Photo: Michele Spatari / AFP
The public sector wage talks have devolved into a showdown in which the government has used negative sentiment towards workers as its trump card.
The government, represented by acting Public Service and Administration Minister Thulas Nxes, has repeated the claim that its offer to workers amounts to 7.5%, when the true figure is 3%.
It is not the first time the government has tried to advance this narrative, having paraded this number in a joint statement with Finance Minister Enoch Godongwana last month. According to the government’s calculations, the R1 000 stipend included in the wage offer amounts to 4.5%, which, added to the 3%, amounts to 7.5%.
In the statement, the two ministers accused unions of peddling misinformation through the media.
Between then and now, the government drew a line in the sand, choosing to unilaterally implement the 3% ahead of Godongwana’s medium-term budget speech last month.
Then, last week, the government issued a statement saying it had made a final offer of 7.5%, giving the impression that it had somehow sweetened the offer. It did so hours after unions announced a national day of action in protest against the 3%.
But the offer, as unions have pointed out, does not differ from what was tabled to unions previously. So why create such a brazenly distorted narrative?
In response to the government’s 7.5% exaggeration, labour federation Cosatu, the South African Federation of Trade Unions and the Federation of Unions of South Africa accused the government of attempting to stop workers from mobilising.
The Public Servants Association said: “The arrogance of the employer knows no limit, hence they are even prepared to lie on a public platform without shame.”
The government was trying to cause confusion between workers and members of the public, by creating a perception that public servants are greedy enough to reject what appears to be a good offer, the union added.
Indeed, one has to assume that the employer is trying to create an image of itself as meeting workers halfway and negotiating in good faith. Public sector unions are asking for a 10% increase, but 7.5% would be a pretty solid compromise given that inflation looks to be averaging below that.
It’s a good spin, because it upholds the ambivalence in which the government seems to be most comfortable.
Nxesi and his ilk can imagine themselves as good social democrats, cut from the same cloth as the workers they negotiate with. They can also appeal to the markets, whose goodwill is balanced on the government being able to gain the upper hand on workers, reining in the public sector wage bill.
The balancing of these two duties was laid bare in an interview Nxesi gave this week, during which he said the government has taken the “responsible stance” to revisit workers at the bargaining table. This is despite the minister having earlier decided to unilaterally implement the 3% wage offer, effectively collapsing the bargaining process.
It’s no mistake that Nxesi and Godongwana have been put at the front line of the government’s wage battle.
Both were once trade unionists, with the former having cut his teeth at the South African Democratic Teachers’ Union, which — incidentally — has already given the government’s offer its stamp of approval. Nxesi was appointed as the acting minister in April, replacing Ayanda Dlodlo, who, during her earlier stint in the position, was trusted with the restructuring of the public service, putting her in Cosatu’s crosshairs.
Godongwana, on the other hand, is viewed by many as the rational, market-friendly protector of the public purse. If there is political pressure to budge on spending, the finance minister is probably the best bet at holding off an offence.
The government’s strategy also has the effect of painting civil servants as the rogue element in the negotiations, exploiting souring public sentiment towards this cohort of workers. A genuine strike by civil servants would be felt most keenly by an already disillusioned public.
In the narrative that has accompanied the government’s now long-running wage bill fight, public sector workers have been depicted as entitled, greedy and, worst of all, “unproductive”.
The irony of it all is that the same descriptors can, perhaps even more easily, be applied to a number of the country’s ministers.
Here lies the government’s biggest dilemma. As much as the government would like to continue scapegoating workers for the dysfunction in the public sector, it is only a matter of time before the public’s tether runs out and the smoke and mirrors cease to have an effect.
In that event, if the public sides with workers instead of the government, the house of cards will collapse. With the national elections around the corner, this outcome would be untenable for a governing party still struggling to repair confidence in it.
Frayed confidence in the government coincides with the worst cost-of-living crisis in at least a decade. If this week’s inflation and other forecasts are anything to go by, high prices will be around for a lot longer than many of us can possibly bear.
In the middle of this crisis, policymakers have stubbornly stood by their conservative prescripts, fearing that any wrong move would result in the country’s economy being punished by financial markets.
But with almost everyone feeling the pinch — and with no end in sight — something’s got to give. Sentiment could still shift towards workers, though it may be too far gone.
In the meantime, trade unions have to balance their interests with those of the public. If they fail at this, they could end up squandering whatever good will they have left.
Trade unions are calling on the government to return to the bargaining table; failing to do so could result in a national shutdown.
A resolution to the impasse would have to ensure that neither party sacrifices too much in the process. The question is, who has the most to lose?
Sarah Smit is a Mail & Guardian business reporter.
[/membership]