Government has dared union leaders, who are trying to whip
up emotions of civil servants instead of negotiating for their welfare, to join
politics and leave welfare negotiations to bona fide workers whose well-being
is of paramount importance to the Second Republic, a senior official has said.
This comes as some union leaders, most of whom are sucking
workers dry through monthly subscriptions and live it up far from the people
they represent, have been trying to stir anti-government sentiments among civil
servants by suggesting that members of the security forces were favoured when
the Government recently paid the 50 percent compassionate increment to its
workers.
In an interview with The Herald, Deputy Chief Secretary to
the President and Cabinet (in charge of communications) Mr George Charamba
described as baseless, attempts to establish a link between what was paid to
members of the security forces and other civil servants, saying the later
should continue using their platforms to push for better salaries.
He said instead of complaining about the money that was
paid to the security forces, the civil servants should use it to negotiate for
a better deal as the initial 50 percent increment, which will be followed by a
US$75 cushion allowances was purely based on compassion.
“Now they are saying why are you differentiating your
compassion. They are saying people in the uniformed forces were favoured. In
the first place, uniformed forces and the entirety of the security forces is
not unionised. It is indeed a debate that, can a man who yields a gun also be
allowed to collectively bargain? Whenever there is a welfare issue, which is
related to their workplaces, those issues are ventilated through their command
structure and the President being the Commander-In-Chief. (What this) means is
that communication ends up on his desk.”
Mr Charamba said since the uniformed forces are not
unionised, issues pertaining to their welfare cannot be lumped with issues
concerning the civil servants who can continuously engage Government, through
the tripartite negotiating forum.
“So you cannot have staff associations overreaching and
trying to comment on issues of uniformed forces who are not their members. In
any case, if there is a valid argument, their argument needs not to be
predicated on what uniformed forces get or don’t get. Their argument must stand
on its merit; you don’t rise by pulling the other guy down. Why not harness
that difference to bargain for better?” he said.
With the behaviour of unions bordering on political
gamesmanship and posturing, Mr Charamba said inevitably the employer will be
left with little choice, but to treat the so-called union leaders as political
activists.
“There is a gratis offer to improve the conditions of the
workforce, itself the ultimate goal of any union leaders. The union leader’s
first reflex is to reject that, when the offer comes, they fault-find around
it, but beyond fault-finding they also misinterpret it deliberately, linking it
to a political event coming from the opposition.
“The discussion around the Covid-19 arose after the first
package that was announced in January was coming to a close at a time when the
inflation was unrelentingly rising.
“At that time there was no talking of July 31, this was
well before the knee of the opposition had been jerked into wanting to do the
impossible, namely to do a demonstration in this season of Covid-19, because
they will not do it.”
To establish a link between that act of compassion, its
distribution with the wishful thinking for July 31 demonstrations is therefore
spurious, Mr Charamba added.
“I am raising this because it leaves the employer with the
genuine question; are we dealing with bona fide union leaders or we are dealing
with opposition politics unionised? The moment that the employer comes to the
conclusion that this is opposition politics unionised, then it means the
collective bargaining process collapses.
“There is a different medicine for dealing with workforce
related problems and yet a different medicine for dealing with the question of
national political power.
“This should never mix. Politics is decided elsewhere.
Worker welfare goals are settled in an interactive forum. There are no rules in
politics, no mathematics and there are losers and winners. My good union
leaders must decide, if they want to go political, they must quit the
collective bargaining process to make way for bona fide civil servants,” he
said.
Singling the health sector where a strike has been rumbling,
despite the Government commitment to improving their welfare through
negotiations, Mr Charamba said there is an unholy alliance between the unions
and some opposition parties as shown by placards and songs that the striking
nurses partake in.
“As matters stand in the health sector where people who are
supposedly pushing for better salaries wind-up singing songs, holding placards
which place them politically in a certain political camp, they should not
expect the employer to treat them as employees. We have been watching with
consternation to a point where it is being increasingly difficult to
differentiate them with an opposition party”.
Mr Charamba said the initial rejection of the Government
initiated salary review by unionists came as a shocker as that was entirely
based on compassion.
He said the 50 percent package, that is based on grade of
civil servants, as well as performance, has now been distributed and what is
outstanding is the US denominated cushioning allowances that will be given to
all civil servants without variations.
Civil servants have received the 50 percent of that
component and what is now only outstanding is the US$75 flat which is waiting
for certain logistics to be put in place.
The 50 percent is going to be enhanced by whatever
concessions to come through negotiation processes, which means the welfare of
the civil servant can only improve.
However, despite the fact that civil servants have already
received the 50 percent salary review and are soon due to get the US$75
cushioning allowances, the civil servants union bosses are already making
threats which dovetail with positions that have been assumed by certain
opposition parties. Herald
0 comments:
Post a Comment