Conference on Organized labour
Responses to the Conference Paper
Gérard Kester
Director, Global Participation Development Programme (GLOPADEP)
Leusden, The Netherlands
10 October 1998
Finally I found a few quiet moments in my busy time as a 'retired' person, to respond to your call for reactions on the brainstorming paper on "Organized Labour in the 21st Century'.
I am terribly sorry I do not use Internet. But brainstorming on developments in the forthcoming century and millennium could afford the delay of a few days, and after all, using an employment-friendly method of communication may help delay some of the trends predicted in your brainstorming paper. As a poor electronic illiterate, could I request you to put me on your old fashioned mailing list?
Responding to your invitation to comment (p 8 of the paper) I must hasten to say that I cannot contribute with information on my own country. I would, rather, react as a person who has been involved in research on trade union trends in Europe more generally, and particularly in Africa, on a comparative basis.
The challenges you describe are indeed the generalized ones that are confirmed in our own research. Instead of repeating the information here I take the liberty to refer to some of the publications which are in your possession.
For Europe, in the book I edited with Henri Pinaud (Trade Unions and Democratic Participation in Europe) we address issues very similar to yours. We put more emphasis on the failure of most European trade unions to take up major meso and macro challenges and to put too much emphasis on member-oriented action, mainly through collective bargaining. We developed three trade union scenarios for the future, and our proposed 'scenario 21' (the scenario for the 21st century) looks at least implicitly much like yours.
For Africa, I think, we come even closer to your analysis of less industrialised countries, in the book I edited with Sidibé (Trade Unions and Sustainable Democracy in Africa). Also that book is available in summary (but adding more information on research on workers and trade unions in 5 African countries) in the booklet prepared for the Pan-African Conference in Arusha ('Africa for Democratic Participation`). I should like to inform you that we have further developed that text to include the deliberations of the Arusha Conference, and will be available within a few months in English.
Recently I have tried to summarize the African, and to an extent the European research results in a paper which I presented at the Bologna IIRA Congress. It addresses indeed the same subjects as raised in your paper.
So much by way of identifying some work problem formulations similar to yours. I should like to contribute some remarks on the key issues to be examined.
I would strongly plea to make a thorough continuous evaluation of both the quantitative and qualitative aspects of the 'state of the unions'.
Sure there is the quantitative alarm of reducing trade union membership, but that has to be seen in perspective. In Africa under one or no party rule, membership figures were unrealistic because of the automatic check-off system. And let us not exaggerate the real and independent influence of trade unions in those state/party corporatist years. True enough, there is a loss of membership, but in many cases the members who stay do not pay dues, .... or simply don't exist. We have come across in our work trade unions who claim some 20.000 members but actually have less than one hundred. We found only in Tanzania that the trade union federation had an updated membership list. Practically the majority of African trade unions have no systematic membership registration. In Burkina Faso APADEP decided to make a 'trade union atlas' before starting an education project as it was found in the pilot phase that certain trade union confederations did not have any affiliates of members in large districts of the country. Unions play out membership figures for reasons of international affiliation (that is: for access to funds of trade union donors), and 'phantom unions' are not unfamiliar. And even then, if there are many members, their contributions are not even enough to pay the telephone bill of a national trade union or a confederation. Even if the union membership would double or triple, this would not give the unions much more strength. And if the unions were able to a large extent to organize the informal sector, they would have to develop new policies and strategies, undertake new kinds of activities, set up new services, and it is unlikely that the new members will contribute enough to finance all this. This is not to play down the importance of membership: in particular in view of its representativeness increased membership, and spread of membership over other categories of workers is important. But it will not solve the problem of trade union independent strength for quite some time.
The earlier dependence on government (party) subsidy and privileges has been replaced by dependence on donors. If the ICFTU does not affiliate you, why not ask the WCL: they are in dire need of affiliates to justify their co-operation budgets which they in turn receive from governments in Europe. The recent split of the trade union movement into multiple confederations can be to quite an extent explained by the 'donor circuit'. There is a lot more to be said on this aspect, and I am quite prepared to furnish further evidence and experience. In the first and fourth chapter in our earlier mentioned Africa book we have addressed this issue also.
Also qualitatively a very critical and close look at trade unions is necessary. The organizations are very weak, their finances often badly managed, and largely dependent on donor funding, internal democracy is wanting, information channels are weak, feedback from the base extremely weak, structures inside the country (that is outside the capital city or the prominent industrialising areas) often neglected, etc. Trade union policies and agendas are often very poor, as you also suggest, and it is not surprising. Left to themselves in the new neo-liberal context, they must prove themselves to the remaining members, lest they lose even them. Thus membership-centered sectorial collective bargaining become prominent, and it is all the trade unions can cater for with the limitations they have. And the international trade union organizations do not train or equip them for much more.
Thus the qualitative jump to a trade union movement in Africa which takes the broader and more long term view (and not contenting themselves with curing the symptoms as they have done until now in the structural adjustment consultations), is a difficult one. It requires a lot of investment, also education, throughout the trade union structures. There are initiatives, such as the PAMSCAD, but there is no critical mass.
Thus what I suggest is to monitor not only the change in labour management relations, the public status of trade unions, the challenges at national and international level (but I agree these are all key points of attention), but also the 'state of the unions' as described before, since there you may find the pre-conditions for all the other perspectives. And we know very little.
