Asinamali ! - the workers' case (1981)

ASINAMALI! The workers' case - The bosses arguments exposed
 

This pamphlet, produced in March 1981 by the South African Labour Education Project - who prepared and distributed material to assist the trade union and political organisation of the workers of South Africa - sets out to explain the struggle for wages in the context of the Marxist understanding of value, price and profit.

Introduction

The chief economist of Barclays Bank admitted in June last year that average living standards in South Africa had fallen by nearly 17% between 1974 and 1977.

Now a study carried out by a researcher at Witwatersrand University has proved that even during the current boom of capitalism in South Africa, living standards for the mass of the black population have continued to fall sharply.

Between July 1978 and December 1980 prices are estimated to have risen almost 40%, while the wages of the black households interviewed (who were considered above-average in Soweto) rose less than 20% during the same period. In other words, the living standards for these households dropped by about 20%.

All over South Africa, black working-class families in both the urban and rural areas face an ever more desperate struggle to survive.

Through waves of strike action, the workers are making it clear they will not accept starvation wages. The battle for independent trade unions, carried forward with great energy and determination, is fought as part and parcel of the struggle against low' wages and oppressive conditions.

In 1973, when workers in Natal came out in mass strikes, the strike movement was largely spontaneous (although underground links were made). Today strikes are clearly tied up with the question of organisation.

With the growing organisation of the workers there is a real need for the trade unions to be armed against the ideas of the bosses and their state. As the workers' organisations grow, so the bosses try ever more clever ways of fighting against our movement. They rely not only on the police and army to try and bludgeon workers into passivity - they rely also on their press and academics to put forward arguments to try and confuse the workers.

This pamphlet aims to help arm workers against the bosses' arguments on the issue of wages. Seven typical arguments of the bosses are outlined, and in reply we make suggestions on how these arguments can be exposed and how workers can organise against them.

Workers also need to be prepared against any weakness in the trade union leadership. Some trade union leaders argue, for example, that workers should hold back on wage demands because recognition of the union by the bosses should come first. Others say that the workers should keep their demands to what would be more or less acceptable to the bosses.

But the struggle for a living wage is central to the trade union movement, and cannot be postponed. For workers, life is a constant battle to make ends meet, to provide even the bare necessities of food, housing and clothing for their families and themselves.

Prices are constantly going up, and the needs of the workers constantly clash with the interests of the bosses. When have decent wages for the mass of workers ever been 'acceptable' to the bosses?

Workers are struggling for a better life for all, exploited and oppressed people. The advances which have been made by the most militant and organised workers, such as the motor workers, are an inspiration for others. But without constant struggle against rising prices and for independent trade union organisation, the workers' standard of living cannot even be maintained, let alone improved.

The task of the trade union federations is to take up the advances of the best-organised workers and strengthen the weaker sections. With the overwhelming mass of workers - the migrant workers - still largely unorganised, the trade union movement faces an enormous and demanding task. But it must be done.

The demand for a national minimum wage has long been raised in the independent unions. This is a demand which can unite workers all over the country in struggle against the bosses and their government.

In 1977, the demand was raised for a national minimums wage for all workers of R50 per week.

Because of the huge increase in the cost of living since then, this demand would now have to be increased to R90 a week, with automatic further increases to keep up with price rises.

Wages and profits

Every worker who has been involved in strike action, every worker who has struggled for trade union rights and higher wages, knows how fiercely the bosses in South Africa defend their system of cheap labour. Workers know that low wages are the king-pin of the profit system - and the main purpose behind the oppression of the black people.

For workers, wages are the only means of survival. Out of wages they must pay for food, rent, clothes, transport, medicines, school books for the children, and the many other things, needed in order to live.

For the bosses, profits are the key to their existence as bosses. Their whole system depends on squeezing as much profit as possible from the workers. If we understand how they make, their profits, we will see quite clearly why low wages are so vital to them.

We must start by stating what workers instinctively recognise from experience. Profit for the bosses comes entirely from exploiting the workers.

Exploitation amounts to this: The boss pays to the worker (as wages) less than the value which the worker's labour creates. The difference is taken by the bosses. It is this unpaid labour of the working class which gives the bosses their profits.

The capitalists are able to exploit workers to take the fruits of the workers’ labour for themselves, for the single reason that they own the means of production - the land, raw materials, machinery and buildings - while the workers own nothing but their own power to work. Thus, to, stay alive and provide for their, families, workers have to sell themselves - their power to labour - over and over to the capitalists, and so maintain the daily cycle of exploitation.

The boss buys the worker's labour-power – for a day, for a week, for a month, as the case may be. That is the so-called 'contract' of employment. The boss and the worker 'agree' on a price for the worker's labour-power. That is the amount of the wage.

