Workers Left Behind at the World Cup

Share/Save Share this

2010 FIFA World Cup logoThe 2010 World Cup in South Africa was going to be a shining moment for Africa, but things haven't exactly gone according to plan. Of the tournament's six African teams, all but Ghana have been eliminated early. Half-empty stadiums early in the tournament suggest that the glittering architectural showpieces of the World Cup will quickly become albatrosses. A team of foreigners will leave South Africa with a trophy, and soccer's international master, FIFA will make billions. The people of South Africa will receive far less. The disappointments of the World Cup are clearest in the sad saga of Stallion Security.

Stallion Security at the World Cup

Stallion Security was contracted to provide security at four of the World Cup stadiums. It is hard to tell exactly what Stallion promised its 3,600 workers. The company itself seems not to know. One worker in Johannesburg was promised 500 Rand for a twelve-hour shift. This works out to a little more than $5 an hour, but in a country facing staggering income inequality and 25% unemployment, the Stallion job was a good job. Others seem to have been promised three times as much. What is clear is that Stallion paid less than half of what they promised, and failed to pay some stadium guards at all.

On June 16th, after a match between Germany and Australia, the Stallion guards went on strike to protest their ill-treatment. FIFA and the South African government responded swiftly and aggressively. When the strikers overturned trash receptacles, they faced teargas and rubber bullets. South African police took control of security at the stadium, and as the strike spread to the other stadiums staffed by Stallion, so did the police presence. Soon all 3,600 Stallion employees -- including those never associated with the strike -- were fired. FIFA transferred security duties to the police. The soccer goes on as planned, and a few thousand South Africans are a couple thousand dollars poorer.

The Past of Stallion Security

This is not the first time that Stallion Security has been linked to the most unsavory aspects of world sports. In 2001, Stallion provided security to a soccer match in Johannesburg between the Kaiser Chiefs and the Orlando Pirates. Due to incompetence and corruption, too many tickets were sold to fans, and a crush of people pressed their way into the stadium. Stallion's beleaguered guards fired teargas into the crowd. The stampede left 43 people dead. It seems Stallion's past did not send up any red flags for FIFA or the World Cup Organizing Committee.

The Way Forward, and Those Left Behind

The legal battle to right the wrongs of World Cup security will begin soon. Yes, Stallion Security is suing the World Cup Local Organizing Committee for terminating their contract halfway through the tournament. The thousands of South Africans have fewer options, and wait and hope for Stallion to pay them for the hours they already worked.

Sports can be wonderful and inspiring, as anyone watching the United States in this World Cup can attest. Sports can give us goals in the ninety-first minute and tennis matches that last eleven hours. But sports are also a business, and all too often a business in which average people subsidize the grand commercial projects of the elite. The people of South Africa pay for eight soccer arenas, and FIFA takes the profits. The next time FIFA, the International Olympic Committee, or even the Oakland A's come to a community demanding special treatment, it is worth remembering the broken promises of Stallion Security.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Viva World Cup 2010!

I understand there are many problems left behind the world cup event. But honestly I, my self really enjoy every moment for the past couple of weeks.

Viva World Cup 2010

Kids Digital Cameras

Well done South Africa!

I think that now that the dust has settled after the world cup we can ponder whether it was a success or not.

I think that the actual quality of the football played was pretty low (the new ball playing a big part in this).

The overwhelming feeling however, is that it was a success as far as (south) Africa is concerned. The initial safety concerns proved to be unfounded and the organisation of the tournament itself was very professional.

Plus the best (footballing) team won. (What were Holland playing at?)

Well done South Africa!

Cliff

Fitflops Sale

World Cup

Interesting article, Wonder why you dont here this on CNN or FOX.

Other Side of WorldCup

Everyone sees that World Cup is made to unite countries through sports, but it is still a business thing.

World Cup

An easy solution would be to reduce the player payments during the tournaments. I read somewhere that just by participating and not even winning a game players will receive a minimum of $200k - not bad at all. And each player of the winning team of the world cup will pocket a cool $680k.

By taking the slimmest percentage of these player payments would solve the problem and most likely the players would not even notice as they are being paid far more for the weekly club games.

Makes you wonder!

Sam

Football (soccer) achieved

Football (soccer) achieved its peak in the 90's and has been ruined by money. Bring back the passion for the game not profit.

2010 world cup ...

I'm not surprised by this after so many bogus called from the referees, especially the two of the bad call against u.s

Not surprised to hear this,

Not surprised to hear this, unfortunately. With major referee mistakes, the World Cup has already lost alot of its credibility this year. This is just more bad PR.

FIFA World Cup

Ross, please check your facts and then update your piece. The factual thinness (e.g. regarding stadium occupation, Stallion Security, the real benefits of the World Cup for South Africa etc.) is less than one can glean from the general news media, and does not really gel with it.

I trust you are in SA for the World Cup, and not expressing a remote opinion based on third-hand information?

Here's another suggestion.

Why don't you supply the specifics? This might just be my imagination, but the vague characterization of "factual thinness" coupled with the suggestion that the writer do the work you should do to support your challenge, suggest a PR person looking for some easy billings.