As the National Economic and Development Labour Council (Nedlac) celebrates its 10th anniversary on Friday, it has to reinvent itself or run the risk of being sidelined as irrelevant. That is according to commentators who spoke to the Mail & Guardian ahead of its milestone anniversary.
Exactly 10 years ago on Friday, Nedlac was established “as a representative and consensus-seeking body where [labour, government, business and civil society] will seek to reach agreement through negotiation and discussion”.
But now the institution finds itself challenged on a range of fronts. Observers suggest, for instance, that the “bargaining council, consensus-seeking approach” leads to parties forsaking an optimal solution in favour of an accommodation, which sometimes frustrates business.
Vic van Vuuren, chief operating officer at Business Unity of South Africa, concedes that Nedlac decision-making processes may need to be reviewed, but notes that consensus‒seeking is the best approach in a developing economy where the playing fields need to be levelled.
“People do not realise how important this institution is,” Van Vuuren said. He added that administrative inefficiencies tended to be highlighted, but that Nedlac had helped create “an orderly society and a better business environment”.
Raymond Parsons, the overall convenor for business, described business participation as “an exciting journey of social dialogue”. He noted that Nedlac has helped reduce perceived country risk and measured its success by having moved economic growth from zero to an average of 3% a year in the years since 1994.
Van Vuuren said that other countries could learn from Nedlac’s social democratic model, and that it had won praise from business peers in Mexico and Brazil and the International Labour Organisation — suggesting that it is perceived as a labour body.
Van Vuuren conceded that Nedlac has been dominated by labour policy debates, producing such legislation as the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, the Labour Relations Act, and laws on skills development and employment equity. He suggested Nedlac should move from the realm of the labour market to public finance and trade and industry issues.
Van Vuuren said, for instance, that with labour laws now in place, unions had to start focusing on job creation and retention.
Nedlac was recently criticised by Daimler Chrysler chairperson Chris Kopke as “dying a rapid death” and missing opportunities to promote growth.
Nedlac executive director Herbert Mkhize told the M&G that the most exciting part of his 18 months at Nedlac has been “our efforts to implement the Growth and Development Summit” goals. These included halving poverty and unemployment by 2014.
Yet these goals were attacked at last year’s summit by Congress of South African Trade Unions secretary general Zwelinzima Vavi as unattainable. Vavi accused the government and the private sector of lacking commitment.
“Social dialogue is, by its nature, contested,” responded Mkhize. The most challenging part of his job was to “make sure that everyone sings from the same sheet, adding social dimension to the business of business”.
On Thursday, Cosatu accused government of bypassing negotiations at Nedlac. Labour director general Vanguard Mkosana could not be reached from Parliament.
Mkhize does not agree with the view that labour has been given undue prominence.
“People focus on ‘labour’ in our name and ignore ‘economic development’.” He said he believed Nedlac was about promoting growth, equity and participation. “I have yet to see an institution that comes close to Nedlac,” he said.
Ebrahim Patel, overall convenor for labour, sees the challenge for Nedlac as being three-fold.
First, he would like to see a more vigorous implementation of agreements that have been buttoned down. He also expected to see trade unions and business being more proactive by tabling proposals of their own rather than reacting to government proposals. Finally, he called on Nedlac to interface with debate on globalisation.
But Nedlac will have to address business concerns about its efficiency and prevail on government to recommit to its process. Otherwise the years ahead could be even more frustrating for its members.