Workers enter the 'contract' of employment with the bosses; under very obvious disadvantages. Workers have no property to sustain them. Poverty, hunger, pressing needs drive them into whatever jobs they can get. At the same time, the state and the, bosses conspire together to keep the workers’ bargaining position weak. 

Survival 

The result is that wages tend to remain at the lowest level necessary to keep the working class alive - to keep the workers capable of working and to replace them with other workers when they become too, old or sick for work, or when they die.

At times of high unemployment, when many workers are forced to compete with each other for very few jobs, the bosses may be able for a while to force wages even below this level. At other times, when the pressure of unemployment eases, and when the workers' organisations are strong, it may be possible for a while to force wages above the level of bare survival.

But, as workers in South Africa have found from long experience, wages tend to remain around the breadline. Thus workers, who have spent a lifetime in toil, have seen their employers prosper while they themselves stay poor.

This is in the nature of the capitalist system. Workers are paid wages - the price for selling their labour-power. But they are not paid according to the wealth their labour produces. That wealth becomes the property of the capitalists.

Let us look more closely at the mechanics of capitalist exploitation. The first point to understand is that labour alone creates value. The value of every product bought and sold depends on how much labour has been used up in making it.

Whether we are dealing with buildings, machinery, materials, cars, food or clothing, we can trace the source of every product back to two things. Firstly, there is what comes from nature. Secondly, there is the work which has been involved in making it.

Society lives by labour - by the work done in extracting, refining, shaping and combining the resources of the earth to satisfy the needs of people. Consequently, the quantity of labour which is necessary to produce the various products which society needs, gives them their value when they are bought and sold.

For example, the iron ore mined from the earth 'embodies' the quantity of labour spent in its production. This determines its value.

Then, when iron ore is processed into steel, the old value (labour) in it is passed on to the finished product, while more labour (value) is added in the process.

When steel is cast and ground, and pieces of it joined to form machinery, once again its former value is carried forward into the machinery; and new value is added by new labour at the same time. So it is that buildings, vehicles, machines and products of all kinds come to embody a total value equal to the labour spent in every stage of their production, from first to last.

Machinery

A similar thing happens when machinery is worn out in the course of use. Let us take, for example, a machine used in weaving textiles.

Its value is steadily reduced, by wear and tear during production. Eventually it becomes practically valueless and is fit-only for scrap. Its former value, however, has not been lost. It has been passed on, little by little, into the fabrics woven through the machine.

Thus the textile products have themselves come to embody the former value of the machine - together, of course, with the value of the thread used in them and the additional value resulting from the labour of the workers consumed in the process of weaving.

Finally, when products are sold, their value is changed into money in the hands of the seller.

Having grasped that value comes from labour, we are now in a position to understand how the profits of the capitalists are made.

Example

Let us take the example of a garment factory. This is only an example - the same process takes place in the motor industry, in mining, and in every industrial workplace where workers are toiling for the bosses.

In this garment factory (let us say) 20 workers work a 10-hour day. During each day, they make up 200 completed garments, which the boss sells off at R5 each. So at the end of each day, the boss sells 200 garments and gets R1 000 in exchange. This R1 000 represents the value of the garments.

How is this R1 000 in the pocket of the employer made up?

Part of it represents the value of the cloth, cotton and other raw materials used in the day's production. (To express this in terms of labour, we would say it represents the labour of the workers which was spent in producing the cloth, cotton, and so on.)

Another part of it represents the value of that part of the machinery and other equipment worn out during the day's production. (To express this in terms of labour, we would say it represents the labour of the workers spent in producing that proportion of the machinery, etc., which has been worn out.)

So, if R500 worth of cloth, cotton and so on has been used up in the day's production of garments, and the wear-and-tear on the machinery has amounted to R100, we can see that R600 of the R1 000 in the boss's pocket represents the earlier labour of workers who produced sewing machines, cloth, cotton, and so on.

But that still leaves R400 out of the R1 000 to account for. This R400 comes directly from the day's labour of the workers in the boss's garment factory itself. Through their toil in the process of production, these 20 garment workers have added R400 to the value of the raw materials and machinery which have gone into the making of the garments.

Let us say the boss pays these workers R6 a day each. His daily wage bill will be 20 X R6, or R120 altogether. But these workers have produced R400 in value. The difference - R280 - is profit for the boss. It represents labour of the workers for which they receive no pay.

We get the same figure if we add up the boss's costs: R500 (raw materials) + R100 (machinery) + R120 (wages) = R720.

He sold the garments for R1 000. His profit is: R1000 – R720 = R280.

Thus value equalling both the wages and the profits has been created by the labour of the garment workers. In other words, in a 10-hour day, the garment workers have added R400 in value, but have 'earned' only R120 in return.

