Industrial Relations and Democracy

7/30/2019 Industrial Relations and Democracy

1/12

Industrial Relations Journal 27:lISSN 0019-8692

Democracy, labour anddevelopment: transformingindustrial relations in AfricaTayo Fashoyin and Segun Matanmi

Here the authors assess the status o f labour development in Africa.The continental constraints of the political context and overall environ-ment of the employment relationships are discussed. They concludethat the longer term role of African unions should be facilitated b ygreater tripartite concertation and government flexibility.

The subject matter of this article is significantas it brings together three interconnectedconcepts that appear to basically underlieany meaningful discussion of industrialrelations in the African context. Even thoughthese terms are conceptually separable, theycan hardly be isolated from one another asa result of their interplay within the contextof employment relationships. For example,the term democracy is useful in the dis-cussion of the orientation of labour groups,just as labour has salience in the analysisof various issues of social and economicdevelopment.It is clear that certain characteristics havebeen associated with the concept of demo-cracy. These are, among others: anti-authori-tarianism, consensual decision process,majority rule, and representativeness. Whenapplied to the world of work, industrialdemocracy connotes worker participation,

0 ayo Fashoyin is of the Labour Law and LabourRelations Branch, International Labour Office,Geneva. Segun Matanmi is Senior Lecturer in theDepartment of Sociology, Lagos State University,Lagos, Nigeria.

which is an arrangement that guaranteesemployees role in some aspects of operationof an enterprise; workers control, whichis a mechanism by which workers gainappreciable power in juxtaposition to mana-gerial power, or workers councils, whichis essentially another organisational systemthat facilitates the exercise of full control byworkers over the running of a n enterprise[l] .Nevertheless, the organisational profilesof African labour movements have revealeda predominance of internal practices thatare still a far cry from democratic tenets[2].But it is also appealing to find that, eventhough unions in countries such as Nigeria,Ghana, Burkina Faso, and Benin had wel-comed dictatorial (military) regimes whichhad dislodged democratic civilian govern-ments, those unions have continued to sup-port the clamour for the installation of viabledemocratic governance[3].

Our argument in this article is that thelarger environment of wage employmentand under-development in the post-inde-pendence African states, as well as the labourpolicies that have been in vogue, have, onthe whole, restricted the role of trade unions

@ Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996, 108 Cowley Road, Oxford OX4 lJF, UK and 238 Main St., Cambridge, M A 02142, USA.38 Industrial Relations Journal


2/12

in the development process. This argumentis generally articulated across the entire arti-cle but especially amplified in the ensuingcontexts of the employment and labour mar-ket conditions in Africa, and also in ourdescription of the frameworks of economicdevelopment and political governance inthese states. However, some notable achieve-ments by African unions have been madeparticularly at the enterprise level. These areacknowledged and further discussed in thefinal section.Significantly, the current slow but gradualdiffusion of democratic values in Africa haspresented yet another opportunity forAfrican unions to contribute meaningfullyto development. Nevertheless, in the foresee-able future, perhaps the only feasible avenuefor these unions is through participation intripartite national institutions and bilateralnegotiations at the enterprise level, bothfor the promotion of democratisation andnational development.

Employment and conditions oflabour in AfricaIt is necessary to account for the structureof wage labour in Africa, although wageemployment itself engages a small pro-portion of the African labour force. Forexample, the aggregate labour force in Sub-Saharan Africa in 1995 constituted only some9% of the worlds total labour force byregion-a meagre growth differential of onepercentage point from the 8% ratio attainedin 1965. More specifically, in the context ofAfrican economies, the scope of the wageemployment sector remains largely urban-skewed-suggesting a widespread policyneglect of the traditional sector. Also, theassociated labour force relative to the eco-nomically-active population is small.Approximately, only about 15% of the labourforce is engaged in the formal, or so-calledmodem, economic sectors that comprisewage-paying non-agricultural private firmsand the public sector[4].The breakdown of international statisticslimits the quantum of wage employment asa proportion of total employment generallyin the poor, low-income countries of theworld to a relatively scanty 17.1/o, comparedto 57.470 in the middle-income countriesand 84.4% in the high-income countries[5].Since the majority of African countries isclassified as low-income, the overall status0 lackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996.

