Labour unions and employer organisations have accused justice and labour relations minister Wise Immanuel of trying to single-handedly choose who should represent them on the Labour Advisory Council (LAC).
The National Union of Namibian Workers (NUNW), Trade Union Congress of Namibia (Tucna), Namibia Employers’ Federation (NEF) and Namibia Employers’ Association (NEA) say they have already submitted their preferred representatives.
In December, Immanuel first asked the unions and organisations to submit nominees for the council.
The LAC consists of four employer representatives, four trade union representatives and four government representatives, plus an independent chairperson.
Tucna secretary general Mahongora Kavihuha says the practice has been for the NEF and NUNW to nominate three representatives each, while the NEA and Tucna nominate one each.
However, Kavihuha says Immanuel asked organisations entitled to three representatives to submit six names so that he could select three.
“Those entitled to one representative were asked to submit two names for him to select one,” Kavihuha said at a press conference in Windhoek yesterday.
He said Immanuel wrote to them again about two weeks ago, repeating his request.
Kavihuha said the minister indicated that if the organisations failed to provide more names, he would approach individual registered trade unions and employers’ organisations for nominations.
“In the world, the tripartite bodies are represented by federations. We haven’t seen an individual industrial union representing it in a tripartite body. We are not here to be bullied by any individual, because we exist in our own rights,” he said.
Kavihuha accused Immanuel of interfering with the right of organised labour and business to choose their representatives.
“We believe that the minister is violating that very same convention, which is very explicit that we have the right to select our representatives independently without any influence,” Kavihuha said.
He said failure to constitute the council, or allowing the minister to determine who represents labour and business, would undermine the social partners.
“We regard that as a serious attack on business and labour if this body is not constituted and if it’s constituted on the feeling of the minister on who should be there,” he said.
NEF president Elias Shikongo says the unions and organisations are not seeking special treatment but want the established process to be followed.
“When you deviate from a system that is tried and tested and has been in place for so many years, when you want to deviate from that, you at least give reason and notice that I’m going to do it differently,” he says.
He says the central concern is that although the minister has the power to appoint council members, the government should not decide who represents workers and employers.
The previous council’s term ended in February. The members were allowed to continue until May, but the country has since been without a functioning council.
Some of the pending issues the council needs to tackle include the Labour Act and Employment Equity Act, the occupational safety and health bill, labour migration policy, the National Employment Policy reforms involving the Office of the Labour Commissioner and labour provisions under the African Continental Free Trade Area.
“In the absence of a Labour Advisory Council, the outcome of that task force in relation to labour amendments, for instance, will be a futile exercise,” Shikongo says.
NEA president Henry Bruwer says they want clarity rather than a confrontation.
“We, the social partners, all we are seeking is transparency and certainty. We don’t want confrontation, because we are part of this tripartite setup, and we want to make it work,” he says.
The unions and organisations have called on Immanuel to urgently appoint the council, respect their nominations and explain the legal or policy basis for requesting additional names.
They have also requested an urgent meeting with him.
When approached for comment, Immanuel says: “But if that is how they claim it is, then it is a naked claim, as there is no context to it. I respond with context to contextualised issues or questions.”
