via MDC, ZCTU rap Supreme Court labour ruling – The Zimbabwean 22 July 2015
The Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions (ZCTU) says it is devastated by the Supreme Court’s ruling that allows employers to terminate workers’ contracts by simply giving them notice.
The MDC-T is also disturbed by the ruling, which it says could lead to abuse of workers by employers. The party called on government to speedily publish a statutory instrument (SI) to ensure that workers’ interests were protected.
Japhet Moyo, the ZCTU secretary general, said the ruling would throw organised labour into disarray. “The ruling is devastating for organised labour. It means that employers have sweeping powers regarding the termination of employees’ contracts. It will cause more harm to suffering workers,” said Moyo.
On Friday, the Supreme Court interpreted Zimbabwe’s common law to rule that, unlike in the past when employers had to settle termination packages for workers, they would now be able to simply giving them varying types of notice.
Employees who would have served for at least two years would simply be given a three months’ notice to terminate employment contracts, while those with less than two would need to be given two months’ notice.
No hearing
Those that would have served for three months and below will now be given shorter notice periods. Employers can dismiss staff without going through a disciplinary hearing as currently provided for by the Labour Act.
Chief Justice Godfrey Chidyausiku, sitting with four other judges, unanimously agreed that the common law position placing employees and employers on an equal footing was still operational.
They were deciding a case in which two former Zuva Petroleum managers, Don Nyamande and Kingstone Donga, were challenging termination of their contracts under the same circumstances.
Moyo said employees and pregnant workers would be negatively affected by the ruling as employers could simply terminate their contracts if they felt they were a being a burden.
“Many workers will fall prey to the ruling. It will no longer be safe to engage in trade unionism at the workplace as employers are known to be averse to those that lobby against their decisions and activities.
“Employers will be celebrating all the way to the bank because the ruling provides them with an opportunity to offload workers willy-nilly. That means workers will not afford to differ with management in any way but this is not good for work-based democracy,” added Moyo.
He said a clique of the middle-class was fighting to exploit employees through the courts.
Obert Gutu, the MDC-T national spokesperson, said: “As a labour-based movement, we are naturally disturbed by the ruling and urge government to urgently come up with a statutory instrument to protect the interests of workers.”
Ironically, one of the key members of the legal team that represented Zuva against its employees is Nelson Chamisa, an advocate who is a senior member of MDC-T.
Chamisa described the ruling as a “landmark development” but Moyo said he should have recused himself from the case. “His party has a heavy labour bias, yet he went ahead and represented an employer in this ruling. He stood for capital instead of labour,” said Moyo.
COMMENTS
When companies go bankrupt because they are carrying too many staff everybody loses their job. When companies cannot pay salaries what is the point of having a job? 3 months salary to let an employee go is still a big expense. In most of the world this is 1 month.
That Zimbabweans seem so offended at this ruling is another sign of a general detachment from reality.
Most of the comment in this article sides with the workers. Hardly anyone thinks about the companies.
We have seen the same pattern in our country.
People will take what they can but no thought is given to the results o f their actions.
This is part of the reason why we ended up where we are.
I am surprised at the stupidity of the MDC, and also of the ZCTU.
Years ago I spoke to members ofr both and both agreed that with no businesses there could be no jobs. Has progressive mind-rot set in, like everywhere else in Zim? I even discussed this with M.T, way back
International labor standards refer to conventions agreed upon by international actors, resulting from a series of value judgments, set forth to protect basic worker rights, enhance workers’ job security, and improve their terms of employment on a global scale. The intent of such standards, then, is to establish a worldwide minimum level of protection from inhumane labor practices through the adoption and implementation of said measures. From a theoretical standpoint, it has been maintained, on ethical grounds, that there are certain basic human rights that are universal to humankind.[1] Thus, it is the aim of international labor standards to ensure the provision of such rights in the workplace, such as against workplace aggression, bullying, discrimination and gender inequality on the other hands for working diversity, workplace democracy and empowerment.
Now with the judgement passed by the Superem court I challenge any one to identify any of the principles above. Its my opinion that the aggrieved take the matter to ILO and similar institution for redress.
You people should learn to think and think outside the box. The weaker part on any employment contract is the employee. He is desperate for protection against being taken advantage of by the employer. A ruling like this makes me even more worried not only because the employee goes home empty handed after such hardwork, worth his lifetime, but mainly because employers are now free to abuse employees during the working times because they can simply threaten to fire them. Why not, when they have absolutey nothing to lose. The employee is now exposed, at the mercy of all forms of abuse by the employer. He has been stripped of all his powers, and even bargaining becomes very difficult with such a ruling in effect. Lets open our eyes to this.