THE POLITICAL CONTEXT
1.0 BACKGROUND
Proponents of social dialogue, who include the International Labour Organisation (lLO), have put forward the social dialogue discourse as possibly one of the viable and lucrative options for social partners to pursue in the interest of industrial harmony and peace and socio-economic development. The ILOa (n.d) defines social dialogueas:
... all types of negotiation, consultation or simply exchange of information between, or among, representatives of governments, employers and workers, on issues of common interest relating to economic and social policy. It can be informal or institutionalised, and often it is a combination ofthe two. It can take place at the national, regional or at enterprise level. The main goal of social dialogue itself is to promote consensus building and democratic involvement among the main stakeholders in the world of work. (ILOb, n.d).
According to the ILO, 'successful social dialogue structures and processes have the potential to resolve important economic and social issues, encourage good governance, advance social and industrial peace and stability and boost economic progress' (lLOb, n.d). As such, social dialogue has been floated around the world as one among many ways countries can push-start their economies following periods of recession and as a vehicle for the generation of wealth and sustainable human development. The whole
19This article was published in Loyola Journal ofSocial Sciences, Vol XX, No. 2, Jul-Dec 2006, pp. 149- 170
dialogue process IS then encapsulated into a social contract20 with self-policing mechanisms.
A senes of International Dialogues were kick-started by the Langkawi International Dialogue of 1995 in Malaysia following the creation of the Commonwealth Partnership for Technology Management by the Commonwealth Heads ofGovernment. The basis of the partnership is win-win, tolerance, patience, shared vision and common goals among the social partners. In Zimbabwe, this led to the creation of the National Economic Consultative Forum (NECF) in July 1997 with the aim of enhancing social dialogue, consensus building and tension reduction by grouping together business, labour, government and academia. The idea was to deepen good governance and allow wider participation of society as well as developing capacity to monitor policy. The NECF had by December 1998 resolved to form a working party to work on a Social Contract, thus setting the stage for social dialogue in Zimbabwe.
Between 1980 and 1990, Zimbabwe flirted with socialist policies which imposed rigidities in the economy which in turn led to constrained growth. In order to kick-start the economy and give new impetus, the Government of Zimbabwe embarked on the Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (1991-5), the Zimbabwe Programme for Economic and Social Transformation (1996-2000) and thereafter, the Millennium Economic Recovery Programme (MERP). In spite of these programmes, the twin problems of unemployment and inflation have remained nagging and on the increase ever since. For example, the unemployment rate was estimated to be more than 70 per cent (The Financial Gazette, 17 July 2003b) and annualised inflation was hovering above 300 per cent (The Financial Gazette, 17 July 2003a). In 1998, the Government announced a devaluation of the Zimbabwe dollar from Z$18.6 to the US dollar in December, 1997 to Z$37.3 by December, 1998. Unbudgeted gratuities ofZ$50,000 each were awarded to the war veterans and at the same time Zimbabwe got embroiled and enmeshed in the DRC (Democratic Republic of Congo) war. The World Bank and International Monetary Fund
20The English political philosopher Thomas Hobbes (1588-1678)coined the word, 'social contract' in his treatise, Leviathan (1651).
withdrew all multi-lateral aid assistance with other international donor agencies taking a cue therefrom. These factors imposed a heavy burden and strain on the economy leading to the development of a socio-economic crisis. As the crisis brewed, organised labour agitated workers for stayaways. Organised business, it appears, was in complicity to the extent that those involved in stayaways did not lose any of their benefits at work.
From that period onwards, confrontations and contestation and fighting and re-fighting for space can be observed between the workers and government, the workers at one time teaming up with employers confronting the state; employers on their own confronting the state and workers versus society at large, and patriots versus sell-outs, the left versus the left and the right versus the right. Thus, these challenges brought the Tripartite Negotiating Forum (TNF) into prominence in an attempt to resolve these societal contradictions, thereby widening the social dialogue debate.
The TNF is chaired by the Ministry of Public Service, Labour and Social Welfare in line with ILO Convention 144 on tripartite consultation and includes the following ministries:
Finance and Economic Development; Industry and International Trade; Lands and Agriculture and Rural Resettlement; Transport and Communication; Mines and Mining Development; Departments of State for Information and Public Enterprises. Business is led by the presidents of the Employers Confederation of Zimbabwe (EMCOZ). Business is drawn from the Confederation of Zimbabwe Industries (CZI), Zimbabwe National Chamber of Commerce, Zimbabwe Chamber of Mines, Bankers Association of Zimbabwe, Commercial Farmers Union and the Zimbabwe Council of Tourism. The Presidents of the Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) leads labour. Leaders of the following staff associations also attend TNF under the leadership of the ZCTU, namely, Civil Service Staff Associations, Zimbabwe Teachers Association (ZIMTA) and the Zimbabwe Nurses Association. At inception it was agreed that the TNF was not a decision-making body although it could conclude binding protocols based on good faith and trust and the subordination of sector interests to national goals. Suffice to say at this juncture that Zimbabwe is a member of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) which itself is a member of the United Nations family.
There are costs of agreeing and costs of not agreeing. Who bears the costs? It has been the general citizenry that has been bearing most of the costs. According to Sachikonye (1997:125):
In the continuing tight economic situation, it is necessary to strike a balance between wage demands and employment security and productivity. In the absence of a significant increase in productivity, and therefore enterprise profitability, real wages and living standards will continue to stagnate and decline. Wage concessions made as a consequence of strikes will be short-lived, and probably inadequate to meet increased costs of living,
This statement was made with reference to the period immediately after Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (1991-5) as a challenge facing unions in the 1990s. It is more pertinent now than before given the negative growth rates being posted continually by the economy.
Sachikonye (1997: 127) further asserts that:
... unions will have to clarify their strategic role in the economy and society as a whole. What direction should its relations with the state and capital take: one of tension or one of accommodation?
This is a complicated question but it raises the possibilities of a social contract based on a corporatist arrangement. As ZCTU secretary general (Morgan Tsvangirayi) has argued, there is clearly a need to develop the thinking of the basis and scope of a social contract. The then Secretary General of the ZCTU stated " ... the social contract would involve the three parties reaching a consensus where workers agree to restrain wage demands on one hand and employers agree to control price increases for commodities, invest surpluses to create more jobs and train workers on the other hand.
For the Governrnent, you would expect them to cut spending.