Maravi

The state of trade unions

The state of trade unions
By Editor
Wednesday July 25, 2007 [04:00]

There is no denying the fact that the state of the labour movement in Zambia is not in an enviable form. And we have stated it in this column on many occasions that the labour movement in Zambia is so weakened that it lacks the capacity to adequately deal with the challenges that have come with the present socio-economic setup in the country.

However, it is downright mockery for Michael Sata, who was part of a government which created the conditions which the labour movement has found itself in today, to pose as someone who really cares about the fate of organised labour. The question is: What did Sata do to ensure that the government of Frederick Chiluba - which he was part of and at a senior level at one moment - did not go ahead with its schemes to dilute the relevance of trade unions by enacting laws aimed at weakening them?

Indeed, we share the view that a lot has to be done by the current labour leadership to revamp the purpose of trade unionism, especially at this moment when the forces of capitalism are shooting hard from all angles. However, it is quite simplistic for politicians like Sata to throw tirades at the leadership of organised labour without explaining the background to the state of affairs in the labour movement.

Without necessarily taking away from the good job that Joyce Nonde has done so far as one of the top labour leaders in the country, it needs to be mentioned that the birth of the Federation of Free Trade Unions of Zambia (FFTUZ) was necessitated by the schemes which the Chiluba administration commissioned in order to destroy the purpose of trade unionism.

Since politicians have a tendency to forget easily, we may remind Sata that the poor state of trade unionism in Zambia today - especially its polarisation - is largely attributable to the conditions that were created by the legislation that was spearheaded by the administration he was part of.

We do not need to overstate the fact that at the moment Zambian laws allow the existence of several trade unions. Quite frankly, the laws that regulate the conduct of trade union activities are today worse than they probably were during the colonial era. We are saying this because the laws that were formulated during the Third Republic represent more the interests of capital than those of the workers. Needless to say that these laws had their basis in the neoliberal policies adopted by the MMD government of Frederick Chiluba in the early 1990s.

Furthermore, it is not an exaggeration that these policies were part of the neoliberal package sponsored by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank and they also fitted in very well with the political desires of Chiluba at that time. Chiluba, having been at the helm of Zambia's labour movement for 17 years and having seen its role in the removal of Dr Kenneth Kaunda from power, did not fathom the idea of a strong labour movement in the country.

To that effect, he took advantage of his connections within the labour movement as well as his power as president of the Republic of Zambia to weaken the labour movement and make it politically impotent, for his own political expedience. It is an open secret today that Chiluba engineered the divisions within the labour movement. As we have already stated, some of Chiluba's engineering can be traced back to the formation of the FFTUZ.

And because of the formation of FFTUZ, the strength and capacity of the Zambia Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) was reduced and this has worked well for the benefit of capital. And this is why recently, there have been calls that necessary steps need to be taken to ensure that the two mother bodies are united.

For those of us with a deep conviction that one of the solutions to the vitality of the labour movement lies in unity, this has been our message for some time now. It is a matter of urgency that the labour movement in the country turns away from the pursuit of their objectives or goals as isolated entities but to come together as a fortified single entity with the ability to take on the challenges that workers are now faced with. This has been our consistent message and we have no intentions of shifting our position on our call for a united labour movement.

Of course we do understand that the leadership styles of the labour movement will, like in any other organisation, vary from time to time. However, we also do believe that the strength of the labour movement should never be anchored on the individual styles of leadership. What will be more useful for the labour movement is to ensure that its purpose, its objectives and goals are not lost in circumstances of a crisis of leadership.

And let's also be mindful that there are several factors, both objective and subjective, that have come to the fore in the last few years which make it very difficult to have a forceful labour movement. We need not to forget that even the numbers in terms of formal employment have gone drastically down over the last few years, again thanks to the neoliberal policies of the Chiluba administration which have left many workers outside formal employment.

In short, while acknowledging that things are not as they should be in the labour movement, let us try to isolate some of the causal factors for the status quo before we unfairly heap blame on particular individuals or groups of individuals. If we are to find solutions to the problems faced by workers today, it is necessary to undertake a holistic interrogation of a host of factors, otherwise we shall continue groping in the dark as far as this matter is concerned.

Labels: EDITORIAL, SATA, TRADE UNIONS

posted by MrK @ 6:14 AM