Publications
Partners
Labour Q&A with Terry Bell
Fin24 user LD van Vuuren says it seems to him as if the urgency for higher wages is getting into a crescendo - with political parties (EFF) giving open support and the government neutered through their Cosatu alliance.
He writes: "Having ran out of ideas, us ordinary mortals often voice the Thatcher option, but it has never been discussed on public platforms.
"Can we have an opinion piece - What if the government declares an 'economic state of emergency and ban all labour action as well as negative employer steps to just keep the labour environment stable until (say) we reach a 5% growth rate; increases to be declared by the government in collaboration with the Reserve Bank and all strikes are banned; special courts installed for labour related issues and the SANDF at high alert for (only) labour type actions; incentives for growth to be built into the system (there are many more clever people than I to formulate this) and a reward system to be forced onto employers for their workers, once they have reached targets in line with a 5% growth.
"I know this is wishful thinking and highly unlikely, but once a seed is planted..."
Terry Bell responds:
Hi LD van Vuuren,
Not sure what you mean by the "Thatcher option" since the policies pursued in most parts of the world and certainly in South Africa since Gear (Growth, Employment and Redistribution programme) in 1996 are along the lines promoted by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan - and seem to have led to the mess we are in.
Of course the EFF, desperate to win support from the traditional ANC base will say and do all they can to do so. That's the opportunistic nature of parliamentary politics.
However, all the evidence points to the government having been able to harness, although not neuter, the bulk of the trade union movement through the ANC-led alliance.
What you seem to be proposing is a prices and incomes policy enforced, if necessary, by the military. But unless you also mean, by "negative employer steps" the limiting of rates of profit and executive remuneration, you might have a recipe for severe instability if not civil war.
In any event such a proposal would require the ditching of the Constitution and fly in the face of international labour conventions to which South Africa is bound.
This can, of course, be done, but what it will mean is placing authoritarian power in the hands of a group of politicians. These are people who practice the art of politics. And, as the philosopher Paul Valery once noted: "Politics is the art of preventing people from taking part in affairs which properly concern them."
As an extreme democrat I, personally, could never support handing over power to a minority, especially when backed by armed force.
I am also extremely wary of the apparent obsession with economic growth in percentage terms. For example, the expansion and spend on the utterly non-productive private security sector contributes toward "growth". I would rather look toward food security and the reduction - perhaps even elimination - of national debt and the eventual elimination of poverty, along with the gross inequality that is at the root of social instability.
I don't think this amounts to wishful thinking. If we all applied our minds and discussed openly and honestly what alternatives might be available and then acted on any decisions we might come to, we could, at the very least, improve the lot of all.
But thanks for your input. I shall use some of these notions in coming Inside Labour columns and Labour Wraps. As long as we keep talking - and listening - we need never be subjected to tyranny of any sort.
Regards
Terry
*Have a question for Terry? Drop us a line.
- Fin24
* Terry Bell is an independent political, economic and labour analyst. Views expressed are his own. Follow him on twitter @telbelsa.
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on Fin24 have been independently written by members of the Fin24 community. The views of users published on Fin24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent those of Fin24.
Fin24 user LD van Vuuren says it seems to him as if the urgency for higher wages is getting into a crescendo - with political parties (EFF) giving open support and the government neutered through their Cosatu alliance.
He writes: "Having ran out of ideas, us ordinary mortals often voice the Thatcher option, but it has never been discussed on public platforms.
"Can we have an opinion piece - What if the government declares an 'economic state of emergency and ban all labour action as well as negative employer steps to just keep the labour environment stable until (say) we reach a 5% growth rate; increases to be declared by the government in collaboration with the Reserve Bank and all strikes are banned; special courts installed for labour related issues and the SANDF at high alert for (only) labour type actions; incentives for growth to be built into the system (there are many more clever people than I to formulate this) and a reward system to be forced onto employers for their workers, once they have reached targets in line with a 5% growth.
"I know this is wishful thinking and highly unlikely, but once a seed is planted..."
Terry Bell responds:
Hi LD van Vuuren,
Not sure what you mean by the "Thatcher option" since the policies pursued in most parts of the world and certainly in South Africa since Gear (Growth, Employment and Redistribution programme) in 1996 are along the lines promoted by Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan - and seem to have led to the mess we are in.
Of course the EFF, desperate to win support from the traditional ANC base will say and do all they can to do so. That's the opportunistic nature of parliamentary politics.
However, all the evidence points to the government having been able to harness, although not neuter, the bulk of the trade union movement through the ANC-led alliance.
What you seem to be proposing is a prices and incomes policy enforced, if necessary, by the military. But unless you also mean, by "negative employer steps" the limiting of rates of profit and executive remuneration, you might have a recipe for severe instability if not civil war.
In any event such a proposal would require the ditching of the Constitution and fly in the face of international labour conventions to which South Africa is bound.
This can, of course, be done, but what it will mean is placing authoritarian power in the hands of a group of politicians. These are people who practice the art of politics. And, as the philosopher Paul Valery once noted: "Politics is the art of preventing people from taking part in affairs which properly concern them."
As an extreme democrat I, personally, could never support handing over power to a minority, especially when backed by armed force.
I am also extremely wary of the apparent obsession with economic growth in percentage terms. For example, the expansion and spend on the utterly non-productive private security sector contributes toward "growth". I would rather look toward food security and the reduction - perhaps even elimination - of national debt and the eventual elimination of poverty, along with the gross inequality that is at the root of social instability.
I don't think this amounts to wishful thinking. If we all applied our minds and discussed openly and honestly what alternatives might be available and then acted on any decisions we might come to, we could, at the very least, improve the lot of all.
But thanks for your input. I shall use some of these notions in coming Inside Labour columns and Labour Wraps. As long as we keep talking - and listening - we need never be subjected to tyranny of any sort.
Regards
Terry
*Have a question for Terry? Drop us a line.
- Fin24
* Terry Bell is an independent political, economic and labour analyst. Views expressed are his own. Follow him on twitter @telbelsa.
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on Fin24 have been independently written by members of the Fin24 community. The views of users published on Fin24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent those of Fin24.