of wage employment in these countries canbe imagined.At this juncture, we note that data prob-lems are a part of the horrendous problemsof development generally in the developingcountries but particularly in Africa. Theinternational statistical authorities onemployment such as the ILO also acknow-ledge the various limitations of data quality,quantity, reliability and comparability thatare imposed by the local sources on mostAfrican countries and attributable to thedifficult conditions in the latter[6]. There-fore, for the purpose of this article, theinability to source complete time series dataon a number of these countries has restrictedour choice to the ones that are coherent andrelatively more longitudinal to allow for areasonable perception and meaningful dis-cussion of the exhibited trends for Africa.Table 1 shows a generalisable pattern forAfrica, in which wage employment-in spiteof its acknowledged limited scope-has pro-gressively declined generally from about themid-1980s in the selected countries. It shouldalso be noted that the various economicreform (or structural adjustment) pro-grammes took off in many of these countriesaround this period[7]. The nature of SAPSand their effects are discussed in the nextsection. Meanwhile, although in relativeterms, the trends in Botswana, Kenya,Malawi and Mauritius have definitelyincreased, some of the increases are onlymarginal (reflecting sluggish overall eco-nomic growth) and could be rendered mean-ingless in a developing country context withtypically high rates of total populationgrowth. Furthermore, as revealed in Table1, the data configuration for South Africabegan to dip as from 1990, and for Zim-babwe, from 1992. Thus, the overall pictureof the existing wage employment in Africais not a bright one. The accounting factorsfor this negative scenario, because of theirinter-linkages, will be collectively discussedlater in this section and further also inthe subsequent section on the economicenvironment.A further structural dimension of Africanwage employment is portrayed in Table 2.Again, the available data on the scale ofpaid employment in the broad sectors oflabour activity are incomplete and some-times non-existent for several countries[8].Therefore, some of the co un tie s that arepreviously represented in Table 1 areTransforming industrial relations in Africa 39


3/12

Table I: Trend data on wage employment in Africa for non-agricultural activities, 19841993-selected countries (thousands)CountryBotswanaBurundiCen. Afr. Rep.GhanaKenyaMalawiMauritiusNigerSouth AfricaZambiaZimbabwe

1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993104.7 112.8 125.2 144.6 163.0 168.9 202.6 216.1 221.4 -36.3 38.1 39.6 42.4 46.6 43.1 40.3 38.1 - -- 16.1 15.0 14.8 13.7 13.4 12.7 - - -394.5 407.9 374.4 362.3 279.7 196.7 - - - -884.0 933.5 972.1 1007.5 1039.6 1098.4 1139.3 1169.8 - -205.1 221.9 244.9 229.8 232.1 224.4 262.2 273.3 - -144.1 159.0 181.2 204.1 219.9 224.0 232.8 235.3 238.1 -19.7 21.5 24.0 25.3 23.7 26.2 23.2 22.1 - -5109.6 5036.4 5093.9 5197.7 5302.7 5333.9 5301.5 5191.8 5082.7 4950.5329.7 326.6 325.7 325.4 323.9 322.4 - - - -765.2 778.6 805.6 820.0 854.1 882.5 902.1 939.8 935.8 909.5

Source: International Labour Office, Yearbook of Labour Statistics, 1994, Geneva, pp. 360-362Table 2 : Trends in African wage employment as percentage of totalemployment, 1982-1993

Wage employment (as OO of total)1982-87 1988-93 1982-87 1988-93Country Agriculture Non- Agriculture

Algeria 36Botswana -Central African -RepublicEgypt 46Ghana 5Liberia 8Mauritius -Morocco -South Africa -Tunisia 37Nigeria 7

-291

27--78799336-

8493*-783441--4378-

-894382--868033*9278

*=1981-86 Statistict =1987-92 StatisticSource: ILO, World Labour Report 1994, Geneva, p. 104 and ILO,World Labour Report 1995, Geneva, p. 112

missing from Table 2, thus limiting compar-ability across this dimension. Nevertheless,in addition to Botswana, Central AfricanRepublic, Ghana, Mauritius and South Africathat are also represented in Table 2-becausedata exist for them on wage employment aspercentage of total employment, six othercountries for which similar data exist arefeatured.Further on Table 2, it is clear that, withthe rare exceptions of Mauritius, Morocco

and South Africa (the latter, particularly,with a history of high settler activity inplantation or commercial agriculture), agri-culture (and, hence, the traditional sector)has not been a prime contributor to wageemployment in most of Africa. On the otherhand, wage employment in the modem(non-agricultural) sector has been the norm.At either extreme, it had accounted for atleast 33% of non-agricultural wage employ-ment in Nigeria for the 1987-1992 period or40 Industrial Relations Journal 0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1946.


4/12

34% in Ghana for 1982-87, as well as up to92% in South Africa for the 1988-93 periodor 93% in Botswana for 1981-86[9].Nevertheless, the general picture ofAfrican wage employment as portrayed inTable 2 is that, not only is the desired growthof this form of employment practically stag-nant, the generality of these economies isinflexible-to the extent that a potentialengine of growth for job expansion in Africa,such as the agricultural sector, has beenmostly neglected as a fall-out of largelyasymmetric public policy. The historical andcontemporary variables that are associatedwith this predicament and which furtherhinder the growth of the African economiesare explained in the discussions in respectof Tables 3 and 4 in the subsequent section.But, there has also been a parallel develop-

Table 4: Average annual percentage grow th ofthe GDP for other African countries in themiddle-income group as compared to globalreference group, 1970-1993Country or Income AreaAlgeria 4.6 2 .1Botswana 14.5 9.6Cameroon 8 .0 0.0Congo 5.8 2.7Gabon 9.0 1 .2Mauritius 6.8 6 .0Morocco 5.6 3.7Senegal 2 .3 2.8South Africa 3.2 0.9Tunisia 6.8 3.7All middle-incomeeconomies 5.5w 2.lw

1970-80 1980-93

Table 3: Country-wide profile of annualaverage percentage gr ow fh of the G D P forAfrica in the low-income group a s comparedto global reference group, 1970-1993

