Growing up on Middagkrans Farm in Franschhoek, Western Cape, Johannes Floris, 54, still remembers vividly the things he used to do as a child.
“After school and during holidays I used to help my dad and grandfather pack fruit boxes and take them to the train station before they were exported. I was still a small boy then and they were working full-time on the farm. During the December holidays the farm owner would give us nicely-packaged Christmas presents and toys as a thank you gift as we couldn’t be paid since we were children.”
As an adult Floris said he and his siblings started working as seasonal workers for money, particularly during harvest time.
Fast-forward to 2023, Floris, his sister, Martha, 53, and 37-year-old niece Cecelia — all born on the farm — are facing an uncertain future after the new farm owners, VRFT (Van Rooyen Family Trust) Properties cc, launched an eviction application in the Paarl magistrate's court.
In the application, made in terms of Extension of Security of Tenure Act (Esta), the trust representative Marius van Rooyen claims that none of the family members ever worked for the farm. He claims Johannes only had consent to reside on the farm through a rental agreement, and “has already voluntarily vacated the premises on the farm and has taken up residence in an alternative accommodation”. He further states that Martha merely received consent to occupy the property, while Cecelia never received an independent right to stay on the farm.
The application states the Floris’ lease agreement expired last March and “therefore all are occupying the property unlawfully”.
If evicted the family says it will be left homeless as it has no alternative accommodation. “If we are kicked out of the farm, we will have nowhere else to stay. We have nowhere else to go to. The only home we’ve ever known is this farm. We will probably end up in someone’s backyard or have to build shacks as we have no means of buying a house as my uncle has only been offered R30,000 to move out,” said Cecelia.
Johannes said though he does not work on the farm, the prospect of being evicted from a home to three generations of his family “is heartbreaking”. He denies he has vacated the farm.
“I still stay on the farm. I’ve never stayed anywhere else, except visiting my child from time to time. Three generations of my family have stayed on this farm.
“My grandfather was the first person to work on this farm then my father joined him. Even though I didn’t work on the farm full-time as I wanted a better life, it pains my heart that the only benefit that we got as a family is being taken away just like that.”
Speaking on behalf of VRFT Properties cc, attorney Esmeri Theron said houses on Middagkrans Farm are earmarked for permanent employees.
“The limited stock of employee accommodation is therefore allocated to key personnel of our client, who are by virtue of their employment necessitated to reside on the farm. It is necessary to state that no individual in the Floris household has developed a lifelong right to reside on the farm as provided for in section 8(4) of Esta, nor working on the farm in order to qualify for housing as an employment benefit.”
She said the court would consider the individual right of each occupier in the eviction application made by the farm.
Carmen Louw, co-director of Women on Farms, said the Floris family's case is not unique, and many long-term farm occupiers are affected by eviction. She said municipalities were obligated to provide emergency accommodation to anyone made homeless by an eviction, but most lacked the political will to help farmworkers, and “often provided a few roof sheets or metal structures with no foundation, as emergency accommodation for farm evictees”.
While the Esta is meant to address the injustices of the past and protect farmworkers from unfair evictions, the legislation “has instead become a guideline to evict farm dwellers from farms”.
“We believe the reason for this is that courts interpret the act very narrowly, the legislation is also gender-blind. Tenure is linked to employment, and most permanent workers are male, thereby linking the farm tenure to the male person in the house. When the male loses his employment or dies, the women and children automatically lose their right to live on the farm.
“We believe the question of farm tenure should be dealt with through land redistribution with specific protections for women who contributed through their seasonal and care work to the agricultural economy,” said Louw.
Support independent journalism by subscribing to the Sunday Times. Just R20 for the first month.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.