Pietermaritzburg,the unions
DOCUMENT take the lead YUNUS CARRIM
Possibly the most effective sumer boycott outside Cape was in Pietermaritzburg. It was organised specifically demands: for the reinstatement of 950 BTR SARMCOL workers Howick and the signing of a recognithe Metal and Allied Workers Union (MAWU). Launched on August 15 and ended on September 26, the boycott did not achieve these ends. it demonstrated to a wide crosssection of white Pietermaritzburg the power of Black consumers.
A survey by the Pietermaritzburg Chamber of Commerce revealed that in the first two weeks of the boycott, white businesses experienced a 60-70% drop in turnover. This varied with the type and locality of business. Even John Orr's and the Hub, not highly reliant on Black custom, admitted to a 15% drop. Most large supermarket chains refused to comment and referred all queries to their head offices, which also gave no definite answers.
A MAWU spokesperson monitoring committee believed that the boycott of white businesses varied between 30% and 90%. Large supermarkets in the Indian area reported an average of 25% turnover increase. Indian businesses in the mainly white Central Business District and others in the Indian area of the city complained of lost turnover as the boycott kept consumers out of the city. boycott was clearly effective for at least three weeks. It then tapered off and was officially called off at the end supporting it began discussions to end
Support for the boycott arose in the course of the sustained campaign over the preceeding three and a half months by unions and community organisations to win the SARMCOL workers' struggle. SARMCOL dispute
On April 30, 950 MAWU members went on strike at BTR SARMCOL in Howick (20 kilometres from Pietermaritzburg). The dispute was over terms of a recognition agreement. On May 3 all 950 were fired, and at a mass
International Viewpoint 13 January 1986 meeting they launched a consumer from May 6. The objective cause business to pressurise SARMCOL to reinstate workers and recognise MAWU.
In Howick, a supermarket owner reported a 50% drop in takings in the first two days. One business others feared possible A local businessman pleaded with strikers at a mass meeting not to treat him as white and donated 200
Businessmen complained whites from outlying areas feared to come into town.
The boycott was successful because Howick is a small town with a cohesive, united Black community and a strong MAWU presence. SARMCOL workers are a significant proportion of the township workforce and white business relies strongly on township refused to budge, and employed scab surrounding areas.
Taking their struggle to Pietermariorganisations and church groups raise material and political support. Black, and particularly Indian businessmen were approached for donations in cash or kind, and asked to provide basic groceries to the support fund at reasonable prices. The response was
The Pietermaritzburg public was forced to notice the struggle when during peak shopping hours on Saturday June 29, a convoy of ten buses of striking jammed main street traffic. leaflets and stickers were to explain the struggle and appeal against scab labour.
On July 6, at a 2000-strong mass meeting, union and community organifor a one-day Chamber of Commerce SARMCOL to negotiate with MAWU. It did not, and the stayaway took place on July 18. Some African workers and 70% of all workers, including whites, stayed away. Township schools were boycotted and 80% of all Black businesses were would not budge. Unions and commu-
SOUTH AFRICA nity organisations then discussed FOSATU's proposal for a consumer boycott. Because of this threat and the success of the stayaway, the town mayor and the Chamber of Commerce invited MAWU and community organisations to a meeting. MAWU was criticised for organising the stayaway and urge not to extend the struggle to Pietermaritzburg. Chamber representatives said they could not influence SARMCOL to meet the union, but agreed to try to set up a meeting between MAWU and the company. There was a meeting but SARMCOL rejected all MAWU's proposals. The consumer boycott went ahead. Debating local tactics
Momentum for the boycott came out of the preceeding months of struggle and was propelled by violent confrontations between people and police, Three were killed and scores and between
Five strikers jailed for up to a year for 'violent intimidation'. Other cases are pending.
Added to the momentum was the declaration of the state of emergency, the UDF [United Democratic Front] -proposed national consumer boycott, Victoria Mxenge's death, boycott and a defiant, militant youth.
The goal of the boycott was debated. The unions and the African Southern Africa, APDUSA (1), sup
La boycott based SARMCOL issue. The UDF and its affiliates felt that lifting of the state of emergency should be included as a demand immediately, to reflect the militant township mood. It argued for inclusion of a demand for the release of all detainees including those detained during the stayaway. issues could not be separated, the UDF believed, and inclusion of such demands linked the union and political struggles. UDF said that number of people should be included
The unions responded that if the SARMCOL and emergency demands were linked, SARMCOL management could respond that even if workers were reinstated, the boycott would lifted. Management would say pressure
African People's Democratic Union of Southern Africa (APDUSA) is one of the small organisations which came out of the ending of the Unity Movement at the end of the 1950s and beginning of the 19608. It seems that the organisation in question here, that is the APDUSA (Natal) was integrated into the New Unity Movement, a wider organisation which has emerged in the last few months.
13
should be brought to bear on the government, rather than SARMCOL. MAWU also felt the SARMCOL struggle was at a crucial stage and needed intensified effort as management showed signs of giving in. MAWU stressed that it recognised that the state of emergency was a major issue, but a coordinated national strategy was necessary to combat it.
