The basis of South African national policy for the last sixty years has been the maintenance of a vast reservoir of cheap African labour for the farms and mines owned by Europeans. The African people are attached to their homes and normally have no desire to leave them, but successive Union governments have introduced various methods to "persuade" Africans to become labourers for Europeans. In the nineteenth century, a poll tax and a hut tax were imposed, not only as fiscal measures, but also to compel the African to work for wages. Since African agricultural economy is too poor to yield even a bare minimum subsistence, adult males were forced to take employment with Europeans in order to meet these tax obligations, which had to be paid in cash. According to the report of the Industrial Legislation Commission of Enquiry (U.G. 62, 1951, par. 151), in 1936 the per capita annual income of forty-five per cent of the Africans who lived in Reserves was £2 16s. 7d. For an African to pay two kinds of taxes, amounting to about 30s. a year, out of such a pittance was impossibility, and he could escape going to gaol only by selling his labour to some white master.
In 1913, the Native Land Act was passed, which divided the entire country into "black" and "white" areas. Europeans were prohibited from holding land in areas demarcated as "black" and Africans from holding land in areas demarcated as "white". HowÂever, a "slight" arithmetical error crept into the process of demarcation. Seven per cent of the land was assigned to the African people-more than two-thirds of the population-and the balance to the Europeans. The Act was obviously designed to dispossess the Africans of their land, create overcrowding among them, and thus force large numbers of them to become labourers. Corporations were established throughout the country to recruit Africans' for work on farms and mines. Today there are nearly one million African agricultural labourers, and over four hundred thousand are herded in compounds on the mines. There they have to live like cattle, deprived of social and cultural amenities, away from their families, with no possibility of advancement. The average annual cash wages for African agricultural workers is under £30, for mine workers about £47-roughly one-twentieth of the wages of the European miners who do not consider themselves overpaid. The cash earnings of Africans in the mines sixty years ago were about £55 per year. Considering the lowered purchasing power of the pound, the real wages of African miners are now less than half what they were in the nineties of the last century. Through a number of oppressive measures the mine owners have succeeded in keeping the wages of African miners down to a minimum.
In the last thirty years, large numbers of non-Europeans, African, Coloured and Indian, have left the rural areas for the towns.
The process of urbanisation among Asians has been relatively more rapid than among other racial groups, followed by that of Europeans, whose ratio of urbanisation is the greatest. In absolute figures, urbanised non-Europeans outnumber Europeans considerÂably, in spite of the policies of segregation, repression and restriction enforced by successive Union governments.
The following table shows the increase in the number of workers in each racial group in the manufacturing industries during the period 1925-1948.
Total number of wage earners (according to race) employed in the manufacturing industries,
1925-1948.
Table No. 23A, p.18, same report.
Europeans Africans Asiatics Coloured
1925 .. 56,433 82,608 10,026 27,391
1930 .. 73,193 90,467 9,482 27,172
1935 .. 92,919 112,091 9,879 27,352
1940 .. 114,272 161,765 13,897 40,442
1945 .. 128,071 245,535 17,492 53,205
1948 .. 162,201 307,597 18,0003 74,487
The total number of workers (all races) grew from 176,458 to 562,288 and the number of all non-European workers from 120,025 to 400,087.
According to the report (January, 1954) published by Dr. Guy Routh, Ph.D., Secretary of the Industrial Council for the Clothing Industry, Transvaal, the labour force in the clothing industry in the Union of South Africa during the period 1937/8 to 1952 grew as follows:
1937/8 1952
European males .. .. .. 985 1,503
European females .. .. .. 8,896 10,406
Coloured and Asiatic males .. .. 1,509 4,850
Coloured and Asiatic females .. .. 3,441 17,953
African males .. .. .. .. 1,228 3,214
African females .. .. .. 101 2,497
TOTAL .. . . . .. 16,160 40,423
This shows that the number of European workers rose from 9,881 in 1937/8 to 11,909 in 1952 and that, during the same period, the number of non-European workers rose from a total of 6,269 to 28,574. The proportion of Europeans, however, fell from 61.2 per cent in 1937/8 to 29.4 per cent in 1952, while the proportion of non-Europeans rose from 38.8 per cent to 70.6 per cent.