Clearly they have spent only part of the working day producing the value of their own wages. If the workers create R400 in value during 10 hours' work, they create R40 every hour. The total of their day's wages, R120, is therefore produced in only 3 hours' work. For, the remaining 7 hours of every working day, the workers in our example are working 'free' for the boss.

They spend these seven hours performing unpaid or 'surplus' labour (that is to say, labour over and above the labour needed to cover their own wages) and producing 'surplus' value (that is to say, value over and above the value of their own wages).

This is where profit comes from - the unpaid labour of the workers. This is what capitalist exploitation consists of.

In the workers' vital fight for higher wages and shorter hours; the time spent working 'free' for the bosses may be reduced, while the part of the working day that they spend working for their own benefit, may be increased. The rate of exploitation may be reduced in this way.

But it is obvious that exploitation will nevertheless continue as long as capitalism survives. As long as factories, mines, land and banks are privately owned, workers will have to go on selling their working power to bosses. They will have to go on working part of every day, not for their own benefit and that of society, but for the profits' of the owners. They will have to go on being exploited day by day.

Exploitation can be ended only when the profit system is ended; when the capitalists are overthrown and dispossessed; when the means of production are taken into common ownership under workers’ control and management; and when all the working people enjoy collectively the fruits of their labour, developing production and building the economy for the common good.

The whole trade union movement should clearly see that as the goal of the struggle. Then every small gain, every increase in wages, every reduction in working hours, every lessening of exploitation at the hands of the bosses, will be fought for, defended and used by the workers as a step in the struggle for complete emancipation of the working class.

A box in the pamphlet spells out the level of exploitation

How the bosses see it - and how we see it

The exploitation of labour alone explains how the bosses get their profits. It explains, indeed, why bosses employ workers. Not surprisingly, however, bosses deny this and instead invent lies about where their profits come from. 

Sometimes the bosses try to explain how they get profits by claiming that it is their own 'skills' as bosses that give products their added value, and enable them to be sold for more than it cost to produce them.

But workers know that employers add nothing to the value of the product. They act only as policemen to keep workers on the job. In fact most of them employ managers and supervisors to organise production and act as policemen on 

Sometimes the bosses claim that it is their machines which yield them their profits. In other words, they argue that machines create value just like workers. Workers, they say, are paid a wage according to the value they create, and what the machines 'create' goes to the owners of the machines - themselves.

But as we have shown in our example of the garment factory, machines add no new value to the commodities produced. The existing value of the machines is carried over into the value of the garments; only the labour of the workers themselves adds new value.

Owning the machines simply means that the capitalist class is able to take possession of everything produced by the workers and sell it for themselves.

Pressed into a corner, the capitalist may try a different argument. He may claim that, in fact, he gets his profit by selling his product for more than its value.

This argument, however, makes no sense at all. It is true that every capitalist will try and sell his products for as much as he can get. Yet to explain the creation of profit as mere swindling of buyers is nonsense.

If this was true, it would mean that all commodities are sold for more than their value. Every capitalist not only sells - he also buys. If all commodities were sold for more than their value it would mean that every capitalist is not only getting 'profits' by selling products in this way, but is also constantly paying out 'profits' to the other capitalists from whom he must buy his machinery, materials, etc. The 'profits' the capitalists make in selling commodities, in other words, would be, lost in buying other commodities, and so they would end up precisely where they started.

In reality, the capitalist confesses to swindling his buyers only in order to conceal a crime that is far more serious in the workers' eyes. For the truth, as we showed above, is that the capitalist obtains all his profits through the systematic exploitation of the workers' labour.

The workers' unpaid labour forms part and parcel of the commodities they produce. The capitalist does not need to sell commodities at more than their value. By selling them exactly at their value, he receives not only the costs of production but also the value of the workers' unpaid labour.

Only this surplus value extracted from the workers can account for the profits of the bosses.

The capitalist system depends on profit-making by the bosses. All capitalists are compelled by their own system to strive constantly to increase their profits. They resort to every means they can to get more labour out of the workers for less pay; to reduce as much as possible the part of the working day which workers spend producing the value of their wages, and to increase as much as possible the part spent producing profit.

Lower wages, longer hours, harder work - this is the recipe of capitalism. In response, it calls forth the struggle of workers for higher wages, shorter hours, a more tolerable pace of work, better facilities and conditions.

To defend the capitalist, system, to protect the property of the capitalists, to maintain the conditions for profit-making, the bosses are supported by the army, the police, the courts, the state as a whole. Together, they resist any changes which would strengthen the workers and endanger their own interests. Naked force backs up all their 'arguments'.

In South Africa they rely on the apartheid system with its pass laws, reserves, system of migrant labour and its denial of trade union and political rights to maintain and control the force of cheap black labour which they exploit in their factories, mines and farms.