Source: The World Bank, World DevelopmentReport 1995, New York, Oxford UniversityPress, 1995, pp. 164-5~~

Country or Region 1970-80 1980-93BeninBurkina FasoBurundiCentral African RepublicCBte dIvoireGambiaGhanaGuineaGuinea BissauKenyaLesothoMalawiMaliNigerNigeriaSierra LeoneTanzaniaTogoZambiaZimbabweSub-Saharan Africa(excluding South Africa)All low-income economies,excl. China and India

2.24.43.12.46.84.5-0.12.46.48.65.84.70.64.61.63.04.01.41.6

3 . 8 ~4.3w

-2.73.73.61.00 .12 .43.53.74.83.85.53.01.9

-0.62.71.13.60.70.92 .71 . 6 ~5.7w

w =weighted averageSource: The World Bank, World DevelopmentReport 1995, Washington D.C.: OxfordUniversity Press, 1995, pp. 164-5

ment of the informal sector or, stated differ-ently, a growing informalisation of employ-ment in the African countries. The informalsector exists as an agglomeration of smallbusinesses and disparate non-agriculturalactivities usually found in the urban areas-and a dominant source of employment inthese countries[lO].Throughout the 1980s and the presentdecade, the informal sector has become theemployment source of last resort for theunemployed persons in Africa. Most peoplewho lost their jobs due to contractions inthe modem sector have been absorbed in theexpansive informal sector. This also explainswhy open unemployment, particularly inthe urban areas, tends to be low in mostAfrican countries. And, obviously, theseinsights into the structure of wage employ-ment in the African countries have meaningin terms of our understanding of the magni-tude of the problems of industrial relationsin the region and the enormous prospectsof harnessing the vast human resources inthe informal sector for the purpose of tradeunion organisation[ll].Be that as it may, the unionisation ofAfrican labour has marked another epochin the historical chain of events that havebeen associated with the development ofwage employment in the continent. This

0 lackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996 Transforming industrial relations in Africa 41


5/12

is particularly so when labour unions ascollectivities are veritable institutions thathave tended to survive political parties.Hence, their importance even in the contextof African industrial relations cannot beover-emphasised. Perhaps, the demands ofthe modem work method and the imbalanceof the structure of work relationships thatgenerate inequalities in the terms of indus-trial relations have variously providedrational explanations for the origin andgrowth of labour unions in Africa.Arising from this overall historical devel-opment has also been the fact of the associ-ation of the early African trade unions withpolitical action alongside with the nationalistand pro-independence movements. Thus, ithappened that the rise in labour unionismwas aided and promoted by the nationaliststruggle for independence from colonialhegemony. But, it should also be noted thatthere was an international pattern to thisdevelopment in the sense that examples ofsimilar action were found also in LatinAmerica, China, Asia, France and Portu-ga1[12]. Nevertheless, there was a recurringtheme in that, in their struggle for politicalindependence from the various colonialpowers, the various nationalist movementscollaborated with the emerging trade unionsin this struggle. Therefore, in Africa gener-ally, labour unions provided a majorresource that broadened the base of anti-colonial sentiments[l3].However, it is worthy of note that the post-independence experience of African labourunions with the new national governmentsdid not necessarily reflect the level of inter-action and rapport of the nationalism era.In fact, not only was the assumption ofunions that political independence wouldautomatically bring about the economicupliftment of the working class erroneous,post-independence relations between tradeunions and the new African governmentssoon became strained and the former beganto suffer from fascist and repressive actionsof the latter[l4].Thus, the 'liberalised union freedoms andstrike rights' which the unions had enjoyedup to the dawn of independence did notlast in most states. The various unions hadthereafter suffered repression from theirAfricn governments who appeared to haveperceived the former as competitors andadversaries. Hence, the emerging govern-ments exerted strong legal, administrative

policies and regulatory measures on theseunions in order to literally 'clip their wings'and neutralise the potent threats that theyappeared to constitute to their newregimes[l5].Besides, it is also necessary to understandthe general state of development of labourunions to date in Africa. For example, therehas been the observation of a general linkbetween the relative level of socio-economicdevelopment of African nat ions and thedegree of unionisation or workers organis-ation. Thus, specific case situations havebeen cited, such as Tanzania where there isa high level of unionisation and wherethe state has promoted rural trade unions,compared to many other countries with cor-respondingly low levels of union organi-sation. In addition, it has been observedthat isolated cases exist of state interventionin the internal affairs of the trade unionmovement. Some of these are Egypt, Ethi-opia, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania and Zam-bia[l6].Furthermore, for most parts of Africa theorganisable labour pool even in the largeenterprises is still relatively small, given thelevel of industrialisation and when com-pared to total national populations[l7]. Aspreviously noted, there exists in the Africanregion a vast informal sector where unioni-sation is more difficult.