For the clothing industry in the Transvaal Province, alone, the figures are as follows:
1937/8 1953
(August)
European males .. .. .. 569 412
European females .. .. .. 5,923 7,333
Coloured and Asiatic males 73 550
Coloured and Asiatic females .. 250 5,767
African males 1, 101 2,631
African females 8 2,742
___________________
TOTAL .. .. .. 7, 924 19,435
______________________
These figures show the following:
In 1937/8, the non-European workers constituted only about twenty-two per cent of the total in the Transvaal.
In 1953, they formed sixty per cent.
2. The number of European workers increased from 6,492 to .7,745.
3. A very big increase in the number of African women workers, also, in the number of Coloured and Indian workers.
4. A decrease in the number of European men workers. It is now common knowledge that the efficiency and proÂductivity of the non-European workers, as well as the European workers, increased considerably over the years. According to the widespread opinions held by Europeans, including many trade union leaders, the influx of non-Europeans into industry and their advancement in skill and efficiency should have led to a decline in the standards of the European workers and to their dismissal and replacement by non-Europeans. The facts show an entirely different picture.
The following pictures are taken from Dr. Routh's report. They exclude African males, who are not "employees" and not covered by the industrial agreements for the clothing industry. Figures for Germiston are not given either, and apparently they were not available; but this is of no consequence as Germiston is, in all respects, identical with the rest of the Transvaal, except that, in that centre, about 2,000 Europeans are employed, as against only a few hundred Coloured workers. The inclusion of Germiston would in no way affect the conclusions to be drawn.
Table VI: Average Weekly Wages, Transvaal (excluding Germiston)
1941 1942 1943 1945
European males . £6 10 11 8 0 8 9 2 6 10 11 1
European females 2 15 7 356 3 17 4 4 8 8
Coloured and
Asiatic males .. 2 0 0 3 4 4 4 12 10 6 7 9
Asiatic females .. 2 2 10 2 10 10 378
Wage Board Figures (Including Germiston)
1946 1947 1955
European males .. £ 10 8 4 11 2 0
European females .. 4 18 4 5 2 0 7 8 9
Coloured and Asiatic
Males .. .. 7 6 9 7 60
Coloured and Asiatic
Females .. .. 3 8 3 4 0 1 6 14 4
These figures prove conclusively that the usual theories which are brought forward, in order to give a reason for excluding Africans from industry, have no basis at all in fact and that industrial and economic development follows its own course and laws. There is nothing singular about the clothing industry and a study of the development of any other manufacturing industry in South Africa will show a similar trend, establishing beyond a shadow of doubt that the introduction of non-European workers into industry and the rise in their standard of living which must inevitably result, constitutes no danger at all to the white worker; on the contrary, it benefits all sections. It should be observed that the minimum wages, as laid down in the industrial agreements for the industry, cover all workers, except African males, and the disparity in wage rates, as between Europeans and non-Europeans and between males and females, is explained by the following.
The basic factors governing wage rates are the standard of living of the various groups of workers and their productivity. The two naturally go together. Even in mass-producing industries, there are different classes of work, which may be roughly divided into various categories-highly skilled, skilled, operative or semi-skilled, and unskilled.
In the clothing industry, the first category includes cutting and designing; the second, tailoring by hand (e.g., basting, shaping, fitting, etc.), and the machining of the better class of garments, such as men's coats and jackets and ladies' coats and costumes; the operative and semi-skilled would include all plain and patent machining or machining of one or two parts of a garment only, machining trousers, ladies' dresses and blouses, more simple operaÂtions of hand tailoring, pressing, machine cutting, etc.; unskilled work is confined to cleaning, i.e., cutting off ends, folding, affixing labels or tickets, etc.
In the manufacturing industries, there is no legal colour bar and non-European workers may perform any class of work. In practice, however, every racial group fits into industry according to its standard of development and living, education, industrial training, cultural background, tradition, none of which is the attribute of any particular racial group.