Thus the struggle for a living wage lies at the, root of the class struggle - a struggle between the working class and the capitalist class over how much of the value produced by the workers is, taken by the bosses and how much remains for the workers.

Cheap labour

Only through the united efforts of the workers, organised together as a class, can the bosses be made to raise wages. The bosses (no matter what they and their 'liberal' spokesmen may say) will not do this unless they are forced to.

This conclusion has been proved in practice. The figures supplied by the capitalists themselves show clearly how the strike wave in Durban in 1973, and the countrywide struggles that followed, affected the wages of black workers.

These figures are for the increase of money wages, not real wages, because they do not take account of increases in the cost of living.

From 1970 to 1971, the average money wages of African industrial workers rose by only 8%, and from 1971 to 1972 by only 9%. These were years of relative quiet on the industrial front.

The Durban strikes, however, changed the situation. From 1972 to 1973, the average wage increased by 18% double the rate of the previous year. With the strikes spreading to all other centres, the capitalist class was forced to continue making concessions in the year or two that followed. From1973 to 1974, wages rose by no less than 22% and from 1974 to 1975, by a further 21%.

Similarly, the great struggles of 1979 and 1980 have forced the bosses to make concessions to the workers. In Cape Town in 1979, for example, the determined and united stand by the stevedores won them not only recognition of their elected committee but also a wage increase of 30%. In Port Elizabeth in June 1980 the car workers enforced wage rises of up to 70%.

Yet as we have explained in a previous publication ('Profiteering from Cheap Labour - Wages paid by British companies in South Africa') the capitalist class in South Africa remains completely dependent on cheap labour. The 'liberal' bosses' journal, the Financial Mail, and the Nationalist Minister of Labour have exactly the same attitude to the demand for a national minimum wage - they reject it entirely.

The capitalist class cannot afford to pay a living wage to the black working class as a whole. Whatever it is forced to give with one hand, it must try to grab back with the other - and more. It swallows up the workers' hard-won wage increases by constantly increasing the prices that workers must pay for the commodities they need. At the same time it uses the power of the state in an effort to defeat the workers' struggle and destroy their organisations.

Therefore the struggle for a living wage cannot be separated from the class struggle as a whole - the struggle to overthrow the bosses and their state. Workers have no option but to fight for higher wages in order to relieve the burden of poverty that the capitalist system places on their shoulders. At the same time they must fight to protect and extend the gains that they have made.

Road ahead 

The workers need strong organisation - trade union and political, open and underground - through which to enforce their demands. Their struggle is to preserve and expand their organisations in the face of the bosses' ongoing attacks. 

Only in this way can they enforce improvements that are desperately needed in every walk of life - housing, education, health care and so on. Only through this struggle can they ultimately force back, paralyse, and abolish the power of the capitalist class to run society in its own interests.

Society cannot have two masters, at least not for long. Two classes with totally conflicting demands, such as the capitalist class and the working class, must sooner or later, carry their struggle to a finish.

The capitalist class cannot destroy the working class without destroying the basis of its whole system; it can only attempt to enslave the workers. But the working class can and must overthrow the capitalist class in order to win its own freedom.

By abolishing capitalism the working class can take control of the means of production and organise production in the interests of the mass of the people. Only then will the gains and the living standards of the working class be secure.

These perspectives of our struggle should be carefully considered by every worker who is actively involved in the movement. We must fight to compel the bosses to pay a living wage and to meet every other demand of the black people for improvements in our slave-like conditions.

At the same time we must see clearly where this struggle has to lead. We must use every struggle for immediate improvements not only to enforce these specific demands, but also as a golden opportunity to explain to our fellow workers the nature of the struggle and point out the road that lies ahead.

The bosses' arguments

We have looked at the struggle for a living wage from the workers' point of view. Naturally, we cannot expect the bosses to see things in quite the same way! When workers demand a living wage, the bosses come up with all sort of reasons why this is 'impossible' or 'unrealistic'. 

Sometimes even trade union leaders or shop stewards may accept the bosses' arguments and encourage the workers to ask for less. But workers should accept no compromise over the demand for a wage that can meet their needs, that can ensure them a decent living. To say this is 'unreasonable' is to say that workers should accept poverty in order to leave more profits for the bosses - the same bosses who live in luxury by exploiting the workers' labour.

Workers have no interest in preserving a system which cannot 'afford' to allow them a decent existence. If it is true that the bosses cannot afford this without upsetting the capitalist system, then it is the system and not the workers' needs that must change.

Some 'reasons' that the bosses give for rejecting the demand for a living wage - for example, that higher wages cause absenteeism or alcoholism - can be treated with the contempt they deserve. Such comments are totally dishonest when coming from ladies and gentlemen who are frequently absent from work on the golf course, overseas holidays, etc., and who often spend more in one day on expensive wines and liquor than a worker earns in an entire week.