I should also like to point out that it may be good to keep in close contact with the APADEP researchers, as on many of the issues you raise, as well as on the issues raised above, a lot of research has already been done and is about to be undertaken in a number of APADEP countries. APADEP is starting a series of action research case studies on trade union activity in the informal sector, and is going to make an evaluation of trade union participation in national and international decision making. BEYOND THE TWENTIETH CENTURY: BEYOND TRIPARTISM
An African and European Trade Union Challenge for Democracy
Political democracy can only survive if placed in a broader democratic landscape which allows for continuing involvement of all citizens in decisions which affect them. Democratic worker participation is an essential component of overall political democracy (Pateman, 1970). Whether one looks at the African Charter for Popular Participation or at the White and Green Papers of the European Union, an appeal is made to strengthen the fundamentals of civil society on order that the foundations of democracy itself be solidified. Trade unions, together with other social partners, are placed in a strategic position to develop a more participatory democracy.
This paper will examine African experience using ongoing research which includes an international comparative questionnaire survey in 5 countries, a series of replicative case studies and general trend studies of developments on the continent. Propositions for a wider perspective on labour relations theory will be made, for Africa, for Europe and in general.
SUSTAINED DEMOCRATIC DEVELOPMENT IN AFRICA:
A TRADE UNION CHALLENGE
Until the beginning of this last decade of the 20th century, Africa's labour relations have been characterised by high levels of state corporatism (Shadur, 1994; Anstey, 1997). In the years immediately following independence (the so-called honey moon period) an 'historic collaboration' (Fashoyin, 1992:2) emerged between political and labour leaders in the pursuit of common objectives. This political unionism has often been explained as an inevitable trade union mission under concrete historic conditions, where the trade union leaders believed their cooperation was ultimately in the workers' interest (see for instance the case of Mozambique in Hansen, 1997: 301 ff), or they were coerced into cooperation if they did not believe so. They were expected to play productionist roles: stimulating productivity and at the same time moderating wage demands in the national interest (Fashoyin, 1991: 118). It should be acknowledged that the situation differed from country to country, but the upshot is that there was no free interplay between the main actors in labour relations: management was incorporated into government hierarchy as the economy was state or public, and most of the trade unions were more or less integrated in single political parties which in turn controlled government.
Structural adjustment and even more the democratisation wave that followed, have created a substantively new situation in which the labour relations parties have to re-orient themselves altogether. Privatisation produces employers and managers who are not accountable to a government or party hierarchy, and who operate independently in a free market environment rather than in a planned economy. A neo-liberal spirit has gained ground and the new private owners or the managers of the new-style public enterprises want to run the place as they deem fit and are at best prepared to enter into negotiation with trade unions on the terms of the employment contract and on a number of basic working conditions.
Structural adjustment, necessary by itself but planned and executed by the World Bank and IMF and pacting governments without adequate consultation with the social structures involved, had a dramatic impact on labour relations. Many had found secure employment, irrespective of productivity, in the formal sector and enjoyed additional indirect advantages such as food subsidy, health and education packages, housing schemes etc. Through structural adjustment and privatisation, competitiveness and productivity criteria forced to shrink the number of those employed in the formal sector. Many of the employees who stayed did no longer enjoy a stable employment contract and had to accept more flexible arrangements instead, including temporary contracts, part-time work, home work, etc. Most subsidies and other advantages were much reduced or discontinued altogether. Trade unions had to run to the support of the many dismissed, and found themselves alone in a struggle to respect the social dimensions of structural adjustment.
The trade union predicament
This immense challenge presented itself just at a time when the African trade union movement was going through a process of major change. Having shaken off party or government control, unions in many countries are now fighting to find their place in the new democratic order. The move towards autonomy and democracy goes hand in hand with trade union pluralism, which could in turn inflict harm on the movement generally. Trade union rights have had to be redrawn and defended and, following the withdrawal of (official or disguised) government subsidies and the automatic 'check-off' system, widespread lay-offs have led to unions losing members and income (Adu-Amankwah & Kester, 1997: 16). Trade unions have now to rely on their own resources. The comparative questionnaire survey in five African countries shows that most trade union structures, especially inside the country, miss the most essential resources to conduct their business (no office, no budget, no transport), and do not avail of the most basic information (labour laws or even the statutes of the union are not available for the majority of the trade union committees) and most unionists have no access to whatever form of trade union education and training (ibid: 14-19). At national level most trade union confederations cannot hold their regular congresses without outside (is: donor) support of some kind. Internal democratisation processes are difficult in view of residual nomenclatura practices of the past.