We find the following distribution of workers in the clothing industry: the head cutters and designers are generally men and women from Europe, with a long industrial tradition and highly specialised training. But many Afrikaner men and women have, over a period of years; acquired sufficient training and skill to do cutting and designing, and recently, a few Coloured workers have succeeded in entering this branch of the industry. The second category is composed largely of Jewish tailors and machinery, but a substantial number of Afrikaner men, Malay workers who have a craft tradition, and even some Coloured and Indian men workers, has also successfully undertaken this work. The operative or semi-skilled work is performed almost entirely by women, the more difficult operations and the work on the better quality garments being performed by European or Coloured women, who have had a longer experience in the industry and possess a higher degree of skill. The more simple work of this nature and the work on the cheaper class of garments, such as shirts, khaki trousers, cheap suits and work-wear, is done by the less efficient Europeans and the mass of Coloured, Indian and African women workers, who have come into the industry comparatively recently. There is nothing predestined or immutable about this process and, in time to come, workers of all racial groups will be able to perform all classes of work, including the highly skilled and skilled.
In earnings, we observe a similar tendency. All workers must receive not less than the legal minimum, but about half of the European workers, men and women, and a number of Coloured workers, which I would estimate at about ten per cent of the total, receive from five per cent to seventy-five per cent above the minimum. This is reflected particularly in factories which operate a bonus system. The more oppression the workers of the different racial groups suffer, the lower is their standard of living, and the less is their opportunity of entering industry and acquiring skill and efficiency. Experience has shown that skill and efficiency are not determined by the colour of a worker's skin, but only by the opportunities afforded to him or her to advance.
Of course, trade union action and the general economic development of the country played major roles in improving wages, but oppression and lack of opportunity are coincidental with race and colour in South Africa. Hence the lower wages for non-Europeans.
The statistics of the office of the Industrial Council for the Clothing Industry, Transvaal, also show that, in times of trade recession, the tendency on the part of employers is to dismiss non-Europeans and retain or engage the services of Europeans.
An African who comes from the land to an industrial area is faced with difficulties which few can appreciate. He is not only a stranger in the big city; he is an outcast, subject to countless oppressive laws and regulations. His own black skin is his mark of inferiority, of cruel oppression, of helotry. The cultural, social and civic amenities are not for him. Wherever he turns, he sees notices displayed: "For Europeans only". If he is tired, he cannot sit down on a bench in the street or in a park, for it is marked:
"Slegs vir Blankes" (for Whites only); should he feel hungry or thirsty, he cannot enter a restaurant or cafe. He would be thrown out. He cannot use the public convenience and will often have to walk miles to find one-marked "Non-Europeans". He cannot even walk on the pavement without the risk of being kicked off by some brute. No hotel will admit him and, in all but a few towns, he will not be allowed to use the same public transport as white citizens. He must travel in a bus or tram marked "Native" and these run at long intervals and are intolerably overcrowded during peak hours. He may, in theory, sit upstairs in one of the few seats at the back of a European bus; but, if the conductor is one of those ill-mannered "saviours of white civilisation"-and most conductors in the Transvaal are-he will not be allowed to board the public vehicle at all and will often be pushed off. The African does not even enjoy the "privilege" of sleeping under the bridge or in the park. The law in effect considers an African a vagrant until he proves that he is not, and vagrancy is a crime. Under the various Urban Areas Acts, he is prohibited from residing in the city altogether, unless he is a domestic servant, and then he may only live on his employer's premises. He must carry numerous passes and is liable to be stopped by any policeman, white or black, and be asked to produce them. Should one be missing, he is arrested and usually sent to gaol, as he cannot afford to pay the fine of £1 or £2. While seeking work, he must have a work permit and, if he cannot find employment within a few days, he may be considered a vagrant. His permit may be extended, or he may be deported, not necessarily back to his home. If he wishes to avoid conviction, he can accept work as a labourer for some white farmer. He usually finds lodging with some friends in a location, an area reserved exclusively for Africans, or in some Native township. These are invariably overcrowded, and lack the ordinary communal amenities, such as sanitation, lighting, etc. The overwhelming majority of urban Africans are forced to live in slums, compared with which the worst slums in Europe and America would seem luxurious. Even if the African has enough money to build himself a decent house, he cannot do so, for he is not allowed to own any land in urban areas. In addition, entire African communities may, at any time, be uprooted from the land, on which they have lived for years, and transplanted elsewhere. Some municipalities, among which Port Elizabeth is most prominent, have given much attention to the housing of Africans; but, in the main, the scandalous housing conditions for Africans in urban areas are examples of criminal neglect on the part of their European "masters". Even in his shantytown, the African does not enjoy peace. For many years it has been a regular habit for the police to raid African homes in the middle of the night, usually on a Saturday. The pretext is the search for illicit liquor, or passes, or tax receipts, but the real motive is to show the African that, at any time, night or day, the white man is absolute master.