Other 'reasons', however, may sound more convincing and cause uncertainty among workers. It is important to expose these arguments and put forward our own point of view.

1. Boss: "If we pay you higher wages there will be higher inflation."

It is completely untrue that wage increases are the cause of inflation. Inflation is inevitably produced by the capitalist system itself. The capitalists are the ones who push prices up. They and their government have the greatest influence on
prices-not the workers.

Under capitalism, workers are able to affect the price of only one commodity - their own labour power. The capitalists try, of course, to control this price as well; and indeed, wages are the one cost that all capitalists agree must be kept down. All other prices are constantly being put up, as workers well know.

The government calculates a "consumer price index" which is supposed to show how much the cost of living is going up each year. In the black townships, however, the cost of living always goes up much faster than is shown in the government index.

But even if we take the government figures for inflation, we see that if a worker had to pay R100 a month for living expenses in 1970, those same things would cost: 
R106 in1971
R113 in 1972
R124 in 1973
R139 in 1974
R157 in 1975 
R175 in 1976 
R194 in 1977 
R214 in 1978 
R241 in 1979 
R279 in December 1980

In other words, a worker earning R100 a month in 1970 would have had to earn R279 in 1980 just to keep his standard of living the same.

In 1980, the rate of inflation for black workers was almost 20%. So what cost R1 in 1979, cost R1,20 in 1980. Take for example, a worker who was earning R30 per week last year. The cost of living has gone up 20% since then. Therefore, that worker would need an extra R6 a week just to pay the higher cost of the same necessities of life. Unless his money wage went up to R36 per week, his real wage would actually fall.

Even if the boss increased his money wage from R30 to R35, the worker will still be poorer, because R35 this year will buy less than R30 did last year. Thus the worker's real wage would have gone down even though his money wage has gone up.

To calculate real wages, the trade unions should work out exactly what workers must pay every year for the necessities that they and their dependents need in order to live. Trade unions should reject the government's misleading cost of living index and draw up their own cost of living indexes for the townships where the mass of the workers live. Committees of workers and housewives should check and ensure that these figures are correct.

Just to maintain their present standard of living, workers would need regular wage increases in line with the increase in the cost of living index fixed by the unions each year. To improve their standard of living, workers would need a further increase in their wages on top of the increase in the cost of living index.

Workers are therefore compelled to demand higher wages in order just to protect their standards of living. Often, when the bosses are forced to increase wages, they recover this money by pushing up prices still more, thus robbing the workers of their gain. Then they add insult to injury by blaming the workers for 'causing' inflation!

In reality, by demanding higher wages, the workers, are simply reacting to the inflation the capitalists have caused. What the bosses really mean with this argument is that, unless the workers allow their wages to be cut by higher prices, the bosses will raise prices even more!

In answer to the bosses, the workers must demand what they need - a national minimum wage, automatically increased every year in line with the cost of living increases.

Today, a living wage cannot be regarded as less than R90 per week. This living wage should be fixed as a national minimum. If the cost of living increases by 20% over the next year, the minimum wage should likewise be increased by 20% to R108 per week.

Automatic increases in money wages in' line with the bosses' inflation would only maintain the workers' living standards. On top of this, workers want improvements in their living standards. They need to organise through their trade unions, to negotiate for automatic wage increases to compensate the workers for inflation, as well as additional or real increases to improve their standards of living. 

2. Boss: "Our firm cannot afford the wages you are demanding. We would be forced out of business."

The bosses often complain that they, too, are the victims (!) of inflation: The rising costs of raw materials, machines etc., they say, prevents them from paying higher wages to the workers. To do so, they say, would force them out of business.

Claims of this kind should be investigated very closely by the workers and their organisations. Most often, the bosses lie to the workers about the profits their firms make. In South Africa, profits have been rising rapidly. For example, in the mining industry, the bosses' profits rose from R2 551 million in 1978 to R4 331 million in 1979. The bosses' profit per worker rose from R3 842 to R6 259.

In the manufacturing industries, profits rose from R2 447 million in 1978 to R3 707 million in 1979. Profit per worker rose from R1 847 to R2 742.

The figures for 1980 have not yet been released. But with the high rate of growth in the economy, profits have probably continued to rise dramatically.

Workers need accurate knowledge of the financial state of the companies they work for - of the income, expenditure, of the total wage bill and the amount of profits taken by the bosses.

If the bosses claim that they cannot afford wage increases, the reply of the workers and their unions should be: Open the books! Let the workers' representatives examine how the factory is run! Let the workers form their own conclusions of what the company can afford! Let the workers decide what should come first - increasing wages or paying out profits for the bosses!'

The demand to open the books will be furiously resisted by the bosses. They will say the workers are impudent, and have no business looking at company figures.