The formal sector: a new battleground
Trade unions are now thrown into wild waters: finally liberated from party tutelage, they find themselves mostly trapped too exclusively in the formal sector where they had built up their membership base. They have to cater with priority for the immediate wage and employment interests of their members. And as it is no longer 'automatic' (because of check-off) that the workers in the formal sector are union members, trade unions have to cater for the remaining members lest they would lose also them. APADEP research shows how indeed devastatingly bad the working conditions are in the workplaces studied and how bitterly dissatisfied the majority of trade union militants are with practically all aspects of working life and that of the workers they represent. Not only are they generally highly dissatisfied with their earnings, but also with welfare conditions (washrooms, toilets, cantines etc), with working conditions (hygiene, safety and health, etc) with transport facilities, but also with personnel policy and enterprise management (ibid: 7-14). And this at a time when at the place of work a neo-liberal spirit is gaining ground encouraging the new owners of the private enterprises, but also the managers of the new-style public enterprises to run the place as they please. At best, they are prepared to enter into negotiation with trade unions on some basic terms of the employment contract. But many trade unionists are not familiar with collective bargaining and have no trained skills for it. Under these circumstances, a first urgent task for the trade union movement is to get collective bargaining functioning and much of present-day energy is invested in this area. But otherwise, management gets de facto carte blanche to run the enterprise. APADEP research shows, in all 5 countries studied, a high militancy and propensity for worker participation (ibid: 25), but even where forms of participation existed these mostly lack any statutory or legal enforcement, are purely consultative, and often manipulative (Kester & Sidibé, 1997: 8-9).
The end of 'social movement trade unionism'?
If the trade union challenge in the formal sector is already formidable, its role in the much larger informal sector is even more exacting. With the advent of structural adjustment and multiparty democracy, governments are no longer pacting with trade unions and other mass organizations, but with Bretton Woods and private capital. Trade unions lost their role (even if it was largely ceremonial) of representative of the working masses. They now are the representatives of their members in the first place. The deepening of the economic crisis in the 1980s had already forced the trade unions in a defensive position, engaged as they were in a desperate battle to defend at least the most basic interests of their members: employment and income. Thus a decline of 'social movement trade unionism' (Webster, 1994) seems at least in the short run, inevitable.
How then are the numerous problems faced by the masses of non-unionised workers going to be represented? This is a general third world problem. According to Valenzuela (1989) trade unions should continue their supportive roles in society at large, on behalf of their members as well as on behalf of broad categories of workers. An analyst of Latin American labour relations states:
„unemployment, poverty and informal livelihood strategies are undermining the capacity of trade unions ... if not taken into account, these issues may not only erode the capacity for representation and action of the conventional labour organizations themselves, but also pose a threat to the long term prospects of development and democracy" (Kruijt, 1996: 24, italics added).
The process of political democratisation in the 1990s gave hope to many people to show that they can themselves act to survive, to make themselves heard and to take part in decision making. But democracy remained limited to the polls, it was not applied to the world of work or to the economy. Trade unionism and labour relations tend to concentrate more and more on enterprise level, among others as a response to commercialisation and privatisation; collective bargaining on terms of the employment contract replaces the erstwhile social policies of the predominant public sector in the formal economy. The informal or formal forms of trade union and worker participation are discredited, often discontinued in privatised enterprises, ignored or only ceremonially continued in the diminishing public sector.
But in a labour market with high levels of unemployment, a large informal sector, huge numbers of 'excluded', etc., trade union structures inside the formal sector workplace cannot cope with the many labour problems outside. About eight to nine out of every ten 'workers' (broadly defined as anyone who has or seeks work) find themselves in the informal or exclusion sector and have, apart from a vote every four/five years in hardly transparent national elections, no access to any form of representation of their interests. Many NGOs have sprung up to assist the informal sector but this has led , according to Monga (1994), to a 'cacophony' of mostly donor controlled and often undemocratic sectional organizations which have no binding organizms to make representations at regional or national level.
A vacuum of institutional democracy
APADEP research teams conducted several exploratory case studies to find out what role trade unions played in addressing labour problems outside the formal sector. A series of case studies was conducted in Mopti, Koulikoro, Ségou and Sikasso, 4 districts in Mali (APADEP, 1993 and Coulibaly, Maiga, et al., 1997 and 1998). The studies (interviews, observations and content analysis of documents) collected information on the working conditions of people working in the self-employed informal sector (in motorbicycle repair, painting and soap manufacturing) and among groups of 'excluded': unemployed and 'victims of structural adjustment' (persons who lost their jobs in public enterprises due to privatisation). Conditions of safety, hygiene, excessive working hours, etc. etc. lead to the conclusion that these self-employed are in fact self-exploited. The excluded cope by taking part in non-monetary activities of the extended family to stay alive: husbandry, agriculture, fishing.. Non governmental organizations provide support to a limited number of groupings of self-employed through credits, sometimes by offering training opportunities, or assisting to improve health conditions. Contacts between (foreign) donors and the local population are often established through development committees of local government. But contacts of the (many!) NGOs are kept more intensely with embassies and/or donor foundations, rather than with local or national government. In the case studies no consultative or other participatory practices could be found through which those who benefited from the NGOs could influence the projects involved, at least not through any regular procedures. Coordination among NGOs was virtually non-existent, except in the case of women. The National Committee of Women convenes local women committees and NGOs to discuss specific problems of women and in general, to give advise on projects (Coulibaly, Maiga et al., 1998: 11).
The trade union structures in the districts were in no way in contact with the informal sector, nor with the unemployed. They also had not established any contacts with NGOs also not with local women or youth committees. Yet, the trade union interacts with local and district government administration, but according to the union representatives themselves as well as the administrators, only the problems of the formal sector (that is: the problems of trade union members more properly speaking) are discussed. Yet, during the interviews all parties (trade unionists, NGOs administrators, other organizations, as well as the workers in the informal and excluded sector themselves) stated they found it important for trade unions to take more interest.