In the eyes of most Europeans, the African can never do anything right. If he is illiterate and dresses shabbily, he is a "dirty kaffir". Should he acquire some education and dress and speak like a European, his efforts will not be praised. On the conÂtrary, he is "the cheeky kaffir, who thinks that he is a white man". If he tries to be friendly, he is "impudent". If he expresses resentÂment at the abuse constantly hurled at him, he is again "cheeky" and is often beaten up and arrested. If he shows neither friendliness nor resentment, but silently bears his suffering with the proud dignity so common among Africans, then he is regarded as simply "one of those kaffirs you cannot trust, who are always treacherous and dishonest".
The African is shackled with so many laws and regulations that it is impossible for him to obey them all. About one million are sent to gaol every year-a very high proportion. But what is really surprising is how the other millions succeed in keeping out of gaol. According to figures published in the Official Year Book No. 25 (p.444), the number of Africans convicted in 1949 of petty "crime" alone, was as follows
Trespass .. .. .. .. 57, 028
Drunkenness .. .. .. 65,257
Possession of illicit liquor.. .. ... 37, 913
Breaking location rules .. .. .. 32,288
Master and Servants Act .. .. .. 18397
Municipal offences .. .. .. 38,360
Native Labour Regulations Act .. 10,509
Pass Laws .. .. .. .. 44,903
Urban Areas Act .. .. .. 8,303
Curfew regulations .. .. .. .. 44,294
Regulations and production of document .. .. .. 55,673
Native taxation 21,381
_______
TOTAL .. .. .. 434,306
________
Apart from this legalised oppression, the African is also very often the victim of lawless brutality on the part of Whites, and wanton assaults on Africans are frequent.
In this atmosphere of oppression, humiliation and degradation, the African starts looking for work. He is denied almost all chance of education and only a small percentage of the new arrivals can read and write. Vocational training? In the Reserves or on the European farms, he has no opportunity for learning a trade. With a smattering of English, sometimes without any knowledge of the language at all, he goes from door to door, asking for work. Often he is rudely chased away. When, at last, he succeeds in finding work, more troubles are in store for him. The European boss is usually not very friendly. Even the white worker, who claims to be a good trade unionist, is often hostile and treats him as a kaffir, abusing and assaulting him. There are exceptions, of course. There are decent employers and white workers, who show sympathy and understanding. But they are in the minority.
Even Europeans, when they have had no industrial tradition, find the factory bewildering at first. To the African, the strange, complicated machinery of a modern factory and the hostile faces around him, are utterly confusing and frightening. He usually starts as an unskilled labourer, sweeping floors, carrying materials or parcels and doing only menial jobs. He earns very little at first, about 30s. a week, but now he is no longer living in a primitive tribal society but under a modern capitalist system. Transport and housing are his two major problems and food and clothing come next.
In Johannesburg, it takes many thousands of Africans from two to three hours-often longer-to get to work and back home. Prom sunset to sunrise, he must carry a special pass from his employer to enable him to go to work, to get home, or to visit friends, and these special passes are issued daily.
