Organised labour in SA needs to step up and fulfil its role in steering the country out of the economic crisis, instead of barking at other stakeholders from the sidelines.
It comes as no surprise that the union movement is opposed to most of the government’s policy interventions and proposals, especially those intended to fix the crisis-ridden state-owned enterprises.
While the unions’ argument has always been that wholesale changes — such as the unbundling of Eskom — risk destroying jobs, there have been no constructive proposals of alternatives from them, or the Left in general. There has not even been an attempt to strengthen this debate by making an argument for how jobs would be lost as a result of the proposed policies.
The main standoff between the government and unions is over President Cyril Ramaphosa’s failure to consult organised labour prior to making the decision that Eskom should be split into three separate entities. Labour is in agreement that Eskom cannot continue to guzzle large chunks of the fiscus in perpetuity, and that a solution is desperately needed. However, given the level of debate in the public discourse, it is safe to say that even if they had been consulted prior to the unbundling decision, not a single union has been prepared to put alternative options on the table.
The unions are right, though, that they should have been consulted in line with the spirit of SA’s labour dispensation. The only question is to what end. The same attitude prevailed when independent power producers (IPPs) were introduced to SA.
Labour has expressed disgust at the renewable energy systems, citing the threat of massive job losses in the coal sector. But major and developing economies around the world have been moving away from coal and there are indications that investors are no longer looking at the commodity as a viable investment.
SA finds itself stuck on a narrative rejecting the IPPs instead of proposals from labour on what should be done for the thousands whose jobs could be affected. When court challenges failed to halt the process, the only leverage remaining to the Left was to embark on strike action.
Organised labour has always pushed the government to adopt a developmental state agenda, advocating for policies such as national health insurance and a comprehensive social security system. The same mantra is directed at the business community, which it wants to put the country first by investing locally and paying workers “decent” wages.
However, unions have failed to consider how their own actions have caused job losses and hobbled the economy. The role of unions cannot be limited to threatening “war” when ideas they are opposed to are promoted.
How about adopting a pro-developmental state stance by showing up to the table with tangible, well-researched concepts that would save workers’ jobs while uplifting the economy? Organised labour has to systematically and constructively participate in the organisational frameworks of policy processes that are under way.
A lot of scholarly work has gone into establishing whether the Left has defined its role in democratic SA, with many questions related to the subject unanswered and clear trends pointing to a movement that has failed to move on from fighting to dismantle the apartheid state.
That is why most engagements by organised labour smack of apartheid-era tactics that were rooted in nothing but defiance, as workers had no seat at the table where decision-making took place.
Its overreliance on costly strikes during trying economic times is a case in point. The message is almost always a negative one — what the unions do not want, rather than constructive suggestions, with the exception of wage negotiations, which invariably see unions presenting a set list of demands.
We know there has been insufficient transformation in many companies, that some employers continue to exploit workers and that the value of wages has been regressing in real terms over the years.
Business has through many platforms presented plans, some spanning 15 years, for fixing these problems, and so has the government. Though implementation remains the stumbling block in both cases, at least these two social partners are scrambling for solutions.
As a partner to the social pact signed at the jobs summit and elsewhere, labour needs to come to the party in a more meaningful way or risk forever chasing after other stakeholders rather than leading the way.
• Mahlakoana is political and labour writer.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.