Our reply is that the workers produce the wealth of South Africa in the factories, mines, and, workplaces, and it is completely within their rights to see how this wealth is allocated.

Only through fierce struggle can this demand be enforced. But on this basis, trade unions would be in a far stronger position to negotiate collective agreements in the interests of the workers, and the workers would gain firmer control over their working lives.

This demand is a step towards the day when the workers themselves will run the factories and organise the whole economy, not in the interests of profit, but to satisfy the people's needs.

3. Boss: "Unless you increase productivity we cannot afford to pay you more."

Often this argument is put the other way round. The bosses say: "If workers produced more, they would be paid more." This is a lie. Under the capitalist system, the bosses always grab as much as they can possibly get in profits, while keeping the workers' wages as low as possible.

Wages are not determined by how much the workers produce. If the bosses deny this, let them open their books to inspection, so that workers can see for themselves who has got the benefit of increased production over the past year!

The level of wages depends on the organised strength of the working class - on how much workers can force the bosses to pay. It is only when capitalism has been overthrown and the working people organise and control production for the common good that the fruits of their labour will fall to the producers.

Meanwhile, certainly, productivity is of vital importance to the bosses.

'Productivity' is a measure of how much is produced by a worker, or section of workers, over a specific period of time - a day, a week, a month or a year. Every boss is very keen to increase the productivity of 'his' workers - as a means of making extra profit for himself. If he can get the workers to produce more commodities in the same amount of time as before, he will have more to sell. And if he pays the workers the same wage as before, or only a little more, he can generally make bigger profits. We give an example below to show how this works.

First, however, let us look at the factors which affect productivity. How much workers can produce depends on many things. It depends on the efficiency of the machines and tools they use, the number of hours per day they work, conditions in the workplace, the training the workers have had, as well as their conditions of life in the townships and compounds.

It is immediately obvious from this list that 'productivity' in our present society depends on the bosses rather than the workers. After all, who decides whether and when to invest in better, more efficient machinery? The bosses.

Who controls the factories, governs the training of workers and decides on the conditions in the workplace? The bosses.

Who - and whose Government - is responsible for the brutally oppressive conditions of life in the townships and compounds? For forcing workers to live so far from work that they must exhaust themselves daily getting up before dawn and returning after dark? For subjecting workers to tiring travel on overcrowded buses and trains? The bosses.

Workers know they are producing as much as possible with the tools and machinery provided, given their conditions of life and work.

Let the bosses look to themselves when they demand increased productivity! 

The bosses are striving to increase the exploitation of the workers. On the one hand, to cut costs, they fight to keep wages down and to spend as little as possible (themselves and through their Government) on the living and working conditions of the workers. On the other hand they demand harder work and longer hours, insisting that production-lines must be speeded up, intent on draining every last drop of energy from the workforce.

Investment

On the whole, however, it is not through these means but through investment in new machinery that the biggest increases in the productivity of labour come about. If we take once again our example of the garment factory, we shall see clearly how the bosses gain from this.

In this factory, 20 workers are producing 200 garments a day. The total value of the garments is R1 000: R500 for cloth and raw materials; R100 for wear and tear on machines, R120 for wages, and R280 representing the profit of the employer.

Now let us assume that the boss has plans to increase the output from the factory by investing in newer, quicker machines. By introducing these machines, output can be increased to, say, 220 garments, (We can assume here that the price of the garments stays the same).

Of course, 220 garments use up more cloth and cotton than 200, so his raw material costs will increase, say, from R500 to R550.

The increased outlay on machinery will mean that the value of the machines transferred to the finished garments will go up from R100 to, say, R110.

Costs, income and profits per day for the capitalists would then look like this (see picture):

We can see from this example that increasing productivity has increased profit for the boss - from R280 to R320. By raising productivity, but at the same time not raising wages, the boss can keep an even larger part of the workers' output for himself. Increasing productivity is his method of exploiting the workers more, and so becoming richer.

Even, if the wages of the workers in our example are increased, say, from R6 to R7 a day, profits to the boss will still increase. The total amount of a day's wages will then rise to R140, while profit will still rise from R280 to R300. In other words, the unpaid labour of the workers still goes up.

Thus, when the bosses declare: "No wage increases without increased productivity!" what they actually mean is: "No wage increases without increased exploitation".

Only through struggle can workers ensure that they benefit from the higher output of their labour. Higher productivity should be turned into higher wages and shorter hours!

4. Boss: "If we pay you more, we will have to mechanise and then some of you will have to be dismissed." 

In practice, as workers well know, when the bosses increase their investment in new machinery, this often results in some workers being made redundant. The workers' reward for increasing productivity is the unemployment queue. 

