Unions seek court intervention as negotiations crumble
Mpho Mokwape | Wednesday July 23, 2025 09:57
The unions under the 5+1 umbrella, this week, Monday, filed a notice of motion before the Gaborone Industrial Court seeking a number of orders against the government, and the Director of the Directorate of Public Service Management, Gaone Macholo.
They are the National Amalgamated Local, Central, Parastatal and Government Workers Union (NALCPGWU), Botswana Public Employees' Union (BOPEU), Botswana Teachers Union (BTU), Botswana Sectors of Educators Trade Union (BOSETU), Botswana Nurses Union (BONU), and Botswana Doctors Union (BDU).
In the notice of motion, the unions, which recently reached a deadlock with the government’s negotiating team after they failed to agree on certain issues, laid out the purpose of approaching the court.
They stated that, amongst other things that the matter deserves urgency as far as the government is bargaining in bad faith and that employees represented by all the unions are affected.
“The matter be treated as one deserving of urgency and the rules of the court in so far as they relate to time limits, service of process, and other related matters be dispensed with. Applicants may suffer in consequence of any delay,” said the unions.
According to the court papers, the unions are seeking, amongst others, a temporary order against the government, ordering and directing that no lawful meeting of the unions' negotiating team, Five Plus One Cooperating Trade Unions, and the Attorney General's negotiating team was held on June 27, 2025.
They also want the draft minutes of the meeting held on June 26, 2025, on Public Service Salary Negotiations and other conditions of service 2025/26 to be separated into two sets.
One set comprising the meeting up to and until the departure from the negotiations by Botswana Land Boards & Local Authorities Health Workers Union (BLLAHWU), and the other to be for the rest of the meeting without the third respondent.
“Pursuant to paragraph 2.2 of the Notice of Motion, directing that the minutes of the meeting held on June 26, 2025 on public service salary negotiations and other conditions of service 2025/26 between the employer party and Five Plus One cooperating trade unions be corrected to reflect a true and accurate record of the proceedings,” stated the unions.
Further, the unions, amongst others, are seeking that the court declare that the government and the DPSM director are negotiating in bad faith.
They are, therefore, seeking an order directing the two to resume their meeting on public service salary negotiations and other conditions of service 2025/26 with the unions within three days from the date of this order and based on the corrected minutes.
Advancing the unions’ grounds in approaching the court and stating the consequences they may suffer if the matter is not urgently resolved, Robert Rabasimane, who is NALCPGWU deputy CEO and also the chief negotiator of the 5+1 unions' negotiating team, deposed a founding affidavit giving factual background to the matter.
According to him, between May 20 and 26, 2025, representatives of the government's negotiating team started engagement in a series of meetings with the unions' negotiating team.
Rabasimane explained that at that time, the applicants' negotiating team comprised several trade unions, including the third respondent being BLLAHWU, and was collectively referred to as 'Six Plus One cooperating trade unions.'
A Savingram was subsequently issued by the DPSM director requesting the release of members of the applicants' negotiating team from their duties to enable their participation in the continued negotiations.
“The primary objective of these meetings was to negotiate public service salaries and other conditions of service 2025/26 on behalf of employees represented by the applicants, with the government acting as the employer. On May 26, 2025, the parties mutually agreed to adjourn the ongoing negotiations,” he said.
Rabasimane also said following the adjournment on May 26, 2025, the meeting was reconvened on June 9, 2025, and continued until June 13, 202,5, at Mahalapye Cresta Hotel, that there was a further adjournment of the meeting.
He added that the parties agreed to reconvene on June 23, 2025, and a Savingram was subsequently issued by the director of DPSM requesting the release of members of the applicants' negotiating team from their duties to enable their participation in the continued negotiations.
The chief negotiator stated that in accordance with the agreement, the parties reconvened on June 23, 2025, to continue negotiations until June 26, 2025. Upon adjourning on June 24, 2025, the unions requested a 'cooling-off' period.
“This was intended to allow all parties to reflect on their respective positions and consult internally. The government acceded to this request, and it was agreed that negotiations would resume on the 26th of June 2025.
