WIETA News
4 new worksites
accredited by WIETA
Congratulations to the Distell Worcester Distillery, Distell
James Sedgwick Distillery and the two Winecorp Farms on their
accreditation, bringing the total number of accredited sites to 9!
We have received a number of excellent improvement plans from
members who have been audited, including DGB, Fairview, Villiera,
Badsberg, Vergelegen, Swartland, and Distell van Rhyn Distillery,
and wish to thank those responsible for the plans for their input
and commitment to the process. We are in the process of evaluating
and responding to these, and we hope that all of these sites will be
accredited soon.
At an accreditation meeting held recently it was decided that
workplaces should submit their improvement plans within 6 months of
being audited. We would appreciate it if all of those workplaces
that have been audited provide us with feedback on the steps that
they are taking to meet the requirements of the code, even if they
have not yet implemented all of the measures that they intend taking
in this regard. It is important for us to get a good sense of the
progress that is being made on this, and to gain a better
understanding of any possible difficulties that members are having
in implementing aspects of the code.
Over the past few months, we have set up meetings at a number of
audited worksites to discuss audit processes and findings and to
discuss progress in the development of improvement plans, especially
where audit processes were conducted in 2004. We intend to continue
these discussions with both producer and worker representatives over
the next few months. We have received both positive feedback and
constructive criticism from the parties on audit processes, and are
very grateful for both inputs. In getting this feedback, we have
been able to consider our interpretation of the code and to
strengthen our processes, and this has facilitated our growth and
development as an organisation.
Labour Broking arrangements come under scrutiny at WIETA facilitated
workshop
WIETA facilitated a workshop with members in
July on labour contracting arrangements in the wine industry. The
meeting was very well attended by producers, worker representatives,
labour brokers, NGO’s and others with an interest in this topic.
WIETA provided an overview of our audit
findings on labour broking arrangements to date. These were as
follows:
| • |
Two-thirds of members who have been audited
make use of labour brokers |
| • |
Labour brokers were the most common source
of temporary or seasonal labourers (of these approximately
50% are women), who formed half of the total workforce
employed |
| • |
Large corporate groups with collective
bargaining agreements in place were most likely to use
labour brokers |
| • |
Nearly half of audited workplaces did not
comply with the WIETA code on regular employment, which
requires members who make use of labour contractors to: |
| |
* |
enquire about the conditions of employment
of contracted workers, and to take steps to ensure that
these are in accordance with the Base Code and national
legislation and, where possible, to |
| |
* |
develop consistent and sustainable
relationships with employees (including temporary workers)
and with reputable labour brokers who comply with the
provisions of the code. |
WIETA audited 2 workplaces with a specific
focus on the 4 labour brokers providing services to the site, as
part of a pilot to test auditing methodologies in this regard.
Whilst most of the brokers audited had a good relationship with
workers and complied with some aspects of the code (e.g. child
labour) other problems were identified including:
| • |
the absence of employment contracts with workers |
| • |
the absence of a service agreement between the labour
provider and the client, setting out the roles and
responsibilities of the parties vis a vis contracted
employees |
| • |
the absence of records on workers and work done |
| • |
failure to deduct UIF and to pay statutory benefits, in
terms of the BCEA (such as pro rata sick leave or annual
leave accruing to the employee concerned) |
Numerous problems were identified under the
health and safety requirements of the code. Although the law
requires that the client is required to take responsibility for the
safety of all employees (contracted or otherwise) on its site,
audits revealed that neither the client nor the labour provider were
taking adequate steps to safeguard contracted employees from
workplace hazards.
