The day BFTU, BOFEPUSU fought together
Oarabile Mosikare | Friday April 1, 2016 16:39
The Botswana Federation of Trade Unions (BFTU)and Botswana Federation of Public Sector Unions (BOFEPUSU) never agree on anything as far as labour politics are concerned. But the two federations defied the odds and shocked many when they released a joint statement last year in winter. This was after a Government Extra Ordinary Gazette was published on June 22, 2015 notifying of the Trade Disputes Bill 2015 (Supplement B).
The two federations pronounced: “This Joint Statement by the Botswana Federation of Trade Unions (BFTU) and Botswana Federation of Public Sector Unions (BOFEPUSU) is our joint resolve as representatives of workers in Botswana regarding the Trade Disputes Bill 2015. In a nutshell we declare that we are opposed to the un-procedural enactment of the Trade Dispute Bill, 2015 and substantively opposed to some sections of the Bill, mainly Sections 46 and 47 on essential services.”
The secretary generals of the two federations signed the statement, Gadzani Mhotsha of the BFTU and Tobokani Rari of the BOFEPUSU. They proceeded to give a background on the issue of the contentious essential services.
“The current Trade Disputes Act Cap 48:02 re-enacted in 2005, has a schedule of Essential services which we, as Trade Unions, have always indicated our disagreement with. Since its inclusion into the TDA and its numerous revisions, BFTU and BOFEPUSU have always opposed the essential services schedule. Trade unions have been consistently opposed to the existence of the whole schedule. And have recommended an alternative method of regulation, based on the International Labour Organisation (ILO) definition as a best practice,” the two unionists explained.
Similarly, they said that the ILO Committee of Experts on the Applications of Labour Standards and the Committee on Freedom of Association have repeatedly raised objections to the schedule and its inconsistency with the ILO definition on Essential Services. In recent years the ILO has objected to the inclusion of the Botswana Railway services and Telecommunication services and has recommended for their removal from the schedule.
BFTU and BOFEPUSU said Botswana government has continuously resisted calls for the abolition or alignment of the essential services schedule and conveniently promised to the ILO and the international community that it is consulting social partners on the issue. “In 2008 Public Service Unions successfully lobbied for inclusion of the ILO definition in the Public Service Act (PSA) of 2008, although ultimately the PSA was crafted to refer (and defer) to the TDA schedule for definition of Essential Services. However, this gave us hope that in future Government may accede to domesticate the ILO definition in other labour laws, especially the Trade Disputes Act.”
They explained that following the 2011 BOFEPUSU strike, government moved in the opposite direction, through Statutory Instrument No. 57, to extend the schedule, now to include veterinary services, teaching services and diamond sorting, cutting and selling services. BFTU and BOFEPUSU worked together to oppose the instrument, which was temporarily withdrawn by Parliament but eventually approved as is. “BOFEPUSU then mounted a legal challenge to the essential services schedule up to the Court of Appeal and won. The Court of Appeal upheld a High Court decision that the essential services schedule is invalid and of no force or effect. Again this gave us hope that government will move towards alignment with International Labour Standards or at least respect its courts.”
“What we are now seeing in the Trade Disputes Bill 2015 is a resurgence of the government’s intention to extend its definition further and thereby limit further the right to strike. Government has increased the number of essential services from 10 to 14 with an express power to the minister to declare more services essential. The new Bill also extends the definition to support services in the listed services, a proviso which hitherto was confined to Transport and Telecommunication Services, which has now been incidentally removed.”
Mhotsha and Rari said the effect of this development is to curtail worker rights, and in particular the fundamental right to strike. The right to strike is the only weapon that workers have at their disposal to back up demands during collective bargaining and in peaceful coercion of employers in a relationship which is inherently unbalanced.
The two objected to the new sections 46 and 47 of the TDA because the trade union representative consistently opposed the schedule and recommended an alternative approach. “While we affirm that in 2014 a draft bill of the TDA was brought before the Labour Advisory Board (LAB) as per the requirement of the Employment Act, the Schedule did not include Teaching services, Government Broadcasting services and Immigration and Customs Services. This means that a procedural flaw with respect to those has been committed.”
They claimed that the LAB unanimously agreed that instead of a list of essential services, the internationally accepted ILO definition of essential services be adopted. The LAB also agreed that there be an independent Tripartite Committee that will oversee issues of determining occupations to be declared Essential services. It is apparent that the minister has ignored all this noble advice, thereby rendering LAB consultation a mere formality.
“It is our considered view that although the current law does not explicitly compel the minister to consult affected sectors, however the mere fact that the proposed amendment seeks to take away a fundamental right previously conferred on the affected workers, such workers ought to be consulted through their representatives.”
They continued: “In the event that this Bill is passed as it is, almost all unionised workers in Botswana will fall under the definition of essential services. We observe that this is a convenient prohibition (banning) of the right to strike. It would be unlawful for workers in any sector to use strike action in furtherance of grievances with employers.
“Our view is that this banning of the right to strike is indirectly at variance with Section 13 (1) of the Constitution which conferred on workers the right to associate. The right to bargain is a fundamental right and the right to strike is an effective means to its achievement. In the absence of the strike weapon trade unions will be turned into welfare societies.”
What was the way forward?
The BFTU and the BOFEPUSU held a joint press conference to carry out public sensitisation. They also promised to combat regressive ideologies which undermine Freedom of Association, the Right to Bargain and the Right to Strike through dedicated labour research and dissemination.
They also promised to lobby Members of Parliament not to pass the TDA Bill, 2015. Alternatively, to amend it by adopting the ILO definition instead of the proposed list. Finally the two rivals threatened that if the Bill is passed, they would launch a legal battle to protect constitutional freedoms.
Govt awards 3% to civil servants
The Director of Public Service Management, Ruth Maphorisa has awarded three percent across the board salary hike to all public servants. Maphorisa said this increase would apply to the public service including members of the Botswana Defence Force (BDF), Botswana Police, Prisons Service, Directorate of Intelligence and Security (DIS) and Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC). This directive will take effect from April 1, 2016