As the deadline nears, the government and labour are urgently seeking a compromise on variations, reports Sechaba ka’Nkosi
Last-minute attempts to ensure that the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill is passed in this parliamentary session are at a crucial stage. Sources close to the process say government and labour are exchanging new positions behind the scenes in a bid to find common ground. The latest proposals are said to be focused mainly on variations – the outstanding issue currently being contested by the parties.
It is understood there is broad consensus between the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) and government on the working week, Sunday work, maternity leave and compensation for overtime. The difference has now been reduced to variations. Neither of the parties would confirm the new proposals.
However, the executive director of the National Economic Development and Labour Council (Nedlac) Jayendra Naidoo says although he also cannot confirm the new developments, a deal is not impossible.
“There is a lot of homework that is being done at the moment. And as the deadline for consensus draws nearer, there are good reasons to be hopeful,” says Naidoo.
Cosatu appeared to be softening its stance this week when it dropped its insistence on its demands being met as a package. Cosatu negotiator Muzi Buthelezi says the federation is now open to negotiating mechanisms towards the implementation of the working week, payment for maternity leave and overtime.
Buthelezi says the stumbling block is variations. He says labour wants a statutory guarantee that rights already enjoyed under collective agreements will not be compromised under the new law.
Says Buthelezi: “We don’t want to allow bargaining council, collective agreements or the ministry to determine sectoral variations. It is not acceptable. But we also want the Bill passed during the current session because delaying it won’t solve the problem; instead it will postpone it. In fact, it will be unfortunate if the Bill is not passed after two years of negotiations and processes.”
Buthelezi says the deadline for the parties to reach consensus must not be a big issue. Instead, he says the government must try to seek consensus on variations before pressing ahead with the Bill.
Labour commentator Duncan Innes agrees it is crucial for Cosatu to have the Bill passed this parliamentary session. Innes argues this leaves labour with very little choice but to compromise and have the Bill as it is. He warns that otherwise the final product might weigh heavily against unions.
“Organised business can agree on a 40-hour working week and afterwards mechanise by replacing labour with machines as a cost- cutting measure. Business can also agree on four months’ paid maternity leave but this reduces the absorption of women into the labour market. Thus, Cosatu will have to back off.
“For Cosatu to insist on variations will be suicidal. It will indicate a lack of faith and capacity to engage in its own structures. Cosatu cannot expect the state to regulate for them, they will have to negotiate that themselves. The more the passing of the Bill is delayed the more frustrations it will bring for unorganised workers,” says Innes.
Innes points to a number of factors that are running against labour. He says the government’s growth, employment and redistribution (Gear) strategy has brought its position on the Bill closer to organised business than to labour. This means that even Cosatu’s mass action campaign is unlikely to yield expected results; instead it could lead to further hardening of attitudes.
Divisions are emerging within the labour caucus. This week’s announcement by the Federation of Unions of South Africa (Fedusa) that it is willing to settle on the Bill in its current form means Cosatu’s position could be weakened.
Fedusa general secretary Dannhauser van der Merwe says it is better for labour to settle than to risk getting nothing. “The Bill is about minimum standards that can still be improved and not maximum standards. It will be a pity if the government withdraws the Bill due to disruptive actions and failure by parties to agree. Fedusa prefers the passing of the Bill in its current form than to have no law at all.”