TRC Final Report

Volume 4

Chapter 2

Subsection 6

The mining industry

62 From the early days of the Boer Republics, mining capital played a major role in shaping and driving cheap labour policies. Strategies included the following:

a influencing legislation that forced black workers into the wage system (and managed their allocation within it);

b state-endorsed monopolistic recruiting practices;

c the capping of African wages;

d divisive labour practices in managing compounds;

e the sometimes brutal repression of black workers and trade unions.

63 This history has been well documented⁷ and was reflected in submissions by COSATU, the SACP and the ANC. The first-order involvement of the mining houses and the Chamber of Mines (COM) in shaping the migrant labour system is the clearest example of business working closely with the minority (white) government to create the conditions for capital accumulation based on cheap African labour. The evidence shows that, rather than relying simply on the forces of supply and demand, the mining industry harnessed the services of the state to shape labour supply conditions to their advantage. Thus, the mining industry bears a great deal of moral responsibility for the migrant labour system and its associated hardships.

64 It is regrettable that the Chamber of Mines made no mention in its submission of the active role they played in constructing and managing the migrant labour system.⁸ Although the foundations of this system were laid before the 1960s, the Chamber had a significant formative impact on the apartheid political economy during the period under review by the Commission. There is plenty of evidence to show that, directly due to the monopsonistic power of the Chamber of Mines (which was set up with this purpose explicitly in mind), black wages on the mines were lower – at least until the mid-1970s – than they would almost certainly otherwise have been. Similarly, the opposition of the Chamber of Mines to the unionisation of black mine workers effectively prevented the growth of trade unions for black mine workers until the beginning of the 1980s. The recognition of this first-order involvement, together with an appropriate apology, could contribute significantly to the reconciliation process.

65 The image of gold mining magnates accumulating vast wealth at the expense of African mine workers, whose wages stagnated in real terms until the 1970s, is a stain on the mining industry and one it needs to recognise. For most of the twentieth century, the greatest point of contact between African workers and business occurred on the mines. The shameful history of subhuman compound conditions, brutal suppression of striking workers, racist practices and meagre wages is central to understanding the origins and nature of apartheid. The failure of the Chamber of Mines to address this squarely and to grapple with its moral implications is regrettable and not constructive.

66 The submission by the Anglo-American Corporation was an improvement on that of the Chamber of Mines. Anglo-American accepted that it could have been a better corporate citizen. It had the honesty to note that, despite many representations by Harry Oppenheimer to government about the need for a more stable workforce, the Corporation failed to provide even the limited amount of family accommodation allowed within the bounds of the law.⁹

67 However, Anglo’s submission was also flawed. Its most glaring failure was to sidestep the African wage issue. The submission blames “race politics” for depressing black wage levels and, like the Chamber of Mines, fails to address the active measures taken by mining magnates to ensure the continued supply of cheap migrant labour. The submission records that black wages doubled within a period of three years in the 1960s, and tripled in the early 1970s. This selective presentation of wage developments is misleading and fails to mention that real African wages on the gold mines were higher in 1915 than they were in 1970.¹⁰

68 It is important to recognise that, while the migrant labour system benefited the mining industry, this was not the case with regard to legislation protecting white labour. Government reaction to the 1922 ‘Rand Revolt’ and the mining industry’s support of the colour bar shows very clearly that the industry was opposed to any form of industrial action designed to raise labour costs – whether by white or black workers. The apartheid state created an environment in which white worker power was enhanced by legislation (a position accepted by the mining industry). Black worker power, on the other hand, was progressively eroded – a situation that was ignored by the mining industry, which went on to suppress black labour with impunity.

69 This leads to the important point that apartheid had both costs and benefits for the mining industry. The relationship between the mining industry and various white minority governments was both complex and contradictory. On the one hand, the migrant labour system worked to the decided advantage of the mining industry. But, on the other, the protection of white labour significantly increased both wage and non-wage labour costs in mining. The many representations by mining magnates to government on the costs of job reservation bear testimony to this major apartheid-related thorn in the side of the industry.

70 Finally, it is necessary to touch on the role of health and safety on the mines. A submission by Laurie Flynn¹¹ suggested that the dismal health and safety record of South African mines, and the way in which mining companies and successive government ministers of mines suppressed knowledge about the dangers of asbestos, constituted human rights abuses. He referred to the “obdurate and well documented refusal of the mining companies in South West Africa [Namibia] and in the diamond industry in South Africa itself.” Similar themes were evident in the COSATU submission, which drew attention to the health hazards associated with mining and related industries.

Approximately 69 000 miners died in accidents in the first 93 years of this century and more than a million were seriously injured. In 1993, out of every 100 000 gold miners, 113 died in accidents, 2 000 suffered a reportable injury, 1 100 developed active tuberculosis and of these 25 died; in 1990 about 500 were identified as having silicosis.

71 The COSATU submission also recalled the notorious Kinross mining disaster, the largest accident in the history of gold mining in South Africa. On 15 September 1986, 177 workers were killed as the result of a polyurethane fire. The submission records the shocking way in which the mine reacted to the disaster:

The mine only publicised the accident at 15h00, although it had occurred at 09h00. Its initial reports stated that thirteen workers had died, although the mine was aware that 177 workers had died. Shortly after the disaster, the names and personal details of white miners were released by the company. The black miners who had died were identified to the world as: “Sotho 45, Shangaan (Mozambican) 21, Pondo 20, Hlubi (Transkei) 6, Venda 1, Xhosa 29, Tswana 14, Malawi 15, Pedi 1”.

72 Mining is, of course, an inherently dangerous occupation. However, there appears to be some evidence that profitability ranked higher than people’s lives – as evidenced by the asbestos scandal and the continued use of polyurethane in mines long after the dangers had become known.¹² It is regrettable that more details were not forthcoming on health and safety issues from the Chamber of Mines or the Anglo American Corporation.