Another exploratory case study was conducted in the Tanga region in Tanzania, using an approach similar to that in Mali (Chambua et al., 1997). NGOs and government appear to work at different wave-lengths. NGOs are not involved in the planning and implementation of the region's development plans, but the NGOs have to register their planned activities. "NGOs in the region plan their own activities, and government plans their own; rarely do they work together, even if it is in such fields as health and education" (ibid.. 15). Neither at local, district or regional level are representatives of civil society consulted or allowed to take part in decision making. This is also due to lack of decentralisation. Local authorities have no powers to make their own decisions, and decisions "can not be implemented unless they get the blessing of the Minister responsible for Local Government" (ibid: 25). Also trade unions do not directly participate at local, district or regional level. They may have informal contacts with Council members, or they may stand candidate for Council elections, but even then, once elected, their first loyalty is to the party under whose ticket they were elected.
The results of these few exploratory case studies (which can by no means be generalised of course) confirm Monga's cacophony thesis (see above) and point at a vacuum of institutional democratic procedure and the trade union deficit in this respect. The studies have to be further elaborated and indeed a major comparative case study research project is launched for the coming 4 years to explore this terrain more systematically.
Development consciousness
Trade unions could play an innovative role. In an APADEP international comparative questionnaire survey of grass roots trade union representatives in five countries (Guinée, Mali, Ghana, Tanzania and Zimbabwe) it was shown that even when the representatives themselves belong to the formal sector, far the majority come from rural areas, and live in communities of peasant farmers, unqualified or poorly- qualified workers, raisers of livestock and , many unemployed. And all, including the representatives themselves, are involved in a variety of additional activities to make ends meet. The salary earned by one person in the formal sector has to be shared with the other members of the household, of the village, it is needed for the education of own and other children, for the health of the extended family... for the wedding of a cousin.
The situation of these representatives gives rise to a double consciousness. On the one hand they are wage conscious as they bitterly need the money. Remarkably, the respondents in all five countries score low to nil on a 'class consciousness scale'. But having their feet so deeply in the side-activities of themselves and their household and sharing large social responsibilities, they appear to be development conscious. As individuals responsible for people who, if they were living in industrialised countries, would be taken care of by social security, they are concerned with development. This emerges clearly from their lists of priority problems (e.g. water supply and systems of communication); they want development programmes to be better organized, and they criticise the waste of human and material resources, together with the poor management of the civil service - as their responses to the questionnaires show.
The second battleground
It is here where trade union revival has important chances of success. Because of the democratic void, unions should now listen to the problems of the unemployed, peasants, women, youth, the handicapped, migrants and so on. These social groups are also potential members who might re-invigorate the trade union movement. Trade unions can also broaden their base by establishing links with the numerous organizations and associations that come into being to promote democratisation. Trade unions have played a far more important part in pushing the democratisation process in Africa than is generally believed (Sidibé & Venturi: 1997), but their task is far from completed: in fact, it has only just begun. Democracy has to be defended, deepened and institutionalised in all sectors of the society, including the economy (Kester & Sidibé: 1997). But trade unions have not been able to exert much democratic control on economic policy. The results of an APADEP study on structural adjustment expose the trade union deficit in this respect. The unions have been knocking on the doors of the World Bank and the IMF, it is true, but without great success: they have had no real impact on macro-economic and social development. The emphasis has been on the consequences of structural adjustment, and therefore on remedying the symptoms rather than on formulating a trade union policy for economic and social issues. Typical in this respect is the institution in the late 1980s, and under trade union pressure, of the 'Programme of Action to Mitigate Social Costs of Adjustment' (PAMSCAD). In short, trade unions have not been able to exert any palpable influence on the policies of the Bretton Woods institutions (Galarraga & Gogué, 1997). Also at national levels the trade unions have not been able to turn instruments of national concertation into more than institutional ornaments Sidibé: & Kester: 1994).
However, any trade union conscious of its mission in an African context cannot discard an ideal for which it has mobilised millions of men and women. They need to act as catalyst in an economic crisis where political parties would appear to be more preoccupied with winning power than with a long-term vision that alone will guarantee sustainable democracy. In most countries, once formal democratic change has come about, civil society falls apart, or at least loses its cohesion. Centripetal forces then take control and each group, the trade union movement included, finds itself locked into sectarian demands. This may well be one of the great problems for trade union leaders because, if civil society does disintegrate into just loose pressure groups, African states do not yet have the strength to muster much resistance. There is so little to share out that the most violent groups, or anyway those that occupy the most strategic sector, will corner whatever meagre resources there are, and everybody else will go away empty-handed. Countries may then be catapulted into a vicious circle of demands, anarchy and repression, and the outcome may be the inexorable return to dictatorship (these arguments have been further elaborated in Kester, Sidibé & Gogué, 1997: 96 ff).
Two models
Issues of income, income distribution, (un)employment and distribution of employment, which are crucial to traditional industrial relations, emerge in Africa in contexts very different when compared to the industrialised world. The study of African labour studies has long been caught in a classical paradox. On the one hand the traditional industrial relations model is applied, which restricts itself to the formal sector in which collective bargaining, industrial action and tripartism. at national level are central, and where trade unions play membership-centered roles. The second is the broader labour relations model which includes all who are involved in the world of work (from a tenured formal employment contract to a loose horizontal relationship in the survival of a household) and where trade unions play social movement roles.