“During the cooling off period, which lasted all of June 25, 2025, the various Unions comprising Six Plus One Cooperating Trade Unions consulted internally with their members on the proposal by the Employer party,” he said.
According to the founding affidavit, on July 26, 2025, the constituent unions comprising Six-Plus-One cooperating trade unions convened a caucus to consolidate their response to the employer.
It was during this meeting that BLLAHWU informed applicants that it had conferred with its members and they had agreed to accept the proposal made by the Employer Party.
It states that the other unions' representatives held contrary instructions, that are to continue negotiating for better terms, and when the parties reconvened for the negotiation meeting, the applicants formally announced changes to their negotiating team.
Specifically, it was indicated that BLLAHWU (previously part of the 'Six-Plus-One' collective) had decided to withdraw from the collective bargaining structure.
Consequently, the remaining unions (the applicants) agreed to continue negotiations under a newly reconstituted group referred to as 'Five Plus One cooperating Trade unions.
Rabasimane explained the reconstituted group adopted the same rules of engagement and the record as is after BLLAHWU confirmed that during the cooling-off period, it had resolved to withdraw from the collective due to what it described as 'deviations' in negotiation strategies and had also expressed its readiness to conclude negotiations independently with the Employer based on the Employer's proposal as it stood at that time.
The Dispute
Rabasimane stated in the affidavit that the changes to the negotiating structure, including the withdrawal of BLLAHWU, were duly acknowledged by both the AG and Macholo pointing out that it was critical to note that BLLAHWU’s decision to exit was premised on its satisfaction with the employer's proposal, which it considered acceptable, whereas the remaining unions did not share the same view and wished to continue with further negotiations.
Following the reconfiguration of the negotiating teams, BLLAHWU was formally excused from the ongoing meeting to enable the applicants (now operating under 'Five Plus One') to continue discussions with the government.
He explained that during the negotiations, the applicants maintained that they did not want the allowance to be named 'temporary living wage enhancement allowance' but instead maintained 'housing and upkeep allowance' and additionally they rejected the proposal that the implementation date be June 1, 2025 but requested the implementation to be effective on April 1, 2025 of the draft minutes of the meeting on the June 26, 2025.
“At the close of the session, the applicants requested an adjournment to enable them to consult their members regarding the employer's proposal and to seek and refresh mandate,” Rabasimane said.
“This request for adjournment was granted by mutual consent. Following the adjournment, and fully cognisant of the fact that there was no formal meeting demanding my presence, I immediately left Mahalapye for Gaborone.”
He noted that following the adjourned meeting on July 6, 2025, together with other members of the applicants' negotiating team, he received a copy of the draft minutes from the meeting held June 26, 2025. Upon perusing the draft minutes, he added that he immediately identified several material irregularities and misrepresentations.
The meeting of July 7, 2025
On that day, Rabasimane said the unions' negotiating team reconvened with the negotiating team for the government to continue collective bargaining discussions, and at the outset of the meeting, they raised serious concerns regarding multiple irregularities, inaccuracies, and misrepresentations identified in the draft minutes.
“When these inaccuracies were raised and brought to the attention of my colleagues, and with the hardline position taken by the government to refuse to correct the minutes, all the signatories to the disputed minutes representing some of the applicants specifically withdrew their signatures. This is fully recorded in the minutes of that July 7, 2025,” he said.
According to the affidavit, in a surprising turn of events, the government conceded that there were indeed apparent irregularities and inaccuracies in the said draft minutes. However, despite the acknowledgement, she took the position that the minutes should nonetheless stand as they were, arguing that they had been adopted during a properly constituted meeting.
The government reportedly further asserted that any revision of the minutes at that stage would be procedurally improper and contrary to established practice,e and as a result of this impasse, the parties agreed to refer the disputed minutes for a legal opinion to be provided by the Attorney General.
Rabasimane concluded that following the impasse, more issues followed, leading to the collapse of talks and their decision, and the unions to approachthe court for redress.