It is a great tribute to the Africans' patience and ingenuity, to their fervent desire to advance and their devotion to their families, that, in spite of all the obstacles in their way and the bitterly hostile world in which they live, over a million have found employment in the manufacturing industries, in transport, commerce, and other spheres. And their numbers are still increasing. Although they have no facilities to help them learn specialist trades, tens of thousands have already become skilled operatives or semi-skilled workers, very often-handling complicated machinery. No one can stop their economic advancement; the entire economy of the country depends upon it. There is a violent and constant conflict between the backward political philosophy of the country, known as apartheid, and it's rapidly developing economic life. A modern economy cannot be built on the fantastic theories of the champions of the master race.
Despite the increasing part played by the African in South Africa's industrial development, his status remains that .of a serf. His contract of employment is governed by several; Master and servant Acts, by the Native Labour Regulation Act of 1911, and other restrictive laws.
In 1924, when the first Industrial Conciliation Act was passed -the Act was amended in 1937-to regulate the relationship between employers and employees and to provide a measure of collective bargaining for workers, Africans were excluded. A direct colour bar in the Act might have evoked criticism from abroad, so a new definition of "employee" was introduced, which reads:
Employee" means any person employed by, or working for an employer, and receiving, or being entitled to receive, any remuneration, and any other person whatsoever who in any manner assists in the carrying on or conducting of the business of an employer but does not include a person whose contract of service or labour is regulated by Act No. 40 of 1894 of Natal, or, in terms of section two of the Masters and Servants Law (Transvaal and Natal) Amendment Act, 1926 (Act No. 26 of 1926) is regarded for the purpose of Act No. 40 of 1894 of Natal as a contract between master and servant, or is regulated by the Native Labour Regulation Act 1911 (Act No. 15 of 1911) or by the Natives (Urban Areas) Act 1923 (Act No. 21 of 1923), or by any amendment of, or any regulation made under, any of those laws; and "employed" and "employment" have corresponding meanings.
Section 24 of the Act prohibits differentiation or discrimination in any industrial agreements made under the Act on the grounds of race or colour and section 48 (iv) of the Act provides that the provisions of the agreement may be extended by the Minister to apply to Africans, on an application by an industrial council. In several industries this has actually been done, but the Garment Workers Union tried for many years, without success, to have our agreements extended; the employers always refused, pleading the unfair competition which resulted from the low wages paid in the coastal areas.
The African workers themselves have no voice whatever in the making of industrial agreements and in determining the wages and conditions under which they have to work. Under the Industrial Conciliation Act, Africans are not allowed to be members of registered trade unions. Since 1928, however, our union has helped to organise a separate union of Africans, known as "The South African Clothing Workers' Union", and has assisted the African workers in many ways. Officials of the union often helped the South African Clothing Workers' Union in making representations to the employers, and on several occasions, the union threatened to take strike action to help them. In some instances, when African workers stopped work, European workers, although generally antagonistic to the Africans, were prepared to go on strike in order to help these less fortunate workers.
Since 1932, Wage Determination Nos. 42 and 120 have governed the wages and other conditions of employment of African workers in the clothing industry in the Transvaal. The minimum wage provided by these determinations is much lower-often less than a third-of that provided in the industrial agreements for similar jobs. The weekly hours of work are more and the paid holidays less.
