — — — — — — — — — 16 Van Rhyn, Dr. A. J. — — — — — — — — — — ------— 13 Van der Hoven, Rev. _ — — — ------— — — ------— — 20 Verwoerd, Dr. H. F. — — — — — — — — — — ------13 Visser, P. J . ______42, 45 Visser, de Villiers — — ------— — — ------— ------42 Voortreker Pers — ------,— 48 Wage Board------81 Werkerspers — — — —, — — *------— — 42, 43, 38, 52 Weinberg, E. — — — — — — — — — — — — ------60 Wolmarans, Dr. H. P . ------23, 48 Wolfson, I . _— — — — — — — — — ------— ------— 60 Wolf son, J . ------60

93 THE AUTHOR.

ALEX. HEPPLE, M.P. is the Parliamentary Leader of the South African Labour Party. Before going to Parliament he was a mem­ ber of the Transvaal Provincial Council. He was born in Johannesburg in 1904 and grew up amidst the rapid industrialisation of the City of Gold, experiencing its hars impact upon a typical working-class family. His father was an active member of the Amalgamated Engineer­ ing Union, being blacklisted and victimised by the employers for his part in the 1913 and 1914 strikes and arrested in the bloody strike of 1922. Alex. Hepple was one of the many unemployed in the Great Depression, vainly searching for work for nearly a year. He has made a special study of labour laws and trade unionism and is a strong opponent of those who seek to interfere in the affairs of the trade unions or curb their democratically established rights.

STREET. WESTGATE. JOHANNESBURG $ PRINTED BY PROMPT PRINTING CO. (PTY.) LTD.. 11 HARRIS

Collection Number: A3393

Collection Name: Bob Hepple Papers

PUBLISHER:

Publisher: Historical Papers Research Archive, University of the Witwatersrand Location: Johannesburg ©2015

LEGAL NOTICES:

Copyright Notice: All materials on the Historical Papers website are protected by South African copyright law and may not be reproduced, distributed, transmitted, displayed, or otherwise published in any format, without the prior written permission of the copyright owner.

Disclaimer and Terms of Use: Provided that you maintain all copyright and other notices contained therein, you may download material (one machine readable copy and one print copy per page) for your personal and/or educational non-commercial use only.

People using these records relating to the archives of Historical Papers, The Library, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, are reminded that such records sometimes contain material which is uncorroborated, inaccurate, distorted or untrue. While these digital records are true facsimiles of paper documents and the information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to be accurate and reliable, Historical Papers, University of the Witwatersrand has not independently verified their content. Consequently, the University is not responsible for any errors or omissions and excludes any and all liability for any errors in or omissions from the information on the website or any related information on third party websites accessible from this website.

This document forms part of a collection held at the Historical Papers Research Archive, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.