Rari explains move to sue Batshu
Oarabile Mosikare | Friday April 1, 2016 16:39
“Sometime last year, we realised that the minister gazetted a bill on the amendment of the Trade Dispute Act.
BOFEPUSU then, did not have a seat at the Labour Advisory Board (LAB), the forum provided by the available acts.
However, at that time the Botswana Federation of Trade Unions (BFTU) sat at the LAB. Also, BFTU made it categorically clear that at the time that the text was brought to the LAB, it was not discussed conclusively. Not only that, also all the recommendations that were agreed upon were ignored and not included in the gazetted bill,” explained Rari.
The secretary general said what was even more disturbing was that they learnt from BFTU that the text that was brought before the LAB was different from that of the bill.
Among other issues discussed at that time were that there was no proper and honest consultation.
“For instance teachers were not part of the cadres that were included into essential service, but when the bill was gazetted, teachers were part of the cadres included in essential service. This in our view indicates very bad faith and half-hatred consultation hence this could not be regarded as truthful consultation,” Rari said.
The newly created Section 46 is not acceptable to BOFEPUSU in that it has extended the essential service cadres to include the cadres that are outside the framework of the basic International Labour Organisation (ILO) definition of essential service.
“The ILO definition of essential service is the cadres of employees who when they have not provided service, will lead to loss of life or danger to the community. During that time last year, we, together with BFTU lobbied and put pressure on the minister, who backtracked and halted the process of taking the Bill to Parliament.”
Rari explained that towards the end of 2015 Batshu invited them to a meeting where he divulged to the federation that he decided to halt the process of taking the Bill to Parliament.
Instead, Rari sad, he told them he would be placing the proposed amendments before the LAB.
He stated that the board meeting would be in a period of three days from that date of the meeting.
The federation recently received a letter from the permanent secretary in the Ministry of Labour and Home Affairs, Pearl Matome. The letter indicated that the federation would be accepted to represent its members in all the tripartite structures and as such, there being need for the federation to be invited to take a seat at the LAB, as rightfully so.
The federation had also indicated that it would be unlawful to proceed with the meeting of the LAB without BOFEPUSU, more so that the federation represented a huge chunk of employees who would be affected by the amendment of the act.
Batshu at that point indicated that it is upon BFTU and BOFEPUSU to engage and agree on the representation of labour at the LAB.
BOFEPUSU wrote to BFTU requesting that the two federations meet to discuss the issue of representation at the tripartite structures including at LAB. He said BFTU responded by saying that they would not meet them because they were still seeking clarity from the ministry over the issue granting BOFEPUSU the right to represent its constituents in the tripartite structures.
Consequent to that the issue of representation at the LAB could not be discussed between the two federations.
BOFEPUSU then wrote to Batshu indicating that BFTU could not meet them and as such needed to be invited to the LAB in their own right and as the federation, which is recognised.
In the same letter BOFEPUSU stated that failing which, the meeting should not proceed, “As that would compromise us in terms of representing our members”.
In spite of this warning from BOFEPUSU to the minister, the LAB meeting proceeded.
Rari said that after realising the meeting proceeded without the federation, they then gave a notice to sue.
This is because they were not consulted, while the LAB was discussing a matter so grave that it would affect hundreds of their constituents.
“The matter is bound to take away the bargaining and balancing power of workers. The statutory instrument has expired and the federation is proceeding to court to litigate for lack of consultation on our part,” Rari said.