The Botswana Federation of Public Sector Unions (BOFEPUSU) has accused Government of refusing to go back to the bargaining table following a series of court battles.
On the other hand Government and the Botswana Public Employees Union (BOPEU) has accused, at court, the BOFEPUSU A.J.A of having not complied with Constitution of Public Service Bargaining Council (P.S.B.C) by not submitting membership numbers. As a result of the alleged non-compliance Government is also refusing to BOFEPUSU’s decision to accept a 3% salary increase offered by the employer last year – at salary negotiations for 2016/17.
At last week’s PSBC meeting BOFEPUSU had indicated that they have complied with Constitution of P.S.B.C as they have submitted the requested membership names, and such evidence was consequently produced. Despite BOFEPUSU’s arguments the Employer party declined to continue with the negotiations indicating that there must be a specific item on the agenda discussing the matter of non-compliance.
Explaining how his Federation has attempted to bring normalcy to the bargaining process, BOFEPUSU deputy secretary general, Ketlhalefile Motshegwa wrote: “In return for purpose of settling issues, progress at Bargaining Council, stability in civil service, BOFEPUSU wrote to Bargaining Council Secretary General and the Employer that there be a meeting to deal with the said allegations, a meeting at which BOFEPUSU will indicate clearly that they have complied.
This BOFEPUSU did to heed to the concerns and demands of Government. Surprisingly and shockingly now Government is refusing to go back to the Council for purpose of that meeting and item, and they are now saying the Permanent Secretaries and Directors who represent them at Council are busy. This is not truthful because Government representatives at Council are eight (8) and each have an alternative to attend when the substantive is not around. It is clear that Government does not want Bargaining Council to function, does not want negotiations and Collective Bargaining in Botswana. Government have many permanent secretaries and Directors to represent her.”
He said BOFEPUSU will announce a way forward on Monday should government hold on to its hard line stance of refusing to come to the bargaining table. “We encourage workers to remain strong and courageous because we are in the final stages of claiming the so much fought for victory,” he added. Meanwhile judgement has been reserved in a matter of where the Botswana Public Sector Union (BOPEU) had asked the Court of Appeal for a Stay of Execution of the Motswagole J judgement, ruling has been reserved following passionate submissions from representatives of the two parties, Botswana Federation of Public Sector Unions (BOFEPUSU) was represented by the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) president, Advocate Duma Boko while BOPEU was represented by Martin Dingake.
BOFEPUSU says it is protecting the Public Service Bargaining Council (PSBC) and the recognised bargaining process while BOPEU says it wants to protect the salaries of civil servants who were awarded 3 percent last year. According to Motshegwa, the motive and consequences of application of BOPEU and Government is destruction of Bargaining Council and giving Government absolute power over workers and rendering Trade Unions irrelevant. He said this is a great attack on Industrial Democracy and human rights.
HOW THE PARTIES GOT HERE
In October 2015, the Trade Union party BOFEPUSU A.J.A tabled a proposal of 13.5 % for purposes of 2016/17 salary negotiations. Government delayed to submit a counter proposal to Trade Union Party’s proposal. In April 2015, Government made a unilateral salary increment of 3 % outside the P.S.B.C. and the increment only awarded to non-unionised public servants. This brought sharp and deep divisions within the civil service.
The Trade Union party, BOFEPUSU approached High Court in an endeavour to protect the role and integrity of the P.S.B.C to ensure that it's functionality is entrenched. This was a path of principle to protect the Collective Bargaining power of workers, protect Trade Unions and Workers Rights. On the 2nd November 2016 Government tabled a 3 % proposal as counter proposal to the Trade Union party proposal for negotiations of 2016/17.
The meeting of 2016/17 salary negotiations started on the 8th November 2016, and adjourned when Government pulled out of the Bargaining Council indicating that they will not continue with negotiations when the scope of Bargaining Council is pending at Court. The Trade Unions tried without success to reason with Government representatives that the pending case does not imply stoppage of salary negotiations. Government representatives insisted on their rigid position and the negotiations stopped.
Judgment on the scope of Bargaining Council was delivered on 4th April 2017 where the Court declared the scope of Bargaining Council as that of all Public Servants and further setting aside the 3 % and 4% unilateral salary increment by Government which had violated the P.S.B.C. and Public Service Act. The Trade Union party wrote to the Chairperson of P.S.B.C requesting for convening of a continuation meeting of salary negotiations. The meeting was scheduled and subsequently held today 18th April 2017.
Motshegwa indicated that the Trade Union party pointed out that in the best interests of harmonious labour relations, peace and stability of the Country they would like to compromise and accept the 3% percent offer made by the employer. “The employer then refused saying they don't agree that Trade Unions should accept the employer’s offer and they pulled out of the Bargaining Council.
The employer motivated a position held by BOPEU that BOFEPUSU should not be in the Bargaining Council, a position BOPEU lost at Court in Francistown. This is clearly indicative of acts of collusion between BOPEU and Government. Prior to the negotiations meeting, BOPEU had indicated that negotiations will not proceed, and at Bargaining Council Government representatives behaved the way BOPEU had stated,” he said.
