Steel Industry: Compare Performances

MONOPOLY CAPITAL vs the ENTREPRENEUR

STEEL INDUSTRY

Zero. Zilch. Nada. Niks. …

Once you’ve read this, you are welcome to comment by clicking here.

According to page 58 of Seifsa’s 75th Anniversary communique, that’s what NEASA has done for its constituency.

However, before we deal with what NEASA has done, let’s remind Seifsa what they have done for the Steel Industry:

• they have succeeded in negotiating double the wages paid by comparable industries;
• in doing so they have, in utter weakness and hypocrisy, acted against their own better judgement;
• they have extended their agreements, which their own members could not afford, to the rest of the Steel Industry;
• they have constantly done so unlawfully, in some cases even fraudulently, resulting in a judge of the Labour Court calling their whole scheme a ‘sham’;
• their dishonest self-serving actions resulted in countless business closures and job losses and the gradual demise of the Steel Industry; and
• in the highly damaging issue of protectionist duties in favour of an uncompetitive AMSA, they have, typically, remained silent.

To the contrary, NEASA, throughout this period:

• protected SMMEs against these hostile agreements, preventing hundreds of small businesses from being liquidated, saving tens of thousands of jobs;
• have in fact, through the Courts, had these agreements declared null and void – all of them since 2011;
• in the process have exposed Seifsa’s continuous unlawful, even fraudulent, conduct;
• have exposed Seifsa to such an extent:

– that their Industry membership, since 2011, was halved;
– their representativity on the MEIBC Management Committee has been  reduced from 90 percent (in 2011) to 20 percent (currently); and

• while Seifsa, typically encased in their cocoon, did not say a word, NEASA fought as hard as it could to demonstrate the devastating impact of the duties, which only protects AMSA, on the Steel Downstream.

There are only two reasons why Seifsa is still in existence:

• the anti-SMME provisions of the Labour Relations Act which protects them and their NUMSA coalition, without which the MEIBC will not exist; and
• the support of monopoly capital – which, by the way, has nothing to do with the size of a company, but its monopolistic attitude.

It is therefore fair to conclude that Seifsa has acted as the model agent for their sponsors (monopoly capital), but for the Steel Industry, apart from a tremendous amount of damage, they have done …

… zero, zilch, nada, niks.

In order to achieve change, the support of each and every SMME is needed.
Neutrality is no longer an option.
Click here to join NEASA in its fight for the SMME cause.

Kind Regards,