The first model has in practice been more 'operational' than the second as it has more clearly identifiable power centres and an institutionalised framework. It is 'modelled' to industrial relations in industrialised countries and to international standards and norms of the International Labour Organization, often reflected in African labour legislation.
In the second model, and in African reality, power relations are more diffuse and labour relations not institutionalised and mostly without any legal base. Labour problems at this level are not taken up in the same way as in the first. The interests of all workers are to be taken into account in national tripartite institutions where trade unions claim to be or are asked to play the representatives of all workers. Labour problems have to be regulated with the instruments of industrial relations.
Perhaps it has been assumed for too long that the informal sector was a temporary phenomenon, that it would be absorbed by the formal sector in due time and that informal sector labour relations were a 'deviation'. But today it is widely accepted that the informal sector is indefinitely one of the main components of African economy and society. That being so, answers are needed to the following questions: where and how are the now marginalised groups in the informal sector going to participate in democracy? To what extent can they receive a fair share of national revenue within the framework of the shared fruits of an economy restructured in their name? Where and how will they have an opportunity to co-determine their future?
Can tripartism deliver?
Tripartism must be seen in the framework of the first, and not of the second model. Tripartism is, in essence, the regulation of terms of employment (the employment contract as well as the working conditions) at national level. Flanders once defined collective bargaining as "individual bargaining written large". Tripartism is collective bargaining 'written national'. Over and above the bi-partite settling of collective agreements, tripartism establishes wage and income policies, employment policies, social security, etc. In a well-functioning tripartite setting, collective bargaining and tripartite consultation are complementary. And they can be complementary to the extent that the 'subjects' of tripartite consultation are the same subjects as those of collective bargaining (that is: persons who enjoy a more or less stable employment contract). Tripartism is sort of a superstructure at national level, where the workers are well-represented by their unions, the employers by their organizations, and where government plays the role of defending the public interest.
In the formal sector of Africa tripartism is as much necessary as in the industrialised world. Yet, the vacuum of institutional democracy referred to earlier, becomes immediately visible. Independent collective bargaining in the formal sector (an important 'constituent' of tripartism) did hardly exist in the past (because of state corporatism, see above). And national labour policy making by one party-states and co-opted trade unions, whilst the state played the role of main employer, could hardly be called the predecessor of tripartism. Tripartism as the interaction of three independent partners is a new phenomenon for Africa and its possible success requires an enormous institution building investment: not only for trade unions, but also for (newly!) organized employers and for government. And in that perspective the trade unions' cards are weak (Martens, 1994). Sitting comfortably as 'representatives of the workers' in earlier structures, where they found government at their side as they had already opted for the government side(!), they now become aware that their representativeness is increasingly questioned by a new coalition: that between government and the organizations of private employers, these in turn incited by the Bretton Woods institutions and many donor governments. Trade union propositions at national consultations can be easily turned down with reference to reduced trade union membership, and it is not uncommon that reduction is the very result of government and employer manoeuvring. A case in point is Zimbabwe, where the quest for a formal tripartite structure by the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions has until now been ignored by the government. Conversely, and this makes the picture more complicated, governments sometimes deliberately seek trade union support to control inflation and obtain industrial peace, but also that is no longer automatic: trade unions have become weary of singing government songs. They are now autonomous and only want to come to terms with government from a position of effective independence. Except for South Africa (which also has a much bigger formal sector) where a formal tripartite structure has been put in place (NEDLAC) which now is fully operational, the subsaharan African countries have not made much effective headway with tripartism in labour relations - even if more informal national consultations do more or less frequently take place.
The emergence of multi-partite structures
In the heydays of state corporatism trade unions played a much broader role than negotiating conditions of wage and work of their members. They were acting on behalf of 'all the workers', unionised or not, in the formal and in the informal sector. They were involved in national policies on income and employment, but also in national planning and, particularly in francophone countries, many other policy questions, including - like in Mali - in national film censuring committees. Even when in these consultations trade unions were able to bring home certain achievements (Henley, 1989; Shadur, 1994; Sidibé: & Venturi, 1997), they were often under the illusion that they shared decision making powers when in fact they were used by party and state to sell decisions already taken, to the masses. Recent developments in Africa have ended the longstanding party/state - trade union coalition and thereby the manipulative practices, but they have also created a vacuum of institutional democracy. Awareness grew that 'good governance' needs a democratic environment, that development without the participation of the population could not lead to sustained development. So the concept 'participation' re-emerged, first hesitatingly as anything that smacked of the old regimes was rejected out of hand, then with much more seriousness when also the World Bank (1993), the UNDP (1994), the OECD (1993) and other actors in the international (donor) community started to realise and support that participation was a necessary condition for the deepening of political democracy and the development of a democratic culture. What failed in the past was not participation itself, but the way participation was designed and implemented (Kester, Sidibé: & Gogué, 1997: 83-9 1). Also the African intellectual debate on democracy appeared to agree that if democracy was not extended to the economy, it would have little chance to survive (Anyang' Nyong'o, 1987 and 1995; Imam, 1991; CODESRIA, 1992; Newbury, 1994; Ake, 1995, etc). Governments, and also most trade unions, remained more reluctant.
