18 October, 2010
As the world rejoiced last week on the release of 33 trapped miners in Chile, questions arise over a chain of events at Campañia Minera San Esteban Primera’s San José copper mine leading up to the massive 5 August roof collapse and rock slide that entombed miners for a record 69 days.
While Chile President Sebastián Piñera basks in the global spotlight of a heroic rescue marshaled by the world’s very best mine engineering and technical expertise, answers to those questions likely will remain hazy. Piñera has pledged there will be no impunity for mine owners and has commissioned an enquiry that will report findings by 22 November.
But the very make-up of that commission explains just one of the structural deficiencies inherent in Chilean mine safety: no trade union representatives will be involved. Chile’s mining unions say the government for decades has been unwilling to engage in tri-partite dialogue to improve mine safety, telling workers’ representatives their job is to negotiate over economic issues, not to participate on health and safety matters.
The unions say government officials and mine industrial representatives have consistently refused initiatives to discuss ratification of ILO Convention 176, the Safety and Health in Mines Convention, because it would dislodge strict industry-government control. One trade union leader told the ICEM that with vast private-sector investment already in Chile’s mining industry, he has witnessed a steady stream of World Trade Organisation (WTO) people, but never a representative from the ILO.
The facts behind San Esteban’s shoddy safety record must come to light to accurately illuminate the structural barriers blocking safe mine practices in Chile. As early as 2004, the single entity trade union at San José, Union No. 2 of Compania Minera San Esteban, presented legal challenges in courtrooms to close the mine because of unsafe conditions. Those went unheeded.
In January 2007, following a rock slide that killed a worker, the National Service of Geology and Mining (SERNAGEOMIN) did order closure of the mine, but a replacement supervisor for the agency ordered it re-opened several months later. Reportedly, the order to reopen came because of political pressure.
The re-opening was conditional, with the two owners promising to construct a second escape route, improve ventilation, and make other capital improvements inside a mine prone to rock falls after blasting. None of the promises were carried out and no inspections were made.
Six months before 5 August, San Esteban’s safety consultant resigned when he couldn’t deal with the multitude of safety infractions. He spoke of roof meshing not in place, roof bolts being shorter and interspaced further than standard requirements, and huge rocks not cleared following blasting. In short, all the prerequisites contained in ILO Convention 176 – a second exit route, regular inspections, trade union consultation, regulatory bodies with the authority to shut and keep shut unsafe mines, workers’ rights to refuse unsafe work – were missing in the San José mine, and no doubt in countless other Chilean mines.
(To view ICEM’s global campaign for the ratification of ILO Convention 176, click here.)
What is for certain is Piñera, Mining Minister Laurence Golborne, and others, including leaders of state-run copper company Codelco, did assemble a world-class operation that successfully rescued the 33 San José miners. Chile is a world-class minerals producer. But there is little question that procedural safety processes at the country’s mine sites are far from world class.
In the aftermath of the recue, scores of ICEM affiliates issued public statements. The National Union of Mineworkers (NUM) congratulated the Chileans “on the successful rescue operation” and said that since expert technical aid came from South Africa, South African miners should expect more at home in terms of fewer mine deaths.
“Over 90 mine workers have died from January to date and the mining industry in South Africa continues to move snail-paced in safety terms and continues to fool itself and those who believe there is significant improvement” inside the country’s mines, read the statement.
The Construction, Forestry, Mining, and Energy Union (CFMEU) of Australia said that in August, it “set about the task of raising funds to help (the 33 miners) and their families. These are people who have nothing and work under some of the most draconian conditions in the world. (CFMEU’s) campaign raised 20 million pesos, about A$40,000, and is still growing.
The Australian union created a video tribute that can be seen here.
The United Mine Workers of America (UMWA) said, “… while we celebrate, we must also look at this event as a learning opportunity for those who regulate mining at home and abroad. Every mine in the world, regardless of location and engineering challenges, must operate in an environment that puts the safety of miners above every other consideration.
“Even the most stringent mine safety laws are only effective when regulators have the will and the means to rigorously enforce them. As we rejoice in the rescue of our Chilean brothers, let us also learn from the mistakes that put their lives at enormous risk.”
In Germany, the IGBCE stated that this misfortunate must draw on lessons to support Chilean miners in their fight for safe work conditions. The ICEM rightfully uses this mine disaster to call on governments all over the world to ratify and adhere to the safety standards contained in the ILO Convention.
And Los Mineros, the Mexican National Miners’ and Metalworkers’ Union (SNTMMSRM), contrasted the all-out effort to rescue the Chilean miners with its own government’s refusal to search or to conduct any kind of inquiry into the February 2006 mine disaster that killed 65 miners.
The 33 miners in Chile are now safe and together with their families. But exactly how they came to be at death’s door, and whether or not the Chilean government will make corrective structural changes in mine safety, remains an open question.