Documents menu
Message-ID: <01be80eb$4fc47ea0$75401fc4@anna>
Date: Wed, 7 Apr 1999 12:39:34 +0100
Reply-To: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy <LABOR-L@YorkU.CA>
Sender: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy <LABOR-L@YorkU.CA>
From: Anna Weekes <samwu@WN.APC.ORG>
Subject: SAMWU launches opposition to the restructuring of Johannesburg -
statement and briefing document
To: LABOR-L@YorkU.CA
SAMWU launches opposition to the restructuring of Johannesburg
SAMWU press statement and briefing document 7 April 1999
Press Statement: SAMWU responds to the restructuring plan
for Johannesburg Wednesday 7 April 1999 11am
The South African Municipal Workers' Union rejects the Igoli 2002 plan
to restructure the city of Johannesburg and is calling for a
moratorium on all restructuring with immediate effect.
The reasons for this demand come after careful consideration, and are
as follows:
- Igoli 2002 fails to set out goals and time-frames for extending
service delivery to the disadvantaged and therefore cannot guarantee
transformation of the city in a way that will benefit the poor.
- Council has wasted hundreds of thousands of rands in shrouding
Igoli 2002 in secrecy through hiring private consultants to design the
process, rath er than making use of democratically elected Councillors
and paid officials to drive transformation of the city in consultation
with all the stake-holde rs.
- The plan has clearly not been based on a cost-benefit analysis or a
socio-economic study of the needs of the community. Some of the most
profitable assets, like the Fresh Produce Market, are up for sale at
ridiculously low prices.
- SAMWU does not believe that there is a "financial crisis"
in Johannes burg that could be improved by selling off profit-making
and job creating asse ts. Any restructuring plan must first rectify
areas of where money is being wasted. There also needs to be
recognition that the government's GEAR economic policy has resulted in
a decrease in real terms in the amount of money allocated to local
government as a whole.
- Igoli 2002 sees workers as a "problem" in the style of the
old aparth eid politicians, and has avoided the approach of
negotiations and collective bargaining. There is currently an
arbitration in process between the employer and the union because of a
dispute over last year's restructur ing plans that have now been
launched under another name. This double-dealing shows clearly that
the employer uses bad faith bargaining as a tactic and brings into
question the credibility of the Bargaining Council.
- A national framework agreement on municipal restructuring was
conclud ed last year between all municipalities and COSATU which Igoli
2002 completely ignores. This brings into question the authority of
national government i n driving negotiations around local government
issues.
- The union has not been consulted on the restructuring process,
which will radically alter the conditions of service of members,
especially in the services designated for privatisation. This
contravenes the LRA.
For more information, please contact the Provincial Secretary, Phinda
Mhlongo, on 082 9759844 or 011 3311032/3/4.
Press Briefing document
IGOLI 2002 - who will restructuring really benefit?
Introduction
Over the past month the Johannesburg Metropolitan Council has been
implementing it's restructuring plan for the city, known as Igoli
2002.
Igoli 2002 is based on different forms of privatisation, including
rationalisation, outsourcing and termination of activities. The plan
will have far-reaching strategic and political effects on the city,
especially on people's living standards. It will influence restructuring in
every city in South Africa.
Public Sector Restructuring
Historically, the workers' movement in South Africa has never confined
struggle to the narrow interests of organised workers only. The South
African Municipal Workers Union is committed to affordable and
efficient public sector delivery. SAMWU believes that delivery should
be accountabl e to the communities we service. SAMWU is prepared to
accept the responsibilities this entails, in the workplace and in the
community.
Historical and international experiences demonstrate that public
sector restructuring is the only way to alleviate poverty and
reconstruct societ y. This is the only way to rid South Africa from
the apartheid inequalities that still dominate people's
lives. Restructuring is also the only way to make the provisions of
our constitution a reality - particularly the Bill
of Rights which guarantees all South Africans the right to basic
services, including the poorest of the poor.
It is against this historical and human rights backdrop that SAMWU has
carefully considered the employer's restructuring plan - Igoli 2002 -
and formulated a union response.
The SAMWU response
We agree that the city is in dire need of transformation. Johannesburg
st ill reflects the legacies of apartheid. The city is unsafe,
services are inefficient or non-existent and are delivered in an
unequal manner along the lines of former race-based delivery
patterns. There is insignificant job growth in the city and massive
unemployment. For the majority, the unemployed, the aged, women and
children living in the townships and informal settlements there has
been very little or no improvement in livi ng standards. In contrast,
residents of the northern suburbs still get best quality services
(even when boycotting rates payment). Any significant transformation
of Johannesburg into a people's city must start from the point of
rectifying these historical inequalities.