It would appear that at the national as well as international level, participation has become a matter of urgency. What form should participation take? Tripartism 9 services' only the formal sector. Also the challenge of informal sector representation has to be taken up otherwise there would be re-enforcement of a dual society which would harm social cohesion and solidarity. The parameters of labour relations have to be redefined and reset to encompass the whole world of work with institutions and procedures geared for social inclusion rather than exclusion. And new initiatives can be noted. In Zimbabwe for instance, the ZCTU which had criticised structural adjustment measures over many years, begun to formulate alternatives to these measures. It linked up with experts, universities and a number of groups in civil society in search for a new inclusive national framework for formulating, implementing and monitoring economic policies. In the words of the ZCTU "a truly national compromise can only be arrived at when all interest groups and stakeholders participate in policy formulation, decision making and implementation" (ZCTU, 1996 ; italics added). At international level, ZCTU shares an initiative with the Ghana Trades Union Congress and several other countries to review structural adjustment policies, in the so-called Structural Adjustment Participatory Review Initiative (SAPRI) which involves the World Bank, governments, employers, trade unions and organized civil society.
The growing evidence seems to be that the democratisation of African countries has opened up numerous spaces and frameworks for concertation which, if properly used, could gradually establish a tradition of resolving economic and social difficulties through dialogue and joint decision making. In francophone countries in particular, socio-economic councils have sprung up in many countries and are interesting in that they are not tripartite but very expressly multipartite, as in Burkina Faso, Ivory Coast, Gabon, Guinea, Senegal, Tunisia and Mali (Bodineau,1994). They have great potential in that their composition reflects civil society as a whole (and not just trade unions), but great investments will have to be made to make these councils operational (Sidibé & Kester, 1994). In South Africa the earlier mentioned NEDLAC functions as a tripartite mechanism for industrial relations in the formal sector, but also meets with a much wider spectrum of social partners, to hammer out broader socio-economic policies and to achieve consensus of civil society, together with the industrial relations parties (Mboweni, 95).
The African trade union movement can play an avant-garde role spearheading these new developments. Trade unions are agents of change and democracy since long. They have played important roles in obtaining independence (lately, in South Africa, this role was yet another time reconfirmed), and have again contributed to the restoration of democracy in the early nineties. Sidibé: & Venturi quote at least 20 countries where trade unions have played important roles in the democratisation process (1997: 28-37). The trade union movement is both a social player and a horizontal institution representing broad social groups, even if indirectly as explained above. It is also typically non-ethnic in its composition (even if there are exceptions) and as indicated earlier it has been involved in democratisation as well as in the defence of human rights and fundamental liberties. In addition, its strategic location in the economy provides it with potential influence that no other organizations in civil society have (see also Akwetey, 1994).
But also in the case of trade unions very considerable investments are needed. Many of them have to restore order in their own house: establish internal trade union democracy, reorientate and reorganize themselves around new roles and environments, and ensure financial means at a moment government subsidies have been withdrawn and automatic cheek-off discontinued. This is not a trade union challenge alone. It is a development challenge in general: if sustainable development coupled with sustainable democracy are found desirable, then the necessary investments in civil society including the trade union movement "I have to be made, and to be financed as part of the overall development effort (Adu Amankwah & Kester, 1997: 45-61).
THREATENED SOCIAL COHESION IN EUROPE:
A TRADE UNION CHALLENGE ALSO
Labour markets and labour relations are also in rapid transition in Europe. The boundaries between 'inside' and 'outside' the workplace become vaguer as there is a shift away from secure and long-term employment contracts to short-term contracts, away from full-time to part-time employment and to higher labour turnover. The proportion of temporary or seasonal labour, home-workers, the unemployed, the marginalised (women, youth, migrants), the socially excluded, rises. The problems of energy supplies, natural resources, the environment, migration, population etc., all have major consequences for the world of labour and production. Technological changes, social changes (towards increased individualisation) and political changes (towards more liberalism) are creating new kinds of workers, and thus new components of labour relations. Also those who do not have a full-time or tenured job, as well as the marginalised and the excluded, must have the opportunity to express themselves, to exert influence, to share in the fruits of the economy and to co-determine their future. Jacques Delors advocated the strengthening or the (re)establishment of local and regional trade union structures to cope with the emerging labour problems by putting themselves in direct contact with those who fall outside the "formal sector". He went further to say that if the trade unions miss this appointment with history, he would fear for their future (Delors, 1994: 44).
A debate on this trade union challenge was launched through the project "Scenario 21", a scenario for greater solidarity and democracy, in which workers fight for their own rights and the rights of others, by building and using solid democratic institutions in the world of work and the economy (Kester&Pinaud, 1996: 54). This scenario for the growth of democratic participation follows two tracks. First, it advocates to bring five different forms of workplace level worker participation (collective bargaining, co-management, co-determination, organizational participation and financial participation) in synergy and under democratic control. And second, it seeks to link the problems of the workplace to meso and macro level labour problems and to local, regional, national and international challenges.