The environment of economicunderdevelopmentThe different conditions of the African eco-nomies also warrant a focus in order toappreciate how the economic and politicalenvironments impact on trade unions andtheir role in social and economic develop-ment. Beginning from the 1970s, a downwardtrend had been associated with the growthof the African economies. Table 3 below isprovided to illustrate the declining trend inthe economies of Africa.The data compare low-income, Sub-Saharan, African countries across two broadtime periods. Thus, it is noted that, inthe latter decade, countries such as Benin,Burundi, Ghana, Guinea-Bissau, Tanzaniaand Zimbabwe have shown comparativelyhigher average rates of growth than thegroup weighted average for the entire region.Yet, the longitudinal trend for Sub-SaharanAfrica from 1980 through 1993 has generallydeclined. This is further evident from the

42 industrial Relations journal 0 lackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996.


6/12

composite data on all low-income economies(excluding China and India) which exhibiteda modest positive average growth in thesame period-and, by implication, depictinghow worse off the African sub region hasbeen.If the dismal picture of Table 3 above isattributed mainly to the peculiar impover-ishment of these low-income economies, anaccount of the middle-income economies ofAfrica for the same period in Table 4, below,still does not project an average growthtrend. Although, for the 1980-93 broad per-iod, several countries such as Algeria, Bots-wana, Congo, Mauritius, Morocco, Senegaland Tunisia had equated or exceeded thegroup weighted average for all middle-income economies in the world, it is clearthat, from 1980, the overall trend in Africahas also been one of protracted decline.The bottom line is that the overall deterio-ration of economic performance, as por-trayed by Tables 3 and 4, has adverselyaffected the standard of living and qualityof life in the African countries, as well asaggravated the unemployment problem inthe region both in structure and magni-tude[ 181.It is also necessary to point out that thepresent economic problem in Africa, whichhas been regarded as a crisis[l9], is attri-buted to both internal and external factors.The internal factors derive from structuralconstraints that evolved from historical cir-cumstances, and from the physical environ-ment[20]. Relatedly, the poor performanceof investment in critical sectors, made worseby ill-advised financial, economic and socialmeasures, particularly with regard to agricul-tural pricing policy, investment strategy,choice of technology, exploitation and useof human resources, and the participationof the general public and the social partners,have aggravated the economic problem[21].Furthermore, the frequent absence of clearpolicies makes a fair and timely evaluationof management and planning strategies ofpast years difficult.Two external factors have negatively affec-ted the economic prospects of African coun-tries since the 1970s. These are natural disas-ters, mainly drought and famine, and thevulnerability of virtually all countries toexternal shocks. The drought that hit manyAfrican countries in the late 1970s and early1980s, as well as their persistence coupledwith occasional floods and widespread civil

wars, such as in Sudan and Zaire, or themenace of inter-ethnic conflict as in Rwanda,have variously exacerbated the problem oflow level agricultural output in theregion[22]. Although considerable variationsexist in the effect of natural disasters on theagricultural sector, most African countriessuffer from low levels of agricultural pro-duction and productivity due mainly tounder-investment, technological backward-ness, insufficient and inefficient productionmethods, and inadequate agrarian andextension policies[23].Additionally, much of the economic crisisin Africa is attributable to international com-merce and financial forces. Virtually allAfrican countries have experienced adversebalance of payments difficulties for variousreasons, such as soaring oil prices for theoil-importing nations or sharp declines inprices for the main exporters, a declinein world trade in primary commodity andsevere terms-of-trade losses and, therefore,equally serious current account deficits.These problems have been exacerbated bythe severe debt problem faced by the variouscountries. Since the 1980s and 1990s, manyAfrican countries have been expending ahigh proportion of their export earnings ondebt-servicing. As an illustration, Africasdebt had risen from $189.0 billion in 1985to $299.7 billion in 1992. Examples of suchhighly indebted countries are Malawi, Niger,Nigeria and Zambia[24]. Therefore, it is clearthat such unsatisfactory economic relation-ship between poor countries and the indus-trialised economies actually hampers devel-opment in the former, as considerable timeand resources are dissipated on debt man-agement rather than economic and socialdevelopment.So far, the discussions in this article havealso addressed the implication of the eco-nomic decline on employment and hencetrade unions. Thus, the size of employmentin Africa has been largely dependent on theperformance of the economies, and, giventheir nature, employment has fallen dramati-cally in most countries. There are generallytwo main sources of the reduction in employ-ment. The first is the reduction in outputdue to a shortage of inputs, itself dependenton foreign exchange earnings. Conse-quently, massive redundancies have takenplace. From the 1970s to the present, thesituation experiences of CBte dIvoire, Zam-bia and Zimbabwe are exemplary.



7/12

The second reason for the reduction inemployment has been the drastic cut ingovernment expenditure, due primarily to afall in revenue. Not only has the decline ingovernment revenue affected employmentopportunities in some parts of the privatesector, such as the construction industry, ithas adversely affected public sector employ-ment since, in African countries, the govern-ment is still the single largest employer ofmodem sector labour. It is also important tonote that the adjustment policies, includingprivatisation in the various countries, havenot brought short-term relief to labour as,in practically all cases, the policies tend toreduce the number of job opportunities inboth sectors of the economies and triggersteep decline in the standard of living.Hence, the decline in employment has oftencreated tension and acrimony among thesocial partners in industrial relations.

