How workplace democracy can undo many of apartheid’s ills
Loading player...
SA’s apartheid-era corporate model, which has been unchanged in the democratic dispensation, is one of the main reasons for conflict, poor productivity and violence in the country’s labour market since 1994.
Whether in mining, agriculture or retail, the model has been based on low wages, migrant labour, minimal skills transfer and little provision of basic amenities for ordinary workers, and huge remuneration and benefits for executives. The model has been the basis of the competitiveness of many SA corporates.
The violence at what was Lonmin’s Marikana mine in 2012 was mostly related to the failure of this model and the worker rebellion against it. Impala Platinum even acknowledged in its 2013 annual report that the Marikana crisis went beyond a breakdown in communication between managers and workers and was a legacy of the apartheid-era operational model.
Many countries have dominant corporate models. The apartheid model originated in the mining companies that were SA’s first large and dominant corporates. Other sectors of the economy, which are closely intertwined with the mining sector, also adopted the mining-driven apartheid corporate model. Many foreign corporates that entered SA, whether during or after apartheid, have acclimatised to this model rather than disrupting it.
The corporate model that emerged from the institutional environment of colonialism and apartheid essentially has six broad pillars.
The first is no different from that in many other countries, with the dominant corporate management culture being top down and hierarchical, with decisions made by top management and employees required to execute them at the lower end.
A second aspect of SA’s management approach is the apartheid legacy of the racially divided workplace, where whites are predominantly in top positions and blacks in inferior ones. Blacks are mostly the employees who must follow instructions while management and ownership are mostly white.
The third aspect of the apartheid business model is that profit-making is generally based on low wages, minimal skills transfer and minimal rights. Blacks earn lower wages and have fewer benefits and advancement opportunities for doing the same jobs as whites.
In contrast, mainly white executives receive huge remuneration, profit shares and benefits, a phenomenon often called the apartheid wage gap.
During apartheid there were no obligations on mine companies to regulate the health and safety of black employees.
Fourth, SA corporates take out higher profit yields than their international peers — on the back of squeezing the rights, benefits and jobs ...
Whether in mining, agriculture or retail, the model has been based on low wages, migrant labour, minimal skills transfer and little provision of basic amenities for ordinary workers, and huge remuneration and benefits for executives. The model has been the basis of the competitiveness of many SA corporates.
The violence at what was Lonmin’s Marikana mine in 2012 was mostly related to the failure of this model and the worker rebellion against it. Impala Platinum even acknowledged in its 2013 annual report that the Marikana crisis went beyond a breakdown in communication between managers and workers and was a legacy of the apartheid-era operational model.
Many countries have dominant corporate models. The apartheid model originated in the mining companies that were SA’s first large and dominant corporates. Other sectors of the economy, which are closely intertwined with the mining sector, also adopted the mining-driven apartheid corporate model. Many foreign corporates that entered SA, whether during or after apartheid, have acclimatised to this model rather than disrupting it.
The corporate model that emerged from the institutional environment of colonialism and apartheid essentially has six broad pillars.
The first is no different from that in many other countries, with the dominant corporate management culture being top down and hierarchical, with decisions made by top management and employees required to execute them at the lower end.
A second aspect of SA’s management approach is the apartheid legacy of the racially divided workplace, where whites are predominantly in top positions and blacks in inferior ones. Blacks are mostly the employees who must follow instructions while management and ownership are mostly white.
The third aspect of the apartheid business model is that profit-making is generally based on low wages, minimal skills transfer and minimal rights. Blacks earn lower wages and have fewer benefits and advancement opportunities for doing the same jobs as whites.
In contrast, mainly white executives receive huge remuneration, profit shares and benefits, a phenomenon often called the apartheid wage gap.
During apartheid there were no obligations on mine companies to regulate the health and safety of black employees.
Fourth, SA corporates take out higher profit yields than their international peers — on the back of squeezing the rights, benefits and jobs ...