Participatory democracy. a new role for trade unions in pluripartite configurations
Classical industrial relations theory continues to be primarily conceptualised in a frame of interaction of three major actors: organized employers, government and the waged/salaried workers and their organizations (Dunlop, 1958). This theory is enshrined in the ILO structure, and is institutionalised deeply and generally in the industrialised countries. For a long time, and especially as long as Europe was characterised by full employment and more or less stable employment contracts, tripartism was a B industrial relations instrument, and the welfare state its result. When that context changed in Europe (structural unemployment, weakening of the welfare state, social exclusion, etc) the existing institutional frameworks continued but could not necessarily provide the most adequate instruments to cope with new developments.
There is a wide spectrum of spheres in which new labour participation strategies could be developed. These include the environment, the labour market, quality of life in general, (adult) education, but also internationalisation and globalisation. Can traditional institutions of labour relations cope with the meso and macro-level issues confronting the world of labour tomorrow? Tripartite industrial relations are extremely important but they carry with them the threat of creating a coalition of those who have what they need and of marginalising the dispossessed. Of concentrating on the present at the cost of the future. Consensus between B social partners of production may well encourage vested interests to take precedence while traditional structures in which labour relations are handled gradually ossify.
This calls into question the issue of solidarity. At the end of the 19th century Durkheim (1897) has warned that lack of solidarity has devastating consequences for democracy and leads to social disintegration. This warning is as much of value at the end of the 20th century. The permanent challenge is to create institutions which express solidarity, linking the interests of different groups and sharing the fruits of the economy. Solidarity across all categories of workers and citizens is a major component of social justice and is the major line of defence against further social disintegration, rising nationalism, racism and violence. Tripartite mechanisms have been important factors in the democratic process, bringing the traditional social partners together in a context of democratic participation. But democracy is an ongoing process, its development includes citizens increasingly in decision making at all levels. This demands a spirit of openness rather than dogged dependency on existing structures. As Alain Tourraine stated, the long movement of descent from democracy to civil society, triggered by trade union action and industrial democracy, will continue. From political democracy to social democracy to cultural democracy, everyday's activities are increasingly linked to dialogue and political decision-making (Tourraine, 1994: 273; see also: Dahrendorf, 1996).
We are about to enter a new century or for that matter a new millennium in which industrial and labour relations can be expected to change rather fundamentally. If one does not share the opinion of Forrester (1996) that thinking in terms of full employment has become anachronism already, one cannot but observe a steady trend from employment to employability, from tenured employment to flexibility. Rapidly rising and expanding schemes of financial participation usher many workers into capital ownership. Many young workers choose or have to accept a free lance or a self-employment status. The development of democracy has implied that not only the conditions and the mode of production, but also the effects and results of production are questioned by a broad spectrum of civil society organizations.
An 'institutional' answer to multipartite and multi-facetted labour relations is implicit in a number of mechanisms of social dialogue that exist already. Trebilcock provides a survey of such mechanisms and from her statistics it can be deducted that of a total of 56 tripartite structures in the industrialised countries she surveyed, 23 are 'tripartite plus', that is, they include - apart from government, employers and trade unions - experts and members of other social organizations, such as consumers associations, environmentalists, farmers and people engaged in crafts etc. (Trebilcock, 1994: 51-63). Yet, her study puts full emphasis on the functioning and achievements of tripartism, and that should not be surprising as tripartism continues to be the locus of power.
In Africa where industrial relations institutions were largely borrowed from industrialised countries, they have actually never been an adequate response to labour relations in the continent (as is more or less the case for other third world countries as well). Occasional attempts to point at the insufficiency of theoretical/conceptual understanding of the problems of the third world under a Dunlop perspective ( see for instance Cox and Harrod, 1972, and Harrod, 1987 & 1988), have not had much influence. Likewise, the absence of a European or global trade union response to particularly the multinational/globalisation challenge( see for instance Treu, 1992) or to the social exclusion challenge (Delors, 1994) have not yet influenced 'established' industrial relations theory. But pressure increases (see for instance Regini, 1992, and Leisink et al., 1996, etc).
Europe could learn from what happened and happens in Africa with the informal sector. This sector was first ignored by mainstream trade unionism and mainstream industrial relations theorising. But the informal sector is there to stay, and demands a revision of the existing institutional framework of labour relations. In stead of tripartism new forms of regional and national 'concertation' begin to function in which a wide spectrum of representatives of civil society take part. The economy of the industrialised countries is not becoming informal, but its labour relations become more flexible and multi-facetted and it should not be too surprising if class consciousness is on its way down and replaced by development consciousness. If that were so, trade unions cannot remain re-active prisoners of existing industrial relations structures, but will have to re-orient themselves and become pro-active. Also in Europe alliances with other groups in civil society will be necessary in order to get a democratic hold over newly emerging work relations as well as on national, regional and global agendas. Multipartism as a new coalition for democracy.
