Unions,+state+draw+battle+lines,+Terry+Bell,+Business+Report

Business Report, Johannesburg, May 16, 2007
=Unions, state draw battle lines over legal terms=


 * By Terry Bell**

There seems to be widespread confusion about the current public sector dispute. This is hardly surprising given claims, counter claims, some misleading reports and the bandying about of sections of the labour laws.

What we are witnessing is sabre rattling, sparring by employers and unions, each trying to gain an advantage in the deadlocked wage talks before any final confrontation or settlement. Because, for all the talk of strike action, there can be no decision about this until Friday.

By Friday morning, the last of the ballot results of union members will be known and the final decision will be taken, unless there is a last-minute move by the government to break the deadlock.

This seems unlikely - just as unlikely as the majority of union members not deciding to support their demands to the point of strike action.

There is every indication that unionists across the public sector are overwhelmingly in favour of fighting for better wages and conditions that amount to as much as a 12 percent increase in their standard of living. But it takes considerable time for the democratic process of balloting 1 million or more members across the country.

So far, two of the three unions that, between them, organise more than 60 percent of the total union membership in the public sector have completed their ballots.

The National Education Health and Allied Workers' Union (Nehawu) and the SA Democratic Teachers Union (Sadtu), both affiliated to Cosatu, have received up to 90 percent support for strike action if necessary.

The third member of the big three, the independent Public Service Association, will declare the result of its ballot on Friday morning. However, indications are that this will be no different from the results announced by Nehawu and Sadtu.

At a combined union meeting in Centurion last week, it was decided that once all the strike ballots were in and if they were in support of action, notice of intention to strike would be given this Friday.

Seven days later, a legally protected strike would start, failing a last-minute breakthrough.

In the meantime, the 194 000 strong Nehawu, together with the 9 300 member SA State and Allied Workers' Union (Sasawu) - also affiliated to Cosatu - have started on a work-to-rule regime.

This action has been dubbed a go-slow by public services minister Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi. She maintained that a go-slow or work-to-rule would be illegal in terms of section 213 of the Labour Relations Act (LRA).

In the final analysis, it may be for the courts to decide.

For although media reports tend to conflate the terms, there is a difference between a work-to-rule and a go-slow.

This has been spelled out clearly by Nehawu general secretary Fikile Majola. He points out that workers in often grossly understaffed areas such as hospitals have tended to voluntarily "double up", doing additional work for which they are neither trained nor paid.

By working to rule, workers will only do, "to the best of their ability", the work described in their job descriptions and contracts. As the unions see it, this is an action separate from a possible future strike.

However, Fraser-Moleketi is relying on the protest action clause in the LRA. This states that "the partial or complete refusal to work, or the retardation or obstruction of work" in the cause of promoting "the socioeconomic interest of workers" is illegal.

It is a nice legal point, since the unions maintain that their members are neither refusing, retarding nor obstructing the work they are legally employed to do.

The decision by Nehawu and Sasawu and the response by the minister threatening possible dismissals for "illegal action" have merely raised the temperature of the debate.

It has also added to the "gatvol factor" among union members, many of whom still deeply resent the wage settlement Fraser-Moleketi imposed on the unions six years ago.

In the past, the government and the public sector unions have agreed on three-year deals for wages and conditions.

This time, the government wants a four-year agreement, to avoid having to face public sector negotiations during the 2010 soccer World Cup.

The unions point out that some of the conditions in the last three-year deal have not yet been met.

They want an agreement for only one year, especially since the government insists on pegging annual wage rises in longer-term agreements to no more than 0.5 percent above the official CPIX inflation rate, which excludes mortgage costs.

Should the state agree to annual increments of between 1 percent to 2 percent above CPIX, the unions could soften their position.

The same applies to what has generally been categorised as a 12 percent wage demand: the precise amount and how it is calculated are negotiable.


 * From: http://www.busrep.co.za/index.php?fSectionId=553&fArticleId=3833068**

806 words