During the workshop, different perspectives
on labour contracting arrangements were elicited from various
stakeholder members of WIETA.
|
Good communication and co-operation
between labour broker, client and employees is essential to
successful functioning of the triangular labour
relationship. |
Omnia Wines spoke about their relationship
with the contractors that they use on site, all of whom have been
requested to join WIETA and to be audited in their own right. One of
their labour providers, Ruddeck and Associates, who was the first
labour broker that WIETA has audited, provided an input on the
respective responsibilities of the parties in ensuring
implementation of the various legal requirements and some of the
difficulties that labour brokers experience in this regard, given
the limited control that they have over what happens on the
employer’s site. Both parties stressed the need for good
communication and co-operation in ensuring compliance with the
various laws covering temporary workers.
From left, Vanessa Swartz (supervisor),
Frans Ruddeck (owner) and Bennii van Rooi (co-owner) of Ruddeck and
Associates, the first labour providers in the industry to join WIETA
and undergo a WIETA audit
|
The relationship should
be rooted in the notion of joint and several liability for
compliance with the law. |
The Department of Labour also
provided an input on some of the challenges that they are
experiencing in investigating complaints against labour brokers in
the agriculture sector, given their limited capacity and the fact
that workers, very often, do not know who their real employer is. He
stressed however that the legislation provided a powerful remedy in
this regard – that of joint and several liability of the client and
the labour provider, in ensuring that legal requirements are met,
although in practice, this remedy had rarely been utilised by the
Department.
|
Cutting out the middleman may result
in more benefits accruing to workers directly. |
Women on Farms Project gave an
input on an initiative that they have been involved in to establish
a worker co-operative, comprising mainly women seasonal workers.
There is no “middle man” in this arrangement. Employers contract
workers belonging to the co-operative directly. Many of the workers
have gone through training on the various aspects of seasonal work
(funded by the Department of Agriculture), so are able to offer a
skilled service to the client, and have an understanding of the
legal requirements pertaining to the contracting of temporary
workers. One of the women on farms project co-ops have recently been
given a temporary pruning contract at a farm.
Zad Padda of Ethical First in the UK gave a presentation on the
development of a code of good practice regulating so called “gang
masters” (labour providers)
in the UK, developed by the Ethical Trading Initiative, and
subsequent
legislative measures (to be implemented next year) requiring the
licencing of gang masters in the UK
Mixed stakeholder groups were
asked to discuss and make recommendations on the potential roles of
different stakeholders in addressing the issue of poor labour
standards in the triangular employment relationship. The following
key recommendations emerged:
The responsibilities of Producers/Clients:
| 1. |
To monitor their labour providers’
compliance with the law. |
| 2. |
To only make use of labour brokers who
comply with the law, even if this means paying a higher rate
per employee to ensure that the requirements of the law will
be met. |
| 3. |
To negotiate a clear and fair agreement with
the labour provider, clarifying the respective roles and
responsibilities of the parties, as well as the rate payable
to the broker and to employees. |
| 4. |
To ascertain how hourly rates for workers
have been calculated to ensure that all prescribed statutory
payments will be made. |
| 5. |
To develop sustainable and long term
relationships with reputable labour brokers. |
| 6. |
To take responsibility for the following at
the workplace: |
| |
• |
Good communication with temporary workers
on issues affecting their employment at the worksite |
| |
• |
Adequate training for temporary workers
which will enable them to perform their job effectively and
safely |
| |
• |
Providing adequate facilities for broker
workers |
| |
• |
Providing relevant safety equipment (PPE)
and clothing for temporary workers |
| |
• |
Preventing any discrimination against
contract workers employed through a broker |
| |
• |
Allowing for representation of temporary