References
Adu-Amankwah, K. and G. Kester (eds) (1997), Africa for Democratic Participation, APADEP: Bamako / Dar es Salaam / The Hague
African Charter for Popular Participation in Development and Transformation. International Conference on popular participation in the process of recovery and development in Africa, Arusha, 12-16 February 1990
African National Congress (1994), The Reconstruction and Development Programme: a policy framework. Umanyano Publications: Johannesburg
African Workers' Participation Development Programme (APADEP), International Workshop, Bamako et Mopti (1993), 'Mopti Syndicalement'. Rapport de l'Etude de Cas A Mopti. PADEP: Mali
African Workers' Participation Development Programme (APADEP) (1997), This is APADEP, APADEP: Bamako / Dar es Salaam / The Hague
Ake, C. (1995), 'Approches et Orientations Socio-Politiques pour le Développement Durable en Afrique', in: Afrique 2000, n' 22, aout
Akwetey, E.O. (1994), Trade Unions and Democratisation: a comparative study of Zambia and Ghana. University of Stockolm: Stockholm
Anstey, M. (1997), Labour Relations in Transition: a changing South Africa in a changing world, Mark Anstey: Port Elisabeth
Anyang' Nyong'o, P. (ed.) (1987), Popular Struggles for Democracy in Africa, Zed Books: London
Anyang' Nyong'o, P. (1995), 'Discours sur la Démocratie en Afrique', in: E. Chole et J. Ibrahim (eds.), Processus de Démocratisation en Afrique: problèmes et perspectives. CODESRIA, Khartala: Paris
Bodineau, P. (1994), Les Conseils Economiques et Sociaux, Presses Universitaires: Paris
Chambua, S. et al. (1997), 'Participation beyond the enterprise: the case of the Tanga region in Tanzania', APADEP Working Paper, University of Dar es Salaam
Coulibaly. M. et S.M. Sissoko (1997), 'Koulikoro aux ONG', PADEP: Bamako
Coulibaly, M. et S.M. Sissoko (1997), 'Sikasso ou le malheur de la richesse', PADEP: Bamako
Coulibaly, M. et S.M. Sissoko (1997), 'La formation en suspens', PADEP, Bamako
Coulibaly, M. et S.M. Sissoko (1998) 'Les Syndicats et la non -participation au niveau local et régional: suivi des études de cas a Ségou et Koulikoro', PADEP: Bamako
Council for the Development of Social Sience Research in Africa (CODESRIA) (1992), 'Conference on: Democratization Processes in Africa: Problems & Prospects', in: CODESRIA Bulletin, N1&2
Cox, R.W., J Harrod et al., (1972), Future Industrial Relations.. an interim report, International Institute of Labour Studies: Geneva
Dahrendorf, R. (1996), 'Economic Opportunity, Civil Society and Political Liberty', in: Development and Change, Vol.27 n' 2
Delors, J. (1994), L'Unité d'un Homme. Entretiens avec Dominique Wolton. Editions Odile Jacobs: Paris
Diallo, M., M. Dopavogui, et G. Kester (1992), Guinde: pour un nouveau syndicalisme en Afrique. PADEP/ L'Harmattan: La Haye/Paris
Dunlop, J.T. (1958), Industrial Relations Systems, Henri Holdt & Co: New York
Durkheim, E. (1897), Le Suicide: étude de sociologie, Alcan: Paris
Fashoyin, T. (1991), 'Recent trends in industrial relations research and theory in developing countries' in: Adams, R.J. (ed), Comparative Industrial Relations, Harper-Collins: London
Fashoyin, T. (1992), 'Introduction' in: T. Fashoyin (ed), Industrial Relations and African Development, International Book Company: New York
Forrester, Viviane, (1996), l'Horreur Economique, Fayard: Paris
Galarraga, R. and A. Tchaboure Gogué, (1997), 'Africa in a period of adjustment', in: Trade Unions and Sustainable Democracy in Africa, Asghate: Aldershot
Harrod, J. (1988), "Social relations of production, systems of labour control and third world trade unions" in: Southall, R. (ed), Trade Unions and the new industrialisation of the Third World, Zed Books: London
Harrod, J. (1987), The Unprotected Worker.. the social relations of subordination, Colombia University Press: New York
Hansen, K. (1997) 'Mozambique: organize or disappear', in: G. Kester and O. Sidibé: (eds), Trade Unions and Sustainable Democracy in Africa, Ashgate: Aldershot
Henley, J.S. (1989) "African Employment Relationships and the Future of Trade Unions, in British Journal of Industrial Relations, vol. 27, nr. 3
Imam, A. (1991), 'Democratization Processes in Africa: Problems and Prospects', in: CODESRIA Bulletin, no 2
Kester, G. (1995), 'Principes Directeurs pour une Stratégie en Matière de Participation Démocratique', in: G. Kester et H. Pinaud (eds.) Syndicats et Participation Démocratique: scénario pour le 21ème siècle. L'Harmattan: Paris
Kester, G. and H. Pinaud, (eds) (1996), Trade Unions and Democratic Participation in Europe: a Scenario for the 21st Century, Avebury, Aldershot
Kester, G. and H. Pinaud, (1996), 'The decline, consolidation or growth of democratic participation? ', in: G. Kester and H. Pinaud (eds), Trade Unions and Democratic Participation in Europe, Avebury: Aldershot
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) (1994), Human Development Report 1994. Oxford University Press: New York
Valenzuela, J.S. (1989), 'Labor movements in transitions to democracy: a framework for analysis', in: Comparative Politics, July 1989
Webster, E. (1994), 'The rise of social-movement unionism', in: E. Webster et al., Work and Industrialisation in South Africa, Raven: Johannesburg
World Bank (1993), The World Bank Annual Report 1993, The World Bank: Washington, DC
ZCTU (Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions) (1996), 'Beyond ESAP: framework for a long-term development strategy in Zimbabwe beyond the economic structural adjustment programme', ZCTU: Harare
|
