Trade unions in the mining sector are in a unique position when it comes to the just transition. They must protect their members as well as humanity as a whole. Amandla! spoke with Tebogo Lesabe, Legislative Researcher for the National Union of Mineworkers (NUM).

Amandla!: What does NUM mean by a just transition?

Tebogo Lesabe: The NUM believes that it has to do with a fair, inclusive shift towards a low-carbon economy that prioritises workers’ livelihoods, particularly in the mining and energy sector. It entails securing jobs and re-skilling opportunities and fair wages, social support and a strong community infrastructure. In a policy conference discussion paper, the NUM identified four pillars that were central to what it defines as a just transition, loosely based on the International Labour Organisation’s Decent Work Agenda. They are social dialogue, social protection, rights at work, and employment protection and creation. 

A!: It seems that you emphasise the fair treatment of workers more than the idea of transition. Is that fair? That for you, protecting your members is number one, and the climate crisis is number two? 

TL: That’s a difficult one. Because I think the transition affects every human being. As an organisation, we are advocates for workers, and that includes the need for a transition. However, there are social and economic issues currently in South Africa that the organisation must balance in this particular transitioning to decarbonisation. So, it’s not that there is no appreciation of the environmental implications. But labour represents workers. We must acknowledge that the transition will affect workers and the community and afford them the grace to adjust accordingly.

The industrial revolution in the UK. In Cosatu’s blueprint for a just transition, there is a view that the Global North should be financing the just transition as the biggest emitters of carbon. And there is a growing concern with the practice of giving out loans instead of grants.

A!: Of course, some people might say that we didn’t, here in Africa, create this problem. It was created in the Industrial Revolution in Europe and North America. So it’s not our business. They keep telling us in South Africa to close down our coal mines. Meanwhile, they’ve got coal mines pumping out in their own countries. So, is there any feeling that we’re not the main culprits here. It’s less our problem than theirs?

TL: In Cosatu’s blueprint for a just transition there is a view that the Global North should be financing the just transition, as the biggest emitters of carbon. And there is a growing concern with the practice of giving out loans instead of grants. And it is a fact that, as Africa, we are one of the low emitters of carbon. But that doesn’t take away the reality that we will suffer the most consequences out of every continent. So we do appreciate that we ought to also participate and partake in the direction that the world is taking.

A!: If we look maybe at our coal-fired power stations, which right now we depend on. Should they be closed as part of the just transition?

TL: The NUM just transition document speaks of net zero emissions rather than zero emissions. It holds the view that net zero emissions would be the right way to go about dealing with the transition. What that means in layman’s terms is that for whatever carbon emission that is generated, there must be the same amount of carbon removed. This net zero emission offers scope to allow the sectors, including the coal sector, to continue operating to contribute to the economy. It pays attention to interventions that may be put in place to control these emissions and to balance them. It also allows for some jobs in these emitting sectors to be protected or saved. Because also, there’s an issue of the pace at which we transition compared with the capacity and the uncertainty in the paths that we are taking. 

A!: Some people would say you can talk about pace, but this is an emergency. We are already long past the 1.5 degrees, which was the aim of the Paris Agreement. So how can you talk about pace in an emergency?

TL: I think it goes back to the four pillars I highlighted, and in particular, the combination of social dialogue and social protection. True to the definition of social dialogue, we’re coming together and negotiating policy agreements for the best interests of all stakeholders. On the issue of financing, labour has a problem, because there’s no disclosure, there’s no transparency, and this breaks the social dialogue. And the social protection aspect means the security of the workers in the face of vulnerabilities and contingencies. So it’s not an issue of not appreciating the pace of the transition; it’s just those nitty gritties for every stakeholder.

A!: It’s a challenge for us. I think that if you were to do a survey in South Africa of the things that are most important to people, climate change wouldn’t be very high up on the list. Unemployment would be much higher, conditions at work, wages and so on. So there’s a sense in which this hasn’t really been accepted by the broad mass of people in this country as a matter of extreme urgency. Would you say that’s fair and that’s a challenge? And, if so, how are you, as a union of hundreds of thousands of members, managing to deal with that?

TL: That’s definitely a fair assessment, and I think it’s also rooted in some of the responses I have given up to this point. What we attempt to do is to capacitate all individuals linked to the organisation to participate in affiliate meetings, to support and advance the issue of the just transition, to share notes, to build up toolkits that ensure that, in our respective organisations, we’re able to really make efforts towards our members or workers transitioning and understanding the implications of such a transition. However, we recognise that it also needs a collaborative effort from all social partners and from both the Global North and Global South because it’s not unique to the NUM. It’s a human problem.

A!: You said earlier “net zero”, not just zero emissions. On one side, we’re emitting carbon into the atmosphere. So, something has to balance that out if we’re going to get to net zero. What do you see balancing that out? Some people would say it’s technology, that there must be technology to capture carbon. Other people disagree with that. How do you see that?

A pilot carbon capture facility pulling carbon from the air and using it to make synthetic fuel. The NUM believes that research must be ongoing to really explore a technology that will enable net zero in the industries or sectors where there’s carbon emission.

TL: The NUM believes that research must be ongoing to really explore a technology that will enable net zero in the industries or sectors where there’s carbon emission. It’s on the premise that coal remains a strategic national resource for South Africa, providing a means to a living for more than 500,000 people, and it’s difficult to easily just discard it. 

There’s been a great investment in coal infrastructure, and there still is. There are debts involved, and livelihoods. And there isn’t concrete evidence of successes in renewable energies that are sustainable and, most importantly, that would allow for an ease of transition from coal, given the benefits the coal infrastructure has brought to many people. So it’s difficult to suddenly say that the alternative energies will provide a sustainable, reliable baseload when there’s evidence that coal, as it stands, provides reliable baseload electricity,

A!: Amongst those employed in the industry, a distinction often gets drawn between direct employees of the mine and contract workers. In many mines, there are more contract workers than there are direct employees. And the employers would not want to guarantee the jobs of the contract workers. I don’t know whether you think that’s a fair assessment, and if so, what can be done about it?

TL: I think it’s fair, and to some degree I believe that’s where stakeholders agree on the framework of operationalising this transition. What would be fair is social protection and employment protection and creation. We should re-skill or upskill the community or workers to ensure that they are able to adjust. It’s beyond permanent or contract workers – re-skilling and upskilling should apply to both.

A!: Next year will be 40 years of COSATU, and it seems that the labour movement is at a historically weak moment. For example, the NUM and Cosatu were opposed to the breakup of Eskom. But it’s happened, apparently, without any really meaningful protest. Why was there no meaningful protest against the breakup of Eskom?

TL: I think what labour needs to do is strengthen their voice where they converge, and particularly on the issues of climate change. We need a consolidated voice. The fragmentation that has existed must cease to ensure that we are a social partner that really is of one mind, one accord, not just in the different industries in the country but even in the Global South. There should be continued collaboration and capacity building through our affiliates and Cosatu.  So I think that would really change the trajectory of labour as a movement when it sits with business, when it sits with government, and when it sits with other stakeholders.