Here we have the crazy logic of the capitalist system. On the one hand, the bosses insist that increased productivity (which mainly means increased mechanisation) is a condition for increasing wages. On the other hand, they add that the workers must pay for increased productivity in the form of job losses!

This shows yet again how the entire capitalist system operates against the interests of the workers.

For the workers there is no answer to this problem except struggle. The fight for higher wages must be coupled with a firm stand against any loss of jobs. 

When the bosses bring in new machinery, workers should point to the increased production which results - and demand higher wages and shorter hours without any redundancies or lay-offs.

5. Boss: "You are much better off than the unemployed. You should be grateful for the wages you get."

This argument rests on the capitalist logic that it is a privilege for a worker to be exploited by a boss! Behind it lies an obvious threat: accept your present wages or you will be sacked. The bosses count on the fact that desperate unemployed workers will be willing to work for whatever wages they can get.

On the one hand, capitalism dispossesses the masses and turns them into wage-slaves - dependent for survival on employment by the bosses. On the other hand, capitalism cannot provide jobs for all, and the army of the unemployed grows daily. The threat of unemployment becomes a weapon in the hands of the bosses against the wages and conditions of the employed workers.

With these tactics the bosses make clear that the question of unemployment is vitally important to all workers. While fighting to prevent dismissals and enforce wage increases, workers need to consider what action is necessary to solve the problems of their unemployed brothers and sisters, and how the bosses can be prevented from playing off the jobless against workers in jobs. 

The unemployed need to be organised together with the employed. Last year, in East London, a beginning was made with this vital task. Only when they are organised will unemployed workers be able to support the struggle of the working class as a whole. Only then will employers be faced with the same demands from all workers, employed and unemployed. 

Employed workers should take up the call of the unemployed for a job or else an adequate unemployment benefit from the state. There is no reason why this should be less than the national minimum wage which employed workers are demanding.
 

Unemployment is not the workers' fault. It is the fault of the bosses and their system that not enough jobs are created for all the people who need work.  

Work or full pay is the basic right that the trade unions will have to struggle to enforce. If the capitalist class is unable to provide a full day's work for all workers, then let the available work be shared out among the workers without any loss of pay.

"Who will pay for all this?" the capitalists will exclaim. Our answer must be: the capitalist class, not the workers, should pay for the failures of the capitalist system. 

6. Boss: “You are better paid than workers in other African countries." 

As a matter of fact, this claim by the South African bosses is not always true. In some industries in other African countries, where workers are organised, wages are higher than in South Africa. For example, in Zambia in 1975, the African mineworkers earned an average of R33 per week while in South Africa black mineworkers earned only R16.

Nevertheless, throughout Africa, capitalism has inflicted appalling suffering on the working people - landlessness, low wages, poverty and oppression of one kind or another.

When the bosses point to lower wages in other African countries, they are really admitting that the crimes of capitalism are not confined to South Africa. Thus there is something very peculiar about this argument of the capitalists, who themselves live in the lap of luxury at the workers' expense. Since when is one robber entitled to excuse himself by saying: "I'm not the only guilty one"? Isn't it scandalous for some capitalists to point to the crimes of their very own system in other countries and say to their victims: "You should count yourselves lucky; you could be even worse off!"

Sometimes, in fact, it is South African companies themselves who are paying the lower wages in other African countries. For historical reasons, the capitalist system in South Africa has been able to develop to a far higher level than anywhere else in Africa. Yet also in South Africa, where giant industries have been created, the capitalist system cannot meet even the bask demands of the mass of workers for a decent living. 

In South Africa, in other words, there is even less excuse for low wages than in other African countries.

In reality, of course, the low wages and poverty of working people in other countries is a very powerful argument why the whole international system of capitalism should be ended. But probably the impudent bosses who raise the above argument would prefer not to be reminded of that!

Internationally, the struggle of working people against exploitation and oppression is rising.

For workers, the aim is not to drag down all working people - as the bosses try to do - to the worst level of exploitation. On the contrary, it is to raise the living standards of all workers, regardless of country or race, to the highest level. For that, we need to unite our strength with workers in other countries.

The eventual victory of the workers' struggle in South Africa will lay the basis for eliminating poverty, not only in South Africa itself, but in countries to the north as well. The industrial capacity built up by the workers' labour in South Africa can be used to assist in developing these countries, in, overcoming starvation, illiteracy and disease.

7. Boss: "Your demands are excessive; they are the work of communist agitators who are trying to disrupt the economy."

Sooner or later all workers who persist in their demands are likely to meet with this reply. On the surface it appears ridiculous. In reality it is highly significant.

Some employers sincerely believe that workers need 'communist agitators' to inform them of their basic needs; to tell them that their children are starving and that they need more money! Such employers regard workers as sheep who want nothing more in life than to obey their bosses.

