IT WAS less than three years ago when the Satawu-led security strikes turned violent and brought the country to its knees. Now, private security companies and organised labour are back at the negotiating table. Unfortunately, the current round of wage negotiations is proceeding at a time when everybody is suffering — customers are cutting back, factories and mines are closing, and construction projects are being stopped — all while this year’s high inflation has put pressure on employees trying to earn a living and support their families.
The good news is that last week’s collective bargaining between the security employers’ organisations and the unions demonstrated a commitment between the parties to find an amicable solution that is not only mutually beneficial but will ensure the sustainability and growth of the sector.
The unions’ revised demands include an average 84% to 47% wage increase in the first year, the phasing out of grades E, D and C, and the abolition of a number of geographic demarcations within three years.
These demands raise a serious concern. Some 90% of security officers fall in these categories and the restructuring of this sector in three years will be financially disastrous for the entire industry.
However, all parties agree that it is imperative to restructure the industry. We are engaged in drawing up an industry charter under the auspices of the National Economic Development and Labour Council.
As a representative of the private security sector, I have publicly acknowledged that the industry needs to transform. This, however, will only be achieved if all the stakeholders, including the unions, the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSIRA) and customers work together to better this sector’s image. It has a significant role to play in crime prevention and policing due to its resources, capacity, and the proactive and reactive policing strategies that it employs when rendering services to its customers.
It is disturbing that the industry has inherited a bad reputation as a result of its history, and rampant noncompliance of some security services providers who disregard minimum conditions of employment, remuneration and benefits as set out in legislation. This phenomenon often results in compliant service providers bearing the brunt of unfair competition in an environment where price is elevated over quality of services and employment standards.
The industry regulator has in the recent past drawn sharp criticism from business and labour alike. The general view is that the structural and legislative absence of participation in regulatory oversight by stakeholders such as employers and unions renders its interventions in the industry misdirected, and thus ineffective, as larger — predominantly compliant — companies are zealously pursued by inspectors, while the fly-by-nights go unchecked and unnoticed.
In the pursuit of the consolidation of compliant employers and the development of the industry, the Security Industry Alliance was formed in 2003 to provide a single voice for the profession. The alliance includes individual companies, employer bodies and members of the big business fraternity. The work of this alliance has opened a necessary dialogue between the industry and various government stakeholders including the safety and security ministry, the PSIRA, the police and the Safety and Security Sector Education and Training Authority. This has created a platform for the industry to attempt to elevate its status in an influential and unified voice.
The employers remain committed to further engage with organised labour. We hope the next round of wage negotiations will yield positive results in order to avoid a repetition of the regrettable events of the 2006 strike.
•Diavastos is chief negotiator for the Coalition of Employer Associations in the Security Sector.