workers in worker forums, such as the worker committees and
the health and safety committees |
| |
• |
Providing regular work to the same
employees, where possible |
| |
• |
Providing a safe and healthy workplace
for workers |
| |
• |
Providing reasonable notice to labour
providers in the event that temporary labour is no longer
required |
| |
• |
Co-operating with the labour broker in
ensuring a fair hearing for a temporary employee who is
accused of breaching a workplace rule |
The responsibilities of
Labour Brokers:
| 1. |
To ensure implementation of relevant labour legislation |
| 2. |
To maintain records to demonstrate compliance in respect
of each employee. |
| 3. |
To ensure registration with the relevant statutory
bodies (UIF, Skills development etc) |
| 4. |
To prepare a cost analysis for negotiating a fair
agreement with the client that will ensure compliance with
statutory requirements, and not cut corners on workers
rights for the sake of a bigger fee. |
| 5. |
To insist on their employee’s rights without fear of
losing the contract from a client. For example, in the event
of allegations of poor work performance or misconduct,
ensure that the employee concerned is afforded a fair
hearing, and insist on the client’s co-operation in this
regard. |
| 6. |
To provide regular work as far as possible. |
| 7. |
To ensure good communication with workers on their roles
and responsibilities in relation to the labour provider’s
own and the client’s workplace policies and practices. |
The role of the Department
of Labour and other government departments:
| 1. |
To improve enforcement of policy recommendations arising
from recent research focusing on methods by which clients
unfairly evade their legal responsibilities vis a vis
contract labour. |
| 2. |
To raise awareness on the roles and responsibilities of
clients and brokers in meeting the requirements of the law. |
| 3. |
To share information on initiatives to monitor
compliance with WIETA. |
| 4. |
To maintain a database of labour providers / Set up a
registration process suitable for small businesses and
provide services to them. |
The role of employees:
| 1. |
Not to discriminate against each other, but to work
together. |
| 2. |
Temporary workers should explore the possibility of
organising themselves in “co-operatives”, which would cut
out the middleman (the WFP example) and ensure a better deal
for themselves. |
| 3. |
To report non–compliance with the code and legislation,
via their representatives, to the broker, client, WIETA or
the Department of Labour |
The role of trade unions:
| 1. |
To prevent unfair outsourcing and retrenchments in the
first place. |
| 2. |
To recruit, organise and represent temporary and
contract workers employed by labour brokers. |
| 3. |
Not to discriminate between permanent and temporary
workers and discourage this amongst permanent workers. |
The role of WIETA:
| 1. |
To develop a toolkit for clients and brokers on their
respective roles and responsibilities in implementing the
code. |
| 2. |
To develop a model service agreement. |
| 3. |
To monitor labour broking arrangements and brokers’
compliance with the WIETA code through auditing activities. |
| 4. |
To adopt an incremental approach to auditing -
discouraging “black listing” of non-compliant brokers and
encouraging progressive improvement. |
Developments
affecting health and safety
As more and more WIETA members
have had site audits, and are involved in the processes of action
plans and accreditation, several important occupational health and
safety issues have become the focus for discussions between WIETA
staff, the member companies, and the WIETA board members involved on
the WIETA accreditation committee. This has been useful in that it
has helped to define our health and safety standards so that we can
be consistent in requiring all members to approach each item in the
Code on health and safety in the same way. Here are three of these
issues, and the joint approach that has emerged towards them:
Farm Dams
Members have pointed out that a blanket requirement to fence all
farm dams is not appropriate. The consensus from the discussion at
the WIETA accreditation committee on this issue was as follows:
| 1. |
Dams are a considerable danger to farm
children, especially boys between the ages of about 6 and 15
(from research conducted in South Africa and
internationally) |
| 2. |
Fencing dams is not necessarily the best way
of preventing young people living on the farms swimming in
the dams, or otherwise endangering their safety in the dam.