Unions were discussing national action, and local unions had no mandate unilaterally to support a boycott over national issues.
MAWU argued that local dynamics should dictate the terms of the boycott. The specific way we combat the state of emergency is through the SARMCOL issue', said a union organiser. Compromise
Unions and the UDF compromised, deciding to launch a consumer boycott based on SARMCOL demands for the first ten days. It would then be reviewed to see if lifting the emergency and related issues should be added as demands. The boycott on August 15, and they set no date for
Organisations committed to the were: FOSATU, CCAWUSA [Commercial, Workers Union]; the UDF and affiliates, especially COSAS [Congress of
African Students], the Indian Congress and various youth and civic organisations; National Education
Africa (NEUSA); (DESCOM); APDUSA; the Azanian Lawyers for Democracy; Association for Rural Advancement (AFRA); and the Pietermaritzburg Youth Cultural
About 70,000 leaflets and 30,000 stickers in English and Zulu advertised the boycott of white business. Black businessmen were approached, intormed of the boycott and asked not to use it as an opportunity to profiteer. They responded positively.
A monitoring committee representing unions and community organisations was set up. It administered the boycott in terms of mandates from weekly joint union and community meetings. Decisions at FOSATU shop stewards council meetings provided direction for the joint meetings
Several community organisations complained they had not been properly consulted during planning of the stayaway, but concerted consultation over the boycott between unions and community organisations helped alleviate these tensions.
Pietermaritzburg is a relatively small town and most white business is situated in a central business district.
There are a fair number of alternative
Black businesses even though they do not match white business in variety or prices.
On August 24 a 2,500-strong mass meeting endorsed continuation of the boycott based on the SARMCOL issue. On September 2, largely on FOSATU and other unions' initiative, consumer boycotts were launched in Durban, Pinetown and Hammarsdale to oppose the state of emergency and related issues. These boycotts did not take up the demands of the SARMCOL workers. In the event, the Pietermaritzburg boycott never formally included demands relating to the state of emergency. But as other did, popular perception probably linked the Pietermaritzburg boycott with the state of
The Durban boycott appears to have been least effective, evidently successful in Hammarsdale particularly in Pinetown. crisis in Inanda, (2) the confrontations between Inkatha and township organisations and the spate of arrests of activists contributed to the boycott's Durban. It was called off on October The boycott spreads
By the time the Durban boycott was called, the Pietermaritzburg boycott was flagging. After the mass meeting on August 24, there were no attempts to consolidate it. Money had run out, and the township disarray. Confrontations with police the need to escape detention hampered activists. And confrontations with Inkatha took a severe toll. Many activists open campaigning around the boycott not prepared support the boycott because it had not been consulted, but did say that it sympathised with the plight of the SARMCOL workers. It believed consumer boycotts were a legitimate and powerful non-violent strategy but said the time was not right. Inkatha said a boycott had to be nationally coordinated and planned and must have majority support.
The Inyanda Chamber of Commerce, an organisation of businessmen affiliated to Inkatha, was stridently against the boycott. Its president, PG - Gumede, in Pietermaritzburg to crush the boycott. He urged consumers to "flock' to the city centre on Satur day September 28, assuring them that Inkatha would protect them against 'intimidation'. Gumede said KwaZulu's Chief Buthelezi made it plain that FOSATU's persistence with the boycott was a challenge to Inkatha and to his own leadership
The Pietermaritzburg chairman of Inkatha and the secretary of Inyanda disassociated themselves from Gumede's statements. But the Inyanda Chamber of Commerce local secretary had said earlier that Inyanda did not support the boycott. African traders did not benefit but Indian traders did, he said. Ending the boycott
A pamphlet jointly produced by the Pietermaritzburg City Council, the Chamber of Commerce and the Afrikaanse Sakekamer was air-dropped over African townships. Entitled 'Boyboycotts 'hurt you and your family first', drive business away and lead to price increases and unemployment. Four editorials over seven weeks in the Natal Witness echoed the same sentiment and repeatedly suggested that intimidation was endemic to consumer boycotts.
The boycott was called off on September 26, after two weeks of discussions. Organisations involved in it stressed that they had not succumbed to Gumede's threats. In the discussions CCAWUSA workers said management had threatened them with retrenchments if the boycott persisted. They suggested calling off the boycott and organising another stayaway in which CCAWUSA members would not be singled out for victimisation. But already the boycott was beginning to peter out, and there no sign that the SARMCOL management was prepared to give in.
At a meeting on September 19, the majority of union members suggested that the boycott be called off. The UDF felt that this would discourage those boycotting in other areas, and suggested that it be revitalised. The unions argued that local dynamics should dictate whether the boycott continued or not, but the UDF was asked to investigate the possibility of financing the necessary leaflets campaign. But at the next meeting on September 24, the UDF agreed with other organisations that the
Inanda is the township which has in the past been the scene of unrest between the Zuli and Indian populations International Viewpoint 13 January 1986