The following shows the absurdity of South African labour legislation:
Before the Second World War there were hardly any African women at work in the clothing industry, or in industry generally, although the number of African men employed was growing all the time. Their work was confined almost entirely to those occupations which required greater physical strength, such as machine or hand pressing and machine cutting. In the early 'thirties, the Government tried to introduce a " white labour policy" in State services and private industry, and manufacturers were urged to dispense with the services of African workers and replace them with Europeans. For a time, a large number of European youths were engaged as pressers and choppers-out, but they did not stay very long and either found more congenial occupations in the clothing industry or left altogether. From 1940 onwards, the industry expanded rapidly and there was an acute shortage of labour. African women, who had always worked as domestic servants, now began to take employment in factories. They wanted more freedom and more pay. By 1944, over a thousand African women were employed in the clothing industry in the Transvaal. Since 1924, when the first Industrial Conciliation Act was passed, it was taken for granted that African women, like African men, were not "employees" in terms of the Act and did not come under the industrial agreements for the industry. Wage Determination No. 42 governed their wages and conditions of employment and were much lower than those enjoyed by the workers who come under the agreement. By that time, the union was expert at finding flaws in the oppressive South African legislation. I had made a careful study of the definition of "employee" in the Industrial Conciliation Act and of the various Acts referred to in that definition, and came to the conclusion that African women were' not covered by the proviso in the definition of "employee", as the Acts mentioned applied only to men. The union informed the employers of our view on the matter, but they refused to accept it, relying on the advice given them by the Labour Department and on the general assumption throughout South Africa that all Africans, men and women, were excluded from the provisions of the Act. We persisted, however, until the employers ultimately agreed that the Industrial Council should seek a Supreme Court ruling on the matter. Accordingly, an African woman, Christina Okolo, who had been working in the clothing industry for about a year, applied to the Transvaal Provincial Division of the Supreme Court for a Declaratory Order, asking the court to rule that she and all other African women were employees under the provisions of the Industrial Conciliation Act. The Industrial Council for the Clothing Industry, which was the respondent, engaged eminent counsel to appear both for the applicant and it. The case was argued at great length and involved the careful scrutiny of several statutes and numerous regulations. On the 22nd December, 1944, the Acting Judge-President Saul Solomon, gave judgment, holding that Act 21 of 1923 and Act 15 of 1911 did not apply to native females.
In the course of his judgment, the learned judge said:
A gap appears to have been left in the legislation hitherto passed and the second applicant has found her way through it. The result may be anomalous, but the court declares that the terms of the clothing industry agreement apply to her, as either Act 15 of 1911 or Act 21 of 1923 does not regulate her contract of service or labour. She, therefore, does not come within the exclusion. The costs of the proceedings will, by consent, be paid by the respondent.
This judgment did not cause any serious disturbance in the industry, and in the course of a few weeks the African women had their wages increased by substantial amounts-in many instances, from £-1 to £2 per week. Their hours of work were reduced from forty-six to forty-four, as was provided in the agreement, and all the other privileges of the agreement were extended to them. The adjustment was effected without the slightest difficulty-only a few employers grumbled. Shortly afterwards all the African women workers were enrolled as members of the union and readily showed their gratitude to the union by being loyal members. And so, probably for the first time in history, and in an extremely backward country, a group of women enjoyed greater privileges than their menfolk, many of whom had worked in the clothing industry for over ten years. African men started at a weekly wage of £1 for a forty-six hour week, rising by yearly increments to £3 after five years, but their wives, daughters and sisters received £25s. per week for a forty-four hour week to start with, rising by quarterly increases to £4 12s. per week after two and a half years. In addition, the women became entitled to four weeks' paid holiday per year, instead of the two weeks for African men, and could become members of our union, while the men were excluded from joining by law. The judgment of the Supreme Court also brought African women within the scope of the Unemployment Benefit Act, which had a definition of "employee" similar to the definition in the Industrial Conciliation Act.
In 1953, The Nationalist Government passed the Native Labour (Settlement of Disputes) Act, which not only specifically excluded all African men and women from the Industrial Conciliation Act, but also deprived Africans of any rights of collective bargaining and negotiating with employers. Under this law committees have been set up with absolute discretion to settle any dispute, involving Africans, as they think fit. Africans are, of course, excluded from serving on these committees but, in addition, even their right to make representations may be denied to them by these bodies, and they are powerless to do anything about it. Resort to strike action is impossible, for this is prohibited by law and carries penalties of three years' imprisonment and a £ 500 fine.
The Garment Workers' Union, however, decided to defend the interests of its African women members. We therefore notified the employers and the Government that no lowering of African women workers' standards would be tolerated and that these workers' wages and conditions must be governed, as in the past, by the industrial agreements for the industry. The union threatened strike action, should the employers decide to alter the conditions for African women workers. The employers who, like most industrialists, are opposed to the Government's "apartheid" policy, agreed to the union's demands. Later a separate union was established for African women workers, which still works in closest co-operation with the Garment Workers' Union.
Where workers are united and determined to fight for their rights they can successfully challenge oppressive legislation.