Transformation must be guided by a developmental approach, with
defined objectives and time-frames. This process must include the
democratic participation of all stake-holders including labour and
communities, if it is not destined for failure before it starts.
It is SAMWU's view that:
1. Igoli 2002 has not been a democratic process, and has not taken
into account the needs of the community or workers.
2. Some of the restructuring proposals in the plan do not even make
economic sense.
3. Igoli 2002 is a violation of existing Bargaining Council
agreements a nd National Legislation. After careful consideration,
and many attempts to reconcile differences with Council, the union
has decided to reject Igoli 2002 for reasons which wil l now be
outlined.
1. Igoli 2002 has not been a democratic process which has taken into
account the needs of the community or workers.
a) Stake-holders have not been consulted Igoli 2002 is not a product
of a democratic consultative process. Igoli 2 002 is based on the work
of the Committees of Ten and Fifteen which were set up by the Gauteng
Legislature in 1997 and inspired by the policies of the Development
Bank of South Africa. The plan was refined to it's present form at an
employer workshop called "Bite the Bullet" held on January
19th 199 9. The employer is now informing and imposing Igoli 2002 on
the stake-holder s at the same time. Unions, communities, and
democratically elected councillors have been actively excluded from
the formulation of the plan. This undermines the spirit of the White
Paper for Local Government and th e Constitution.
b) Council has undermined it's own procedures for democratic involveme
nt In it's haste to implement restructuring, the employer has ignored
it's own democratic procedures for tendering and interviewing. Kagiso
Financial Services has been engaged to arrange the tender of the sale
of the Metro Centre, without participation by any stake-holders. The
Fresh Produce Mar ket was put out to tender without consulting
stake-holders. The Landelani Recruitment Project, an employment
agency, was hired at the cost of R120 000 to recruit the Chief
Financial Officer and the Labour Relations Officer t o the City
Manager's office. Stake-holders did not participate in intervi ewing
as per normal procedures.
c) Wasting money on outsourcing political decision making Council is
wasting the very money they are trying to save by keeping Igol i 2002
shrouded in secrecy. The planning process so far has been driven by
highly paid consultants who are making far-reaching decisions without
consulting anyone but a few top officials. Councillors are already
electe d and paid to make political decisions in consultation with
unions and communities, and taking into account social needs of
constituencies. Yet only a tiny, elite group of Councillors have been
involved in Igoli 2002.
2. The restructuring proposals of the plan do not make developmental
sense
a) Any solution must start by looking at the problems Igoli 2002
contains no analysis of the problems which face the city, let alone
the source of these problems. The motivation for restructuring is
presented as the solution to Johannesburg's "financial
crisis". But the city deficit is only R257 million - hardly a "financial
crisis" for a large metropolitan council which spends millions
every year on cellphone bills and high salaries for top officials. It
is common knowledge that national government has considerably reduced
the amount of money allocated in real terms to local government in
this year's budget. This is part of the GE AR macro-economic policy of
cutting social spending and privatising municipal services. The
"financial crisis" is merely a screen for implementing thes e
unpopular policies.
b) The solutions presented do not even make economic sense The
solutions to the deficit do not engage with the real problem. The Fre
sh Produce Market is on sale for R200 million, yet it turns over more
than R 1 billion every year, with R23 million in profits alone. Ten
thousand farme rs supply fruit and vegetables to the market every
month. About two hundred thousand agents, hawkers and storekeepers are
involved with the sale of those vegetables throughout the Southern
African Development Community. Igoli 2002 means that the future of
this job-creation asset hangs in the balance. Similarly, the Rand
Airport is being privatised as a non-core asset with no economic
analysis having been done on the amount of revenue it could generate
for the city with the future expansion of Johannesburg. In a city
which so desperately needs to spend every available financial resource
on extending services, there is still tremendous wastage of mone y.
