Analysing the petrol strike’s amicable end

As workers aligned to the Chemical, Energy, Paper, Printing, Wood and Allied Workers Union (Ceppwawu) return to work following the end of their strike in the petroleum sector, questions should be asked about whether the union and the employers had explored all options before the strike.

Read also: Petrol strike ends, workers must return

Typically a strike is a threat of last resort when all negotiations fail. It is the workers’ last bullet. It is meant to move intransigent employers.

For a moment, Ceppwawu had the country on the edge when it announced that approximately 15 000 of its members in the petroleum sector would down tools and disrupt the supply of fuel from the oil refineries and fuel depots.

The threat of a strike could not be taken lightly.

The government’s energy security master plan for the liquid fuels industry appropriately describes energy as the blood that runs through the veins of every economy. Without fuel, key sectors of the economy come to a standstill. Those with long memories will remember the 2005 fuel shortages that resulted in shortages of jet fuel at Cape Town International Airport.

So a talk of a strike action in the petroleum value chain elicits those memories of dry service stations, cancelled flights and absolute chaos.

But just as the Ceppwawu strike started towards the end of last month, petroleum companies said they had made preparations for the strike and had put in place contingency plans.

Two weeks into the Ceppwawu strike, it became clear that, indeed, the effect on fuel supply was limited. With the strike well under way, the SA Petroleum Industry Association, the industry body representing major petroleum companies, said deliveries to fuel stations were continuing without disruptions.

It is important to look at what irked the workers to the point of a strike action. The union and the National Petroleum Employers’ Association (NPEA) - representing the employers - could not agree on a wage deal. The workers wanted a 9 percent increase while NPEA offered a 7 percent increase in the first year and an increase linked to the April 2017 CPI (consumer price index) plus 1.5 percent in year two.

Significantly, the union wanted a one-year deal while the employers insisted on a two-year deal.

Through deputy chairman Zimisele Majamane the NPEA ruled out a one-year deal as a short-term agreement would cause instability as annual wage negotiations would be disruptive.

There were other demands on the table but the wage increase percentage and the length of the deal were the most prominent.

A Commission on Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration conciliation process commenced on Friday last week and within days the parties had agreed on a deal.

In fact the union and NPEA signed their agreement on Wednesday and some of the workers started going back to their posts.

The workers have until tomorrow to return to work. The elusive agreement was not materially different from what the workers had previously rejected. It included a 7 percent increase in the first year starting on July 1 and an April CPI plus 1.5 percent increase. And it is a two-year deal.

Attempts to get comment from Ceppwawu on Friday were not successful, but the union’s representative was on Thursday quoted saying its members were happy with the deal.

NPEA was also pleased with the outcome. “Not much has changed from what we were offering. So we are very happy with the agreement,” said Majamane on Friday.

SUNDAY INDEPENDENT