We wish to inform our members that their union, POPCRU, was invited to a meeting that was called by the CCMA at the SSSBC offices in Centurion yesterday, 23 July 2017
The meeting was between POPCRU, SAPU, the SAPS and the CCMA. As POPCRU, we were informed of the meeting late Friday afternoon, clearly indicating that there was not sufficient time to prepare thoroughly for the envisaged meeting.
When the meeting started, it was well within our rights to inquire as to what the status of the meeting was, and upon that, established that both the employer and SAPU had consented to the CCMA process, while POPCRU was not afforded the same opportunity to consent to the very meeting.
This meeting was called by the CCMA in terms of Section 150 of the Labour Relations Act, an act that basically requires that parties involved in the dispute must give consent to the process. In the case that one of the parties does not give consent to the process, then the Director of the CCMA must call parties for consultation and appointment of a Commissioner to conciliate the dispute.
In this instance, POPCRU was neither consulted nor afforded an opportunity to give consent to the conciliation by the CCMA.
For this reason, POPCRU did not agree to the process. POPCRU is, however, considering whether we should continue with the process under the auspices of the CCMA or proceed in the SSSBC negotiations. In our opinion, it is still possible to resolve the matter with the latter option, even though the employer had yesterday declared a deadlock. To this effect, we shall keep members updated.
It must again be noted that those who wrote to the CCMA for intervention did not tell the truth about POPCRU being party to the dispute, hence the CCMA had to acknowledge that there was an oversight on their part not to seek consent from the union.
It is worth noting, once more, that the strike called by SAPU was indeed premature and ignorant of the fact that there were processes unfolding, of which there was an agreement that we would follow the legal process in ensuring all members, regardless of affiliation, get the kind of remuneration they are worth.
Most importantly, this reveals that they are in fact fighting a silly SAFTU battle to find relevance at the expense of the very workers they claim to represent. The reason they opted to pull out of an ongoing process, which POPCRU remains committed to, is because they were instructed by their newly-found master who is trying to garner relevance at all costs, even if it means having members go out to the streets, regardless of whether it is to be considered as unpaid leave for these workers who continue to earn so little.
POPCRU has never been arrogant about its overwhelming domination within the criminal justice cluster, but notes the inflation of numbers these people continue to mislead the public on. There are less than 1000 workers at the 10111 centres, yet it is being falsely purported as 5000 members who are on strike. This is another form of propaganda to create an impression that they have a growing support in their premature, uncalculated decisions that are placing workers into distress over matters that are resolvable through negotiation, typical of and consistent with their master’s widely known premature activities.
POPCRU remains the only hope for the many members within the criminal justice cluster, and our joint responsibility is to protect and promote the rights and wellbeing of our members against any form of labour without the recognition of relevant statutes.
We remain committed and adamant to advancing labour peace and unity, hence our position remains that it cannot be appropriate to condone unnecessary unpaid leave to our members, which is prematurely caused by the need for Vavi’s project to be seen as ‘radical’ at the expense of the members who have intentionally being misled by those who seek to exploit their genuine frustrations.
Issued by POPCRU on 24/07/2017