The logical policy response on the part ofthe governments of those African countrieshas been to explore the stemming of theunfavourable economic decline through theadoption of structural adjustment pro-grammes, often initiated by internationallending institutions. Suffice to say thatdespite the differences in the nature andmagnitude of the problems facing each coun-try, adjustment programmes have generallyhad the following objectives: to reduce bal-ance of payment deficits, eg. through over-valued exchange rates, trade and economicliberalisation, and rationalise the public sec-tor[25].Conclusions on the impact of adjustmentmeasures are subjects of debate, but theevidence available points to the fact that, in

most countries, quite apart from its negativesocial impact with regard to deterioratingstandard of living, adjustment measureshave resulted in shifts in the labour market,marked declines in job opportunities andrising unemployment[26]. As might beexpected, the contraction in employment hashad adverse effects on the organisationalstrategies of trade unions, as the loss inmembership and union income has crippledtheir effectiveness. Additionally, in severalAfrican countries, trade union rights havebeen severely curtailed while union leadersare often harassed and detained.

Labour and the developmentprocessAgainst this complex backdrop of unfavour-able economic environment, the role of lab-our in development can be discussed. Pre-vious studies on the role of unions in thedeveloping countries have generally focusedon the misleading dichotomy between thenarrow, self-serving interests of unions andtheir role in the development process. Theargument has been that, bearing in mindthat the purpose of trade unions is to defendand improve the wages and working con-ditions of their members, unions invariablymust concentrate on the narrow job interestsof their membership.One of such perspectives is by Kindleberg,who claimed that to assign other roles tounions would turn them into overseers, andin the process undermine their appeal toworkers[27]. Yet, it has also been arguedthat trade unions in the developing countriesshould subordinate self-interests to national(development) interests. In other words,unions in these countries should play, ifonly in the course of development, rolesdifferent from those they were foundedto serve. According to Schweinitz, thisapproach to labour is bound to emerge sincethe ideological and economic environment inthe less-developed countries (LDCs) makesthis form of state-union relations and controlof the latter inevitable[28].Although this debate is an old one, itremains essentially inconclusive. Moreimportantly, the issues for debate are noless relevant in the 1990s because they con-cern how trade unions can effectively partici-pate in economic recovery and nationaldevelopment for meaningful integration intothe apparently global economy and inter-national economic relations of the 1990s andbeyond.The first argument is misleading whenconsidered from the perspective of thedeveloping world, for it presents too narrowa view of what trade unions are. The incom-patibility between the sectoral interests ofworkers and national interests is generallyexaggerated. In the same vein, the secondview is erroneous because it assigns tounions roles that appear to contradict theobjectives behind their formation. This view,as defined usually by political elites, seesthe unions as governmental agencies in theexecution of national development pro-

44 lndusfrial Relations Journal 0 lackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996.


8/12

grammes. Unavoidably, union members'interests are subordinated to those of poli-tical parties or, as is commonly argued, tosocietal interests of nation-building[29].Be that as it may, the main reason whytrade unions are encouraged to play a majorrole in economic development appears fairlyobvious. For the structural reason that manyof the developing countries depend heavilyon a small, although crucial, industrial sector,the role of industrial workers, especiallywhen they are organised, in the growth ofthat sector is very important. A little strikeaction can have a boomerang effect on theeconomy as production is lost and this candiscourage investment. Similarly, the actionsof the organised workers indirectly affectthe conditions of the unorganised positively,as any benefits received by union membersoften provide a basis for the treatment ofthe unorganised, subsistence sector and ruralworkers.On the other hand, the actions of tradeunions in the articulation of their sectoralinterests have been adduced for the growingdifferentials between the organised and theunorganised workers[30]. Thus, in eithercase, trade union activities, particularly asregards the advancement of the economicinterests of their members, affect develop-ment.In the view of Bates, the concern foreconomic development and social justicedemands high productivity and restraint onwages, plus an equitable distribution ofnational wealth and resources. In seeking toachieve these objectives, the activities oftrade unions must be reconciled with theimperatives of economic development[31].Nevertheless, Damachi[32] has argued thatattempts by many developing African coun-tries to achieve the above objectives throughsubordination or co-optation of unions arequestionable. He suggests that many Africanleaders experience anxiety about the rightof trade unions to operate as independentinstitutions. That is to say, primarily forreasons of political expediency, many poli-tical leaders prefer to control trade unionpower so that the latter do not threaten thepolitical stability of the ruling elites[33].From the foregoing, two broad operationalapproaches to the relationship between thestate/party and trade unions can be dis-cerned. At one end of the spectrum arecountries in which a partnership relation-ship between unions and the partylgovern-

