revisiting accountability in industrial action

PRESENTATION TO THE GOVERNANCE CONFERENCE

21 MAY 2012

REVISITING ACCOUNTABILITY IN INDUSTRIAL ACTION

OUTLINE

AN INHERENT RISK

DEBUNKING CONVENTIONAL WISDOM

UNPACKING THE CAUSES OF INDUSTRIAL ACTION

MITIGATING THE RISK STRATEGICALLY & OPERATIONALLY

CONCLUSIONS

AN INHERENT RISK

INDUSTRIAL ACTION, AN INHERENT RISK

Constitutional right to strike

Normal part of the collective bargaining process

Balancing power in the employment relationship

A risk with adverse consequences, that can be mitigated

AN INHERENT RISK WITH ADVERSE CONSEQUENCES

Characterised by intimidation & violence Leads to breakdown of relationships between employers and

trade unions Disrupts business continuity Trade union rivalry and instability Adversely impacts productivity Causes loss of profits & loss of jobs


Conventional wisdom lays the accountability and responsibility of industrial action and its consequences at the feet of Trade Unions solely

Experience has shown that the seeds for industrial action are, more often than not, planted long before the customary ‘48 hour notice’ is issued.

UNPACKING THE CAUSES

SYMPTOM / EFFECT = INDUSTRIAL ACTION

CAUSES = VARIOUS FACTORS INVOLVING THE ROLEPLAYERS

CAUSES WITHIN CONTROL OF EMPLOYERS

Unhealthy organisational culture Autocratic management style Outdated / outmoded workplace practices Inequitable employment practices e.g. pay anomalies, non-

standard employment Managing industrial relations by proxy ‘Lawyering up’ as a first resort

CAUSES WITHIN CONTROL OF UNIONS

Under organising / no organising Ineffective representation Reluctance / refusal to speak out or act against perpetrators of

violence Ineffective / absent Strike Management

CAUSES WITHIN CONTROL OF BOTH PARTIES

Failure to show Leadership Misconstruing the Labour Relations Act Ignoring Worker Voice Failure to agree Rules of Engagement Little / no joint preparation for collective bargaining Adherence to adversarial collective bargaining practices Over-familiarity between negotiators Failure to extract learnings from successive collective bargaining

rounds

MITIGATING THE RISK

MITIGATING THE RISK– STRATEGIC LEVEL

Shift from distributive / positional bargaining to interest based / mutual gains bargaining

Promoting a Model Workplace Managing conflict & resolving disputes in the workplace Effective communication with staff Commitment to peaceful industrial action at leadership level Education & awareness raising regarding rights in law

MITIGATING THE RISK– OPERATIONAL LEVEL

BEFORE THE STRIKE Business continuity plan, including the use of replacement

labour which may increase risks of violence Picketing rules in place Contingency plan for violence, sabotage and emergencies,

keeping police involvement to a minimum Media plan Plan for communication with workers Strike settlement plan: use of mediation; availability of senior

decision-makers for revisiting mandates


DURING THE STRIKE Manage the media – who speaks, when and what they say Avoid becoming entrenched in a position; remain open to

negotiations Accept CCMA section 150 offers Provision for mandating processes Communication with striking and non-striking workers Demonstrate respect – ablution facilities, water, reasonable

communication facilities


AFTER THE STRIKE Communication and the Return-to-work process Media announcement Steps to restore relationship with workers and the union Reflect on causes of strike and build into plans to mitigate risks Reflect on success of contingency plans and learnings

CONCLUSIONS

CONCLUSIONS

Industrial action is an inherent risk

Accountability in industrial action must be apportioned between business and labour

The risk of industrial action is associated with adverse consequences

The risk can be mitigated through strategic and operational interventions involving both employers and trade unions