Fences are easy to climb over or under. |
| 3. |
The most important thing is that a realistic
assessment of the risk of injury or death is included in the
health and safety risk assessment for the WIETA member
company. |
| 4. |
Risk factors that should be considered
include: |
| |
• |
frequency of past incidence of death or
injury at dams; |
| |
• |
numbers of “at risk” children living on
the farm; |
| |
• |
proximity & accessibility of the dams to
houses; |
| |
• |
absence of barriers to entry (fencing
etc); |
| |
• |
absence of suitable warning signs at the
dam; |
| |
• |
low awareness in the farm community about
the danger and avoiding it; |
| |
• |
lack of a well-communicated farm policy
(especially with regard to parents and community leaders,
crèche workers etc); |
| |
• |
lack of alternative arrangements for
children to swim during the hot summer months; |
| |
|
lack of availability of demarcated
safe bathing area at the dam; |
| |
|
availability of life-saver(s) at the dam
at specified times; |
| |
• |
swimming lessons for “at risk” children;
|
| |
• |
absence of equipment such as life-bouys
attached to the shore. |
Whether the arrangements at a
farm are adequate with regard to dam safety will depend on how these
factors stack up, and what is in place to prevent an accident in the
specific circumstances at each farm.
Bulk Wine Filtration –
managing hazardous chemical substances
Filtration medium used in bulk
wine filtration, such as diatomaceous earth, contains free
crystalline silica, which is a regulated hazardous chemical
substance. Breathing in very fine (invisible in normal light) dust
from it can cause a chronic and worsening lung disease called
silicosis, which cannot be cured, and which eventually causes
ever-increasing shortness of breath, and a painful and undignified
death. The Department of Labour has mounted a National Programme for
the Elimination of Silicosis, thereby recognising this occupational
disease as a significant public health issue, which is made worse
because it interacts with TB – some researchers have found that it
can actually increase a person’s risk of getting active
Tuberculosis. This problem is not well understood in the wine
industry, whereas it is common knowledge in hard rock mining, where
a great deal of research is devoted to controlling and monitoring
the risk.
Silica dust from filtration powder is a serious
health hazard in cellars.
The Hazardous Chemical
Substances Regulations of the Occupational Health and Safety Act
regulate free crystalline silica by imposing a maximum concentration
of it in workplace air, and requiring employers to assess the risk
of exposure above these levels. Such a risk assessment would
normally involve an accredited inspection authority (an occupational
hygienist) taking representative dust samples and arranging
laboratory analysis of the dust results to assess who is at risk,
and to define respirator zones in the workplace. Employers then have
the obligation to reduce the dust levels, train exposed workers on
the hazard and workplace measures to protect themselves, and place
them in a medical surveillance program. This must include annual
lung function tests administered by a trained occupational health
practitioner, and periodic full chest X-rays - less frequent at
first, then more frequent after 10 years of exposure to detect lung
disease in the early stages, so that people can be assigned work in
areas where there is no silica dust in the air.
WIETA has discussed this issue
and has come to clear conclusions about what we require to comply
with the Code on health and safety with respect to crystalline
silica. They are as follows:
| 1. |
Cellars should include a detailed and
documented risk assessment for the wine filtration process.
This must include all aspects, including the storage,
transport, handling and disposal of the filtration chemical
containing silica, and its containers, to drastically cut
down on accidental liberation of dust into the air, whether
in the workplace, or outside it. This last point is
important as we have come across examples where workers are
taking the bags away for personal use, which exposes them
and their families or community to the dust at home. The
risk assessment should ideally include a dust survey as
described above. One cellar has included such a survey in
its WIETA action plan. |
| 2. |
When the risks of exposure are fully
understood, control measures must be designed to minimise
them for all cellar workers and their families. Types of
measures that ought to be considered are: |
| |
• |
Slow and controlled filling methods to
avoid large dust clouds over the filter pumps |
| |
• |
Local exhaust ventilation (with or
without full enclosure) over the filtration pumps during
loading with powder (with air filtration and safe exhaustion
to the outside). There are of course technical problems to
solve with local exhaust ventilation over the filter pumps
as they are mobile units. However, this problem is not be
insurmountable as long as there are resources in the
industry to develop and test optimal and cost-effective
designs. |
| |
• |
Airtight lids on filling points on pumps
that can be closed immediately after filling |
| |
• |
Safe vacuum or wet cleaning methods for
all spills with safe disposal of slurry or vacuum bags |
| |
• |
arranging for contract laundry services
for employees’ work clothes, or washing them at work, so
that no-one takes dusty overalls or boots home. Anyone doing
the laundry needs to know about the hazard and to have
protection from dust exposure as well |
| |
• |
showers at work at the end of the shift
before changing into home clothes |
| |
• |
having written safe work procedures
(which can be used for safety training purposes). |
In addition, it is mandatory
for employers to:
| • |
issue and maintain the correct type of dust masks for
lung protection, and goggles to protect eyes from
scratching, to each employee who is exposed to the dust at
work |
| • |
include all exposed workers in a medical surveillance
program as described above, supervised by an appropriately
qualified medical practitioner |
WIETA will not require dust
measurements to be done if the cellar has decided to include all its
workers in the medical surveillance program, including any seasonal
or temporary workers who are exposed.