ment is emphasised, the former being calledupon to pursue the sectoral interests of theirmembers in so far as these do not createobstacles to the development programmesof the state. Incidentally, the countries inthis category are strikingly few in Africa:post-independence Nigeria (mainly in the1960s and 1970s)' Sierra Leone, Zambia and,to a lesser extent, Kenya and post-indepen-dence Ghana under Busia, but excludingRawlings's military regime. These areexamples of countries that have emphasised,in varying degrees and contexts, the partner-ship relationship[34].The second type of union-state relation-ship, undoubtedly the common type inAfrican states today, is one that co-optslabour into the party/state framework. Co-optation, as used here, is defined as "apolitical structure which integrates organ-ised labour through a system of mutualinteraction at the leadership level and socialmobilisation and control at the mass level"[35]. This relationship has existed in Tan-zania, Botswana, Ghana under Nkrumah(1959-66), Nigeria (1985 to-date), and inpractically all the Francophone West Africanstates. In these countries, trade unions are,to use Galenson's words, "administrativearms of the state charged with the primaryresponsibility of maintaining discipline andfurthering productivity . . ."[36]. In this per-spective, trade unions operate within thelimits set by the state and, consequently,their influence to significantly improve theconditions of their members are severelyconstrained in many African countries.However, available evidence suggests thatthe consequences of union co-optation intothe state/party framework are not desirablefor the promotion of economic developmentsince such strategy detracts from the con-structive role of trade unions in the develop-ment process. Unions tend to lose theirmembers and their vitality the moment theyare denied the right to perform functionsthat appeal to their members. Furthermore,they lose their image as an effective sourceof social change in the society.It seems to us, therefore, that co-optationor subordination of unions in African statesfor the purpose of achieving economic devel-opment is not only a misconception of thepurpose of trade unions but that such poli-cies rely on the erroneous concept thatunions cannot participate effectively inthe development process and still remain

0 lackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996. Transf orming industrial relations in Afric a 45


9/12

independent institutions. We agree withFlanders that unions can and have transfor-med society by remaining doggedly confinedto their primary objectives and refusingto be captured and exploited by politicalparties[37].It is from the foregoing perspective thatwe can examine the argument for unionparticipation in politics in Africa. This argu-ment rests on the assumption that unionsbeing mass organisations are in a vantageposition to advance the interests of theworking class and thereby promote develop-ment. Such an argument looks attractive,particularly in the era of democratisation.Being democratic organisations themselves,the unions can, in principle, serve as formi-dable institutions for promoting democracyin the vast authoritarian terrain of Africa.Unfortunately, the evidence in virtuallyall African countries where this phenomenonhad been promoted or tested, is a painfulrealisation that union involvement in politicshas usually caused them self-destruction.Participation in politics has brought manyAfrican unions into disrepute and openconfrontation with the ruling elite. Moreimportantly, it has detracted from whatevergains might have been achieved throughresolutely confining themselves to industrialactivities.In Lesotho, for example, the unions'resolve to support a particular political partyled to the persecution of their leaders andultimately, to the demise of the labour move-ment[38]. Similar events occurred in Ghanaduring the Nkrumah and Busia regimes of1959-1966 and 1969-71 respectively[39]. Avery recent experience in Nigeria was theinvolvement of trade unions in the abortivedemocratisation process which has led to theultimate dismissal of pro-democracy unionleaders in 1994 by the military junta.Furthermore, in Zambia where the unionsplayed a key role in the election of theirformer leader, Mr Frederick Chiluba, asPresident of the country, the latter hasrecently taken legislative measures to under-mine the unity of the Zambian Congress ofTrade Unions. President Chiluba's suddendecision to ratify, without consultation,International Labour Conventions No. 87and 98 on freedom of association and theright to collective bargaining, has the under-tone of a ploy to weaken the powerfulorganisation which he himself had led tofight former President Kaunda for many

years.In any event, it should be noted thatin the particular conditions that prevail inAfrica, workers do not form a trade unionbecause they all share the same politicalview or ideology. As Fashoyin[40] has dem-onstrated, the fact that all the political partiesthat have been formed in Nigeria since the1950s on the platform of the working classhave failed to arouse the interest and com-mitment of workers is testimony to the claimthat, in Africa, unions-especially if theyvalue labour rights and self-governance-cannot successfully operate on a politicalparty basis in the foreseeable future.

The challenge of transformingindustrial relations in AfricaIt is well known that an industrial relationssystem is influenced by a country's eco-nomic, political and cultural environments.In Africa, as elsewhere, attempts by govern-ments to restructure their economies inresponse to the challenge of developmentand growth have brought about a myriadof economic systems. Though each economicsystem invariably introduces a peculiarindustrial relations framework, there arecontradictions or what has been referred toas "development dilemma"[41]. These havearisen partly as a result of the conflict ofideas, on the one hand, in terms of thepurposeful role and independence of tradeunions in the development process and, onthe other, the responsibility and commit-ment of governments to ensure rapid eco-nomic development within an atmosphereof industrial democracy and peace.The economic crisis that has been dis-cussed earlier in the article constitutes anenormous challenge to industrial relationsinstitutions for which the social partners areexpected to respond, not only to achievesectoral objectives but also to enable themplay a role in the task of economic recoveryand national development. This providesthe background for examining the nature ofthis challenge.It is significant that the problems of unem-ployment, low productivity, declining realwage and falling standard of living havebeen perhaps the most troublesome forAfrican workers. Consequently, trade unionsgenerally continue to lose their appeal toworkers especially as they are seen to beincapable of stemming the tide of unemploy-

