[4] The strike affected all three of South Africa's major platinum producers, with Lonmin hardest hit.
By June, AMCU was arguing for steady wage increases over 4 years to meet the 12,500 rand goal by 2017 instead of immediately.
[6] On June 12, a preliminary agreement was reached when the mining companies offered a 1,000 rand per month pay increase.
[2] The offer was quickly endorsed by some workers and AMCU leader Joseph Mathunjwa publicly stated a deal was imminent the following day.
The union also requested the platinum companies not pursue criminal charges against workers suspected of violence during the strike.
In a joint statement, the platinum companies said the new demands would cost an additional 1 billion rand and were impossible to meet.
[citation needed] The mining companies did not agree to avoid future job cuts as they sought to operate more efficiently.
Mathunjwa called the deal "a breakthrough [where] we have managed to unshackle ourselves from this structure that came long from colonization to the national party".
[citation needed] By the time a deal was reached, the strike had become the longest and most expensive in South Africa history.
[7] The GDP of South Africa contracted in the first quarter of 2014, pulled down by the steepest drop in mining production (25% of which 19% was directly attributable to the strike) in 50 years.
[7] The nationwide impact of the strike led to calls for laws to give the government or court system "strike-breaking" powers.
[7] The disaster relief charity Gift of the Givers had spent 3.4 million rand on food parcels and medical care for the strikers by early June.
[12] The strike also caused a substantial increase in the number of stray animals in Rustenburg as people abandoned pets they could no longer afford to feed.
[14] It called the strike the most significant non-African National Congress action to help black people since the fall of apartheid.
[14] Industry analysts cautioned that further difficulty was likely as the platinum companies would need to cut the work force to regain profitability.
It argued that the industry should take a more active role in managing the socio-economic issues affecting its workforces, but said the government needed to use tax money to help as well.
Furthermore, it argued that laws regarding government intervention powers, migrant workers, and union rules needed to be revised.