Response to Mail and Guardian article titled "who are the essential service 
workers"?
 
It is with regret that we have witnessed the shallow understanding by the 
learned J-School graduate, who wrote a piece of “who are essential service 
workers” in the M&G dated 09 September 2010.Whilst we agree that our some of 
our 
workers are offering essential services, services whose interruption would 
endanger the life, personal safety or health of the whole or part of the 
population, a blanket generalization that all employees must not partake in a 
protected strike, is unfounded.
 
The LRA does not provide a list of these services except the South African 
Police Services and the Parliamentary services for reasons of policy, but has 
subjected other sectors for the indulgence of the essential services committee 
for reasons of course, to introduce a measure of rigidity. And this has been a 
problem because the only time the employer will budge on that is only during a 
strike action and nothing is said after that.
 
As POPCRU we have been running in the Labour Court on the basis sometimes of 
harmful writings by some media persons that “we are on strike” and such 
articles 
were used against us. 

 
On the Labour  Appeal  Judgment held on the 02nd September 2010 it was 
established that “not all workers may be declared essential services in a 
particular institution and some may render non-essential services”, and 
essential services workers are disallowed to embark on a strike whilst 
non-essential services employees may participate in a strike action.
 
The Judgment indicated that “….Section 23 (2) (c) of the Constitution 
guarantees 
“every worker” the right to strike subject to the limitation imposed in Section 
36.Where a limitation is placed on a right, especially one enshrined in a Bill 
of Rights of the Constitution, courts must ensure that the limitation is 
restricted to the clear and unequivocal wording of the instrument that validly 
seek to limit that right.
“I in the present matter the SAPS argument that the all of its employees, 
including those employed under the Public Service Act be included as personnel 
engaged in the essential service is neither justifiable nor reasonable”.
 
Section 71 of the Labour Relations Act no.66 of 1995 as amended provides a 
designation of a service as an essential service through submissions to an 
essential committee and also provided for a resolution of the minimum service 
level agreement but over the years, the employer has abdicated it’s 
responsibilities to finalize on same. 

 
During the strike action a notice was issued which disallowed the health sector 
and some other departments to embark on a strike, and the employer failed in 
it’s obligation to call the Trade Unions to debate the matter. It is 
uncomplimentary for the Department of Public Service and Administration to 
abdicate their role not to return clarities during the strike action because it 
was an open secret that their court interdicts were used to defocus the strike 
and demobilize the workers on a clear wage dispute.
 
The inherent conflict nature of negotiations sometimes negate a clear tabling 
of 
these imperatives by the employer on the basis that such is tabled to diffuse 
the strike and that has proved to be unworkable over the past six years.
 
To further suggest that the strike “was not as much a strike but a service 
delivery protest” in an understatement and a real undermining of the provisions 
of Section 64 of the LRA which explicitly says “Every employee has the right to 
strike and every employer has recourse to lock-out” and necessarily strikes 
comes after all processes have been exhausted through Section 67 (2) 
(A&B)amended that “A person does not commit a delict or a breach of contract by 
taking part in a protected strike or a protected lock-out, or any conduct in 
contemplation or in furtherance of a protected strike or a protected lock-out”
 
Strikes will forever be here around as long as the power dynamics are 
unresolved 
and as Labour it is our only important commodity that cannot be outsourced as 
other departments outsource their services to capital.
 
Finally,we share the same concerns as the writer on the non-respose by the 
employers, and it incumbent of the employer to unlock all these limitations to 
ensure that the LRA continues to serve a the necessary valve to ease power 
struggles between the employer and employee organizations.
 
Forward with working class power!
 Issued by:       
Norman Mampane
National Spokesperson
Tel: 0112424600/4615
Cell: 0720737959
Fax: 0866253054
Email: [email protected]
01 Marie Road     
Auckland Park
2006


      

-- 
You are subscribed. This footer can help you.
Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this 
message.
You can visit the group WEB SITE at 
http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, 
pages, files and membership.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You 
don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put 
anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this 
address (repeat): [email protected] .

Reply via email to