46 Industrial Relations Journal 0 Blackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996.


10/12

ment. For the unions, the loss has been inboth ways: the changing composition ofthe labour force has meant a reduction inunionised employees, and consequently thefinancial resources of unions. Also, throughlegislative, administrative and coercive mea-sures, made ostensibly to give governmentsa free hand in dealing with intractable devel-opment problems, trade unions are beingmarginalised in national developmentefforts. This is in spite of the reality that thegoal of achieving rapid economic recovery,through higher productivity, national com-petitiveness in global markets, and improvedstandard of living is not a task that can beeffectively pursued with the exclusion oflabour.In the final analysis, the way out appearsto be clear. There is no doubt that the partiesin African industrial relations systems needto re-appraise themselves to appreciate theneed for their mutual coexistence. In parti-cular, any fruitful discussion of democracy,labour and development must recognise theoverriding influence of the economic andpolitical environment on union organisationand behaviour. It is however important tonote that the present problem of economicrecovery, compounded by unstable politicalstructures in these countries, does not pre-sent a promising outlook for extensive useof collective bargaining for sectoral gains inthe immediate future.Given this intimidating and hostileenvironment, the prospects for labours con-tribution to democracy and developmentin Africa would seem to derive from twointerrelated industrial relations structures.At the macro or national level, the pointcannot be overemphasised that the trans-formation of industrial relations in Africafor the promotion of democratic values andnational development ought to focus onthe reactivating of existing labour relationsstructures, or the creation of new ones wherethey do not exist, to allow for the unificationof the parties and their seemingly disparateinterests in a way that there is an embraceof tripartism and the achievement of socialconcertation in employment relationships. Itwould also imply the promotion of trilateralvalues such that labour, employers andgovernment will perceive the mutual bene-fits that are derivable from partnership, andthe fact that the interest and gains of asecond or third party do not necessarilynegate the aspirations and opportunities of

a first party. In the process, the status ofcollective bargaining will be enhanced inthe workplace as a further institutionalmechanism for the entrenchment of indus-trial democracy as an engine of positiveindustrial relations.Available evidence sugests that there isindeed a trend towards this development.Recently, the social partners and governmentin Kenya have renewed their commitmentto tripartite consultation on all issues ofdevelopment, including economic reforms,social and workers welfare[42]. Similardevelopment appears to be taking place inUganda where the partners have expresseda desire to return to tripartism.Undoubtedly the most encouraging caseis South Africa which has newly emergedfrom apartheid to a full representativegovernment. In that country, a fresh LabourRelations Act in which specific responsibilityis given to tripartite consultation is in theprocess of being enacted. In fact, the newtripartite organ created by government, theNational Economic Development and Lab-our Council (NEDLAC) has made animpressive start by successfully negotiatingsome aspects of the proposed legislation. Thetrend is becoming observable in a number ofAfrican countries. in such countries as Benin,Cameroon, Ghana, Congo, Tanzania etc.[43],the return to pluralistic democracy is takingplace also with positive effect on labourrelations at the enterprise level. Here, thepossibility of greater participation ofemployees at the company level can bedescribed as the outcome of a new mana-gerial strategy designed to deal with labourrelations matters as they affect individualorganisations.

Through joint bilateral effort, labour andmanagement at the enterprise level are effec-tively handling the challenge of increasedproductivity, efficiency and competi-tiveness. Also, employers and unions aredeveloping flexible approaches to the man-agement of human resources so that theycan address the problem of human resourceutilisation in the face of technological con-straints, declining non-labour inputs andlow productivity.In the public sector, governments are con-tinually faced with strikes and other formsof industrial action, declining revenue andthe need to reduce deficits. As employers oflabour, governments too can use exist-ing bilateral and tripartite institutions,0 lackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996. Transforming industrial relations in Africa 47


11/12

essentially for promoting participation andco-operation in the workplace, and for solv-ing the problems of low productivity,efficiency and declining revenue.

Industrialisation of the Third World, London:Zed Books Limited, 1988, p. 111.18. See Fashoyin, Tayo and Damachi, U. G., op .cit., pp. 47-48.19. See Ornanisation of African Uniw (OAU),

1.

2.3.

4.

5.6.7 .

8.9.

ReferencesMunck, R., Th e N e w International Labour Stud-ies: A n introduction, London: Zed Books Ltd.,1988, pp. 145-162.Ibid., p. 112.Kraus, J., Trade Unions and Democratisationin Africa, in Marian Doro (ed.), Africa Contem-porary Record 2989-90. New York: AfricanaPublishing, 1994, p. A70.See The World Bank, World DevelopmentReport 2995. New York: Oxford UniversityPress, Inc., 1995, pp. 9-11, 72-73.Ibid.See International Labour Office (ILO),Bulletinof Labour Statistics, 2995-2, Geneva, 1995,p. xi.International Labour Office/Jobs and SkillsProgramme for Africa (ILO/JASPA),AfricanEmployment Report 2992, Addis Ababa, 1993,ILO World Labour Repo rt 1994,and ILO, WorldLabour Report, 1995, Geneva.See ILO, World Labour Report 2994, p. 104;and ILO. World Labour Renort 2995. D.112.

p. 11.

