JOHANNESBURG, Gauteng — The escalating wage dispute between Eskom and the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) has officially moved to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) after the union firmly rejected the power utility’s latest three-year wage offer.
While NUM and Solidarity, representing approximately 75% of the bargaining unit, have already accepted the agreement, the CCMA has procedurally directed them to be joined to NUMSA’s case. This ensures all represented parties are included, as the outcome of the conciliation process will ultimately affect the entire workforce.
NUMSA’s Chief Negotiator, Wandisile Pram, outlined that the union is demanding an 8% salary increase in the first year and 7% in the third year. This stands in stark contrast to the 6% initially offered by management during settlement negotiations. Pram emphasized that NUMSA is not asking for more than what Eskom has already budgeted, noting that the utility presented a 9% allocation to the National Energy Regulator of South Africa (NERSA) and internally.
Pram described the lower offer as “broad daylight robbery,” pointing to severe double standards in executive compensation. According to Pram, pre-executives recently received salary increases of over 100%—amounting to roughly 250,000 rand more per executive—alongside individual bonuses reaching up to 2 million rand. In comparison, a T4-level worker is being offered a mere 1,360 rand increase.
The disparity extends to performance bonuses. Management structures allow executives to receive bonuses equivalent to 25% of their annual salary, while bargaining unit workers are capped at 12%, earning less than 30,000 rand. Pram argued that all workers contribute equally to meeting the business’s key performance indicators and deserve an equal share of the rewards, especially now that Eskom has significantly improved its financial position. The utility recently reported a return to profit, posting 24 billion rand before tax (16 billion rand after tax), bolstered by a Treasury relief package.
Pram noted that Eskom’s own chief negotiator previously acknowledged during negotiations that management “stands on the shoulders of the foot soldiers,” referring to the bargaining unit workers. However, Pram stated that this recognition vanishes when it comes to financial compensation. When confronted with these figures—which Pram confirmed were sourced directly from Eskom’s public financial statements and presented during negotiations—management reportedly had no defense and requested a caucus.
Beyond base pay, other worker demands were referred to a task team. However, Pram noted that this process is currently paused because the transmission business is defining itself outside the parameters previously agreed upon in negotiations.
Looking ahead, Pram warned that if CCMA conciliation efforts fail to resolve the deadlock, industrial action remains a strong possibility. This threat is compounded by NUMSA’s fierce opposition to the President’s decision, which the union claims was advised by the World Bank, to transfer profitable transmission assets to a new Transmission System Operator entity.
NUMSA argues that this move undermines both the Eskom board and the minister, effectively privatizing the heart of Eskom’s business. Pram cautioned that stripping these profitable assets away will eventually leave Eskom unable to pay its workers fairly, a trajectory the union is prepared to fight.