There are five Metropolitan Local councils - each employing a Chief
Executive Officer, Strategic Executive Officer for every department
withi n each council and other high ranking executives earning over
R20 000 per month. Millions are spent on executive salaries.
c) The plan does not have a developmental approach A major flaw in
Igoli 2002 is that it contains no approach to guide the c ity towards
reconstruction and development. The plan states in it's outline
that Igoli 2002 will result in "a world class city." Yet it
does not outline a ny concrete service delivery targets, human
resource strategies, job creatio n goals or time-frames for any of the
above. None of the plans to "corporatise" assets not
immediately designated for privatisation give any direction about the
medium and longer-term plans for how corporatisation will benefit the
people of Johannesburg. Council has not indicated any willingness to
take-back the service provision responsibilities of the utilities once
infrastructure has been built by the private sector. Inste ad, Igoli
2002 uses corporatisation to leave the door wide-open for full-scal e
privatisation at a later stage.
d) No cost-benefit analysis has been done It is unclear what hidden
costs to the community restructuring will bring. For example,
privatisation of the Fresh Produce Market not only affects municipal
workers, but also the 210 000 people indirectly and directly employed
in the fruit and vegetable sector, the nutrition of the communit y,
and the many people who work there. It is unclear from Igoli 2002 how
stripping the city of it's assets and creating an uncertain future for
the people involved with each asset will meaningfully transform the
city.
e) Workers are seen as a "problem" The Council sees workers,
or service providers, as a problem and not as a human resource that
should be democratically involved in restructuring an d improving
service delivery. Workers have been completely excluded from Igoli
2002. The approach of Council to labour does not befit the times we
live in, where negotiated agreements and centralised bargaining is the
order of th e day. Rather, Council has chosen to act in the same way
that the apartheid government would have done - to define labour's
role in restructuring a s a narrow one where workers merely carry out
the tasks set for them by their bosses.
f) Igoli 2002 will not remove inequalities Inequalities in
Johannesburg are widespread and entrenched. Igoli 2002 do es not
explain how selling off core assets will remove these inequalities. T
he private sector who will buy up core assets has no political
responsibilit y to iron out inequalities. It is likely that Igoli 2002
will cause Johannesburg to remain a racist city, with the poor getting
poorer.
3. Igoli 2002 is a violation of existing Bargaining Council
agreements a nd National Legislation a) Arbitration outstanding Igoli
2002 is being implemented while there is an arbitration pending ove r
unilateral restructuring between SAMWU and the employer. The
arbitration, scheduled for April 6th 1999, has arisen as a result of a
deadlock betwee n SAMWU and the employer over unilateral restructuring
carried out last yea r by the Council's Committees of Ten and
Fifteen. By pushing through implementation of the very same
restructuring plan under a different name , the employer is
demonstrating extremely bad faith towards labour relation s and
legislation.
b) Collective agreements violated On June 30th, 1997, the National
Labour Relations Forum for Local Governm ent (now the South African
Local Government Bargaining Council) agreed that the public sector
was the preferred option for service delivery. This means t hat local
government restructuring must take place to the best of the public
sector's ability before the private sector can be considered. Igoli
2002 violates this collective agreement.
c) Labour Relations Act contravened Section 64 (4) of the Labour
Relations Act of 1995 stipulates that unions must be consulted in
cases of workplace restructuring when this results in changes in
conditions of service. Igoli 2002 is radically restructuring t he
workplace. SAMWU was presented with Igoli 2002 for information only,
and was not consulted on the plan's implementation which had already
begun.
d) COSATU/Government agreements violated In December 1998, COSATU
signed the Municipal Services Partnership Framew ork Agreement with
South African Local Government Association (SALGA). SALGA is the body
to which all municipal employers belong, including the Johannesb urg
Metropolitan Council. The Framework Agreement confirms the Bargaining
Council agreement and thus Igoli 2002 is in violation of the Framework
Agreement.
e) Government policies violated The Council's unilateral restructuring
violates the departmental policies of the Department for
Constitutional Development and the Department for Water Affairs and
Forestry. Both departmental guidelines affirm the Bargaining Council
decision that service delivery must be restructured within the public
sector service by the democratic participation of all stake-holder s.
f) National Legislation violated The Water Services Act of 1997 states
that private sector participation in the delivery of water must only
be after all public sector options have b een exhausted. This is
violated by Igoli 2002.
4. The SAMWU demands
-
SAMWU demands an immediate moratorium on all local government
restructuring.
-
SAMWU demands that negotiations be set up to begin the
process of restructuring the city in a democratic manner, including
all stake-holders, especially poorer communities.
-
Restructuring must fall into line with national legislation,
policies and collective bargaining agreements.
-
The restructuring of Johannesburg is the task and
responsibility of all who live and work in the city.
|