Over the last few months, a number of trade unions held national congresses at which union leaders supposedly updated their members on union operations. Such gatherings are welcome, especially as they provide a chance for the labour unions to evaluate their successes and also chart new strategies and avenues through which they can improve their operations going forward.
High profile officers in the public service, the private sector and non-governmental organizations are also an attractive feature at such gatherings. They always reiterate their commitment to working with the labour unions to establish cordial working relationships. That is all well and good, except that most of the time such statements are just lip service.
Working relations between the labour unions and the employer have been acrimonious and at times outright hostile. This is not a welcome development because it does not bode well for the reputation of this country as a peaceful and stable economy with good industrial relations. It is our belief that there are other more peaceful avenues through which differences and labour disputes can be resolved, other than through strike action and dismissals. The employer and the employee should smoke the peace pipe, at least for the sake of this country.
In the public sector, we recently saw government summarily dismissing over 24 employees from the public service through the early retirement. This was supposedly because the said officers were not performing up to standard. While we appreciate government’s drive towards creating an innovative and productive nation, we feel that it is very unfair to subject employees to the whims of powerful individuals within the public service.
The standoff between government and the public sector unions on this matter dates back to 2008, when government hastily passed the new Public Service Act through parliament and immediately decided that it needed to be reviewed. Accusations flew thick and fast that government was looking to reverse the gains that the labour unions had made during the formulation of the new Act. These accusations were further lent credence by the fact that government refused to shed light as to exactly which parts of the new Act were to be reviewed.
Public sector unions, in particular BOPEU, have in the past revealed that government might renege on an initial agreement concerning the omission of section 15(3) of the current act (public service act, 1998) for reasons still to be pronounced. The section gives government authority to retire public employees who have reached 45 years. Section 15(3) is not present in the new public act 2008, and there are fears that recent insinuations by government to review the new act are actually meant to re-impose it.
The fact is that the unions were right, because some of the issues that they highlighted at the time are currently the centre of their present standoff with government, especially over the issue of early retirement. Worse still, government has no obligation to accord such employees a hearing, nor furnish them with reasons for their early retirement. Labour unions have described this law as unfair and draconian and subject to abuse by senior officers.
The fact, however, remains that government, the private sector, parastatals and the labour unions are all partners in the development of this country. The fact is that it is this country and its citizens who stand to lose in the event of a protracted standoff between labour unions and the employer. It is, therefore, imperative that all work together.
The employer should not look at the labour unions as vigilantes who are hell bent on weaving havoc within the national economy, but rather as partners who are only out to ensure that workers are given a fair slice of the cake. Their efforts should therefore complement each other, for they are partners in a common quest to ensure peace, stability and economic prosperity for this nation.
Government, on the other hand, must also ensure that the rights of the workers are preserved. There have been many instances where the employer has treated the employee unfairly and walked away with it. There are many instances where the labour department failed to stand up for the employee when they were given a raw deal by unscrupulous businessmen and managers. That should not be the case. Government should remember that before anything, they have an obligation to preserve the rights and privileges of the citizens of this country, and that they should work hard to ensure that employers who cheat their employees are brought to task.
The trade union movement must also play their part. Trade union leaders, especially, must learn that in this country consultation is key. They must therefore avoid strike action or stay-aways by all means, for they impact negatively on the economy of this country. Trade union leaders must always have the interests of their members at heart, not political motivation, and not personal gain. It must always be about the workers. We should not hear of trade union leaders who are on a personal crusade to push their political agendas, in the end using the name and resources of their members. That should not be allowed. We should not hear of trade union leaders who use union funds for personal use.
They must be brought to book. The labour movement must be robust and proactive in protecting their interests. Negotiate with the employer in good faith, audit and expel leaders who embezzle union funds and who use the names and resources of the labour unions in vain.
But most importantly, remember that this is your country too. So work hard, be productive and cooperate for the betterment of this country.
