South African Mineworkers’ Perspectives on the Right to Refuse Dangerous Work and the Constraints to Worker Self-Regulation

The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
N. Coulson P. F. Stewart S. Saeed
Organization:
The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy
Pages:
10
File Size:
307 KB
Publication Date:
Jan 1, 2018

Abstract

"The Mine, Health and Safety Act No. 29 of 1996, as amended, embodies worker self-regulation to advance health and safety in the workplace. An important provision for this is the Right to Refuse Dangerous Work (RRDW). This paper explores worker perspectives about the implementation of RRDW on South African mines against a backdrop of revised guidance in the sector: ‘Guideline for a Mandatory Code of Practice on the Right to Refuse Dangerous Work And Leave Dangerous Working Places’, gazetted in February 2016 by the Department of Mineral Resources (DMR). A mixed methods study conducted at mines (n = 14) included a survey of workers (n = 293), focus groups (n = 6) and in-depth interviews (n = 16). Workers reported a high level of awareness, a positive attitude, and experience of the formal RRDW. However constraints to the formal RRDW meant that informal worker resistance to dangerous work was commonplace. Evidence of informal non-confrontational consultation, cooperation, and collaboration in the event of a dangerous workplace also emerged between workers, and supervisors. The research underscores the importance of the RRDW and worker health and safety representatives to mine health and safety. The revised guidance addresses RRDW implementation gaps, but of concern is the potential partiality towards management interests. IntroductionEnsuring that mineworkers act on their duties and responsibilities for health and safety remains a concern across the globe. Article 13 of the International Labour Organization (ILO) Convention Safety and Health in Mines (176 of 1995) entrenched the Right to Refuse Dangerous Work (RRDW) as an important mechanism through which workers act in the best interests of their own occupational health and safety (OHS) and is considered a cornerstone of worker self-regulation (ILO, 1995). Countries ratifying Convention 176 are under obligation to make this right available to workers through OHS legislation that frames the circumstances, procedure, and protection of workers from discrimination in the event of a formal work refusal. The Convention has been ratified by 31 countries, with South Africa becoming a signatory in June 2000 (ILO, 2000). Worldwide studies show that workers use this right with caution (Hilgert, 2013) and cases associated with work refusal are rarely presented in court (Gunningham, 2007; Cooper, 2013). Rather, in cases of formal notification of a work refusal, issues arising out of this are addressed either in the immediate workplace or through the site OHS system and/or at industrial tribunals or similar mechanisms (Harcourt and Harcourt, 2000)."
Citation

APA: N. Coulson P. F. Stewart S. Saeed  (2018)  South African Mineworkers’ Perspectives on the Right to Refuse Dangerous Work and the Constraints to Worker Self-Regulation

MLA: N. Coulson P. F. Stewart S. Saeed South African Mineworkers’ Perspectives on the Right to Refuse Dangerous Work and the Constraints to Worker Self-Regulation. The Southern African Institute of Mining and Metallurgy, 2018.

Export
Purchase this Article for $25.00

Create a Guest account to purchase this file
- or -
Log in to your existing Guest account