Yet the more intelligent bosses also take this 'argument' very seriously indeed. They know the link that exists between the slave-like exploitation of the black workers and the system of political repression. Relying on the apartheid state to protect them, the bosses know that the workers' struggle for improved conditions can ultimately only be a struggle for complete political and social liberation.

By ‘communist agitators’, the bosses have in mind all workers who struggle determinedly for better conditions of life and work. Workers themselves are drawing the conclusion more and more that their struggle for basic rights is part of the struggle for complete liberation from national oppression and capitalist exploitation.

In fighting the ruthless power of the bosses and the state, the workers in general are becoming clearer and clearer about their tasks. They are using every means at their disposal, including the most vigorous 'agitation' among their fellow-workers, in building up their forces.

The final ‘argument’ is ... FORCE !

When ‘reason’ fails them - as it usually does - the bosses resort to their real defence against the workers' demands: brute force.

This is the basic stock-in-trade of the bosses in South Africa. In plain language they spell their 'argument' out: “If you workers continue to claim the right to a human existence, we shall sack you from your jobs and deport you to the Bantustans; we shall smash your organisations; we shall imprison and murder your leaders. All this we shall do in the name of law and order!"

Now, in countries in Europe, North America and elsewhere, where the trade union movement is very powerful and the workers highly organised, very often the bosses threaten to close down whole factories rather than give in to workers' demands for higher pay. The bosses are unable to immediately resort to naked force.

In South Africa, at the present time, threats of plant closure are generally not necessary for the bosses, as they are still confident that they can rely on the police and army against the workers, and replace most striking workers out of the ranks of the unemployed.

The only solution to this problem facing the workers is organisation, organisation and still more organisation.

Workers need to mobilise - in the factory, in surrounding factories, and in the community to defend themselves.

But this is not enough. The great task facing trade unions is to organise the workers in the mines and on the farms, as well as the worker in the border areas and in the Bantustans, to fight for higher wages, trade union and political rights for all.

The entire Bantustan system, the pass laws and influx control threaten the lives of all workers, serving as they do to split up the workers as well as the country to the advantage of the capitalist class.

Only the organised unity of all workers can prevent the bosses playing off one section of, workers against another. Determined struggle by the workers is the language that the bosses understand best; it is the only answer to their threats.

Strength against strength, force against force - only by this means can the working class eventually triumph. And there is no power on earth which can stop the working class, once it is organised and united in its full strength.

Workers' power

From time to time, for brief periods, compromise and even retreat may be an unavoidable tactical necessity for the workers - in order to drive forward once again with greater force and energy than before.

But as workers are discovering in practice all over South Africa today, the general tide of the movement is forward. The greatest advantages are to be gained from boldness, firmness and militancy. Huge reserves of strength, hundreds of thousands of unorganised workers, are still waiting to be drawn into the battle line.

A course of compromise with the capitalists holds no advantage for the workers. The bosses 'compromise' only when they cannot defeat the workers with naked force. As soon as brutal measures become possible for the bosses, as soon as the pressure from the workers slackens, they use these measures without a qualm. The whole history of our struggle in South Africa has proved this over and over again.

Therefore, through all the twists and turns of tactics, the whole trade union movement needs to have its eyes fixed on preparing for the eventual, decisive confrontation of the working class against the capitalist class.

In the final analysis, to enforce a living wage, to secure jobs for all work seekers, to prevent dismissals, to protect activists against victimisation, to gain control over their working lives, to abolish the apartheid system - the workers will need to establish their power over every factory and place of work; over the economy and over society as a whole.

This cannot be achieved while the present state exists. Only by defeating and abolishing the bosses' racist state, by establishing a new state democratically controlled by the working people, by driving out the capitalist class and establishing state ownership, workers' control and management over all branches of industry, agriculture and the banks, will it be possible to plan production in the interests of the working population and safeguard the workers' democratic rights.

Mobilising

This does not in any way lessen the importance of the struggle for a living wage and other reforms which the workers see as the immediate answer to their urgent needs. To conclude that these struggles are 'irrelevant' and that 'only' the struggle for state power must be pursued, is to misunderstand the way in which the mass struggle in South Africa is growing.

Only the working class, at the head of all the oppressed black people, has the power to defeat apartheid and capitalism. Yet the working class, and the mass movement in general, is driven forward precisely by the need to overcome the specific problems that the system forces upon them. Poverty - starvation wages - is one of the most critical of these problems.

As part of the overall class struggle, the fight for a living wage can play a central role in mobilising the forces for the overthrow of apartheid and capitalism by the working class.

Thus a national campaign for a minimum wage, organised by the trade unions, could rapidly bring together large masses of workers in action and create very favourable conditions for building organisation on both the open and underground level.

For a national minimum wage for all workers of R90 a week, with automatic further increases to keep up with price rises.