Asbestos
The WIETA audit report form had
an error because it said that members have to inform the Department
of Labour about any asbestos they have on the premises. This is
incorrect, and is not required by the Asbestos Regulations of OHSA
either. These regulations state only that the employer must keep an
updated written inventory of all asbestos on the premises (including
any in employee housing), and inform the Department of Labour if any
“asbestos work” is performed (i.e. work that can liberate tiny
asbestos fibres into the air). There are also stringent requirements
in the regulations for conducting this kind of work safely. In this
regard, we have seen cases at cellars or on farms where asbestos
roofing in worker housing is cleaned by high pressure water-jet on a
regular basis. This can be dangerous because it takes off a whole
layer of pulped asbestos fibre, which then collects in gutters and
drains and on surrounding ground. When it dries, it becomes a dust
hazard in and around the houses. It is better to either remove the
asbestos altogether and replace it with another roofing material
(this would also be “asbestos work”) or to seal the asbestos with
good quality paint regularly.
WIETA project to ease implementation of health and safety standards
The Department of Agriculture
has agreed to fund a WIETA project aimed at identifying a definitive
standard in dealing with occupational health and safety at the
workplace (taking into account SA legislation and other
international health and safety standards that wine producers and
growers are committed to, such as Eurepgap and ISO); to develop the
WIETA standard in this regard (together with good practice
recommendations in addressing occupational health and safety issues
identified) in consultation with key stakeholders in the industry;
to develop popular materials for workers and management which would
assist them implementing good health and safety management systems;
and to incorporate these into WIETA training on the code.
This project will commence in
October 2005. We intend to establish a reference group comprising
different stakeholders and, in particular, those specialising in
health and safety in the sector, to assist with the implementation
of this project. Please could you pass this information on to your
health and safety committees, and if there is anyone interested in
participating more actively in this process, we would be delighted
to have them on the team.
Recommendations arising out of
the initial research on this project will be discussed with members
at a WIETA health and safety workshop in December 2005, aimed
especially at the health and safety managers and health and safety
representatives at WIETA worksites. We will keep you posted on the
time and date for this workshop.
Training materials for workers and management on the code
We are still awaiting the outcome of our application to SAWIT to
fund a WIETA training and materials development programme, but in
the meantime have managed to secure funding from Novib which will
allow us to develop participatory training materials for both
management and worker representatives on the code. This project will
also commence in October 2005, and we hope to have these materials
developed and to be able to offer training on the code before July
2006.
Raasblaarstories : Order
Form
We are able to supply each member with up to 20 free copies of
Raasblaarstories. Should you want more copies, you are welcome to
purchase these from us, at R10 per copy. Please try to ensure that a
few copies of the photostory are kept at the worksite, so that they
are accessible to new workers and temporary employees as well.
Please complete and return the order form via fax number to (021)
447-5662 or e-mail to
anthea@wieta.org.za
Download the Raasblaarstories order form
HERE.
|
 |
Download
September 2005 newsletter
Read archived news items
|
|
|
