THE SWOP HYPOTHESIS APPLIED TO NUM

Three articles on NUM, published by Sakhela Buhlungu and Andries Bezuidenhout, constitute most of the available scholarship on the union and its transformation after apartheid. Their analysis is based on material collected in three longitudinal surveys of NUM members, commissioned by the union and released respectively in 1998, 2005 and 2010. The surveys, which addressed the broad issue of ‘servicing’ to members, were conducted by the University of the Witwatersrand-based SWOP Institute, to which Buhlungu and Bezuidenhout belonged. They contained mostly quantitative data, complemented with some qualitative interviews. Such data provide a useful picture of NUM's membership with regard to, for instance, age, gender, languages, domicile. From a more qualitative point of view, the surveys explore members’ perceptions of NUM presence and action at the grassroots, and the degree of members’ involvement in union activities.

The 1998 report's executive summary starts by recalling what the effective functioning of union structures means according to NUM (see Figure 2.1). Local structures have to be ‘strong, independent branches which solve their problems on their own, and which use the regional and national structures as a form of support. Regions are serviced by the national office, and branches are serviced by regional offices.’ An empowered branch is further described as one that is ‘able to take initiatives and engage management effectively. The branches have the capacity to run their administration, education, and health and safety programmes. There is a dynamic interaction between the region, the branch leadership and membership.’ The report's summary then contrasts this ideal with reality on the ground:

‘if the picture presented from the data gathered in this project is compared to the characteristics of a strong branch, it is clear that the vision of strong, self-sufficient branches remains to be met’. The report also notes that where branch structures existed at the time, other factors negatively impacted on their operations, such as ‘destructive branch politics, office bearer turnover, unclear portfolios, the lack of consultation with members, low levels of responsibility and commitment, and office bearer disempowerment’ due to a lack of training. In 1998, between 15 and 33 per cent of NUM members surveyed said union structures at their branch were not in place.