Report zf the Secretary-General on th e Role ofthe Ministries of Labour in the lmplem entati onof t he Lagos Plan of A ct ion and Africas PriorityProgramme for Economic Recovery (2986-2990).Addis Ababa, April 1987.20. The World Bank, Accelerated Development inSub-Saharan Africa: A n Agenda for Act ion,Washington DC, 1981.21. ILO, Review and Evaluation of ILO Activitiesin Africa Including the Economic Crises in Africaand the Implementation of International LabourStandards, Geneva, 1986.22. The World Bank, Financing Adjustment withGrowth in Sub-Saharan Africa, 2986-90. Wash-ington DC 1986; and ILO/JASPA, op. cit.,p. x .23. OAU, op. cit .24. Fashoyin, Tayo and Damachi, U.G., op. cit.,p. 49; and ILOIJASPA, o p . cit., p. 6.25. See The World Bank, op . cit., pp. 15-24.26. Adepoju, A., The Impact of Structural Adjust-ment on the Population of Africa, London:Heinemann, 1993.27. Kindleberg, C. P., Economic Development,10. Fashoyin, Tayo Spatial anh Sectoral kattems New Yo& McGraw Hill, 1958.and Trends of the Unemployment Problem, 28. Schweintz, K. , Industrialisation, Labour Con-Proceedings of th e Ann ual Conference of the trol and Democracy, Economic Development

Nigerian Economic So ciety, Kaduna, May 13-17, and Cultural Change, 7, 1954, pp. 38-04.1986A. 29. Fashoyin, Tayo, Trade Unions and African11. Fashoyin, Tayo and Damachi, U. G., Indus- Development, International Studies of Manage-trial Relations for African Economic Recov- ment and Organisation, Summer 1986,ery , Nigerian Jour nal of Industrial Relations, pp. 59-60.Vol. 2, December 1988, pp. 56-57. 30. Fajana, O., Intra-industry Wage Differentialsin Nigeria, Journal of Developing Area , 9,1975,pp. 523-38.and Industrial Relations in Underdeveloped 31. Bates, R., Un ion , Parties and Political Deve lop-Countries, Ithaca: New York State School of ment , New Haven: Yale University Press,Industrial and Labour Relations, Come11 Uni- 1971, pp. 40-51.versity, 1963, p. 36; Ref. No. 13; Milen, B. H., 32. Damachi, U. G., The Role of Trade Unions inTh e Political Role of Labour in Developin g Co un - the Developm ent Process, wi th a Case Stu dy oftries, Washington D.C.: The Brookings Insti- Ghana. New York: Praeger, 1974.tution, 1963, pp. 54-63; Davies, I., African 33. Bates, R., op. ci f . ; Gertzel, G., Labour andTrade Unions. Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1966, the State: The Case of the Zambian Minech. 5; Yesufa, T. M., The State and Industrial Workers Union, Th e Journal of Comm onw ealthRelations in Ross, A. M. ed. Industrial and Com para tive Politics, 13,1975, pp. 290-304;Relations and Economic Development, London: and Gladstone, A., Trade Unions, GrowthMacmillan, pp. 104-5. and Development, Labour and Society, Vol. 5,14. Tokunboh, M. A., Labour Mo vem en t in Nigeria, No. 1, 1980, pp. 49-68.Lagos: Litramed, 1985, pp. 59-67.15. Kraus, J., op. cit., p. A54.16. Gabre, Michael Mesfin, The Role of TradeUnions and Employers Organisations in theSocial and Economic Development of Africa:An Overview, in Tayo Fashoyin, ed., lndus-trial Relations and African Development. NewDelhi: South Asian Publishers, 1992; Kraus,J., op. cit., p. A55.

12. Munck, R., op . cit., p. 108.13. All of the following: Friedland, W. H., Unions

34. Fashoyin, Tayo, op. cit., p. 61.35. Panitch, L., Trade Unions and the CapitalistState, New Lef t Review, 125, 1981, pp. 2543.36. Galenson, W ., Labour and Economic Develop-ment , New York: Wiley, 1962, p. 107.37. Flanders, A., Managem ent and Unions, London:Faber and Faber, 1970, p. 39.38. Ananaba, W., The Trade Union Movement inAfrica, London: C. Hurst and Company, 1979,17. Southall, R. (ed.), Trade Unions and the New pp . 89-101.

48 Industrial Relations Journal 0 lackwell Publishers Ltd. 1996.


12/12

39. Damachi, U. G . op. cit. in Africa. London: Macmillan, 1986,42 . ILO, Structural Adjustment, Labour Refationsand Productivity in Kenya. Labour-manage-ment Relations Series, Geneva, forthcoming

40. Fashoyin, Tayo, Industrial Relations and the pp. 117-118.Political Process in Nigeria. RS 69 . Geneva:International Institute for Labour Studies,1981.Development Dilemma' in Damachi, U.G.and H. D. Seibel (eds.), Management Problems

41. Damachi, U. G., 'Industrial Relations: A 1996.43, see LO/JASPA,op. tit,, p, 2,


Documents

Industrial Relations and Democracy