“The Minister of Presidential Affairs Eric Molale, Permanent Secretary to President Carter Morupisi have dismally failed the Public Service, have drastically failed the Nation and they are responsible for low productivity and division in the public service . They are great architects of instability in the Country due to their lack of leadership where they are required to provide it. In this scheming the D.P.S.M and Attorney General has been side-lined to the extent that now Government is using BOPEU lawyers and side-lining its own Attorney General. That means Government is paying twice, paying its own attorneys at Attorney General who are just spectators in these cases and paying BOPEU lawyers for service rendered to Government on consultancy.
It is clear that Government is trying to save BOPEU at the expense of the whole civil service and Trade Unions in Botswana. The question then is what has made BOPEU leadership and Minister of Presidential and P.S.P to unite towards destroying the civil service,” wrote Motshegwa in one of his posts on social media.
Motshegwa is of the view that BOFEPUSU has done all within its power to be reasonable, patriotic by compromising in the best interests of unity of civil service and stability of the Country. He called on Cabinet, BDP MPs, Councillors, structures to rise up as they are the ones in Government. He said if they (BDP) are not careful, the top civil servants who get paid even when they create this mess will cost them as a party and politicians because it is now clear in the eyes that ours is a stubborn, ruthless and unrepentant Government.
The P250 million National Petroleum Fund (NPF) saga that has been before court since 2017 seems to be losing its momentum with a high possibility of it being thrown out as defence lawyers unmask incompetency on the part of the Directorate of Public Prosecution (DPP).
The Gaborone High Court this week ruled that the decision by the State to prosecute Justice Zein Kebonang and his twin brother, Sadique Kebonang has been reviewed and set aside. The two brothers have now been cleared of the charges that where laid against them three years ago.
The United States (US) will on the 3rd of November 2020 chose between incumbent Donald Trump of the Republicans and former Vice President Joe Biden of the Democrats amid the coronavirus pandemics, which has affected how voting is conducted in the world’s biggest economy.
Trump (74) seeks re-election after trouncing Hillary Clinton in 2016, while Biden (77) is going for his first shot as Democratic nominee after previous unsuccessful spells.
US Presidents mostly succeed in their re-election bid, but there have been nine individuals who failed to garner a second term mandate, the latest being George W H. Bush, a Republican who served as the 41st US President between 1989 and 1993.
Dr Mark Rozell, a Dean of the School of Policy and Government at George Mason University in Arlington, Virginia describes the complex US electoral system that will deliver the winner at the 3rd November elections.
“The founders of our Republic de-centralised authority significantly in creating our constitutional system, which means that they gave an enormous amount of independent power and authority to State and local governments,” Dr Rozell told international media on Elections 2020 Virtual Reporting Tour.
Unlike parliamentary democracies, like Botswana the United States does not have all of the national government elected in one year. They do not have what is commonly called mandate elections where the entire federal government is elected all in one election cycle giving a “mandate” to a particular political party to lead, and instead US have what are called staggered elections, elections over time.
The two house Congress, members of the House of Representatives have two-year long terms of office. Every two years the entire House of Representatives is up for re-election, but senators serve for six years and one third of the Senate is elected every two years.
For this election cycle, US citizens will be electing the President and Vice
President, the entire House of Representatives and one third of the open or contested seats in the Senate, whereas two thirds are still fulfilling the remainder of their terms beyond this year.
An important facet of US electoral system to understand given the federalism nature of the republic, the US elect presidents State by State, therefore they do not have a national popular vote for the presidency.
“We have a national popular vote total that says that Hillary Clinton got three million more votes than Donald Trump or in Year 2000 that Al Gore got a half million more votes than George W. Bush, but we have what is called a State by State winner takes all system where each State is assigned a number of electors to our Electoral College and the candidate who wins the popular vote within each State takes 100 percent of the electors to the Electoral College,” explained Dr Rozell.
“And that is why mathematically, it is possible for someone to win the popular vote but lose the presidency.”
Dr Rozell indicated that in 2016, Hillary Clinton won very large popular majorities in some big population States like California, but the system allows a candidate to only have to win a State by one vote to win a 100 percent of its electors, the margin does not matter.
“Donald Trump won many more States by smaller margins, hence he got an Electoral College majority.”
Another interesting features by the way of US constitutional system, according to Dr Rozell, but extremely rare, is what is called the faithless elector.
“That’s the elector to the Electoral College who says, ‘I’m not going to vote the popular vote in my State, I think my State made a bad decision and I’m going to break with the popular vote,’’ Dr Rozell said.
“That’s constitutionally a very complicated matter in our federalism system because although the federal constitution says electors may exercise discretion, most States have passed State laws making it illegal for any elector to the Electoral College to break faith with the popular vote of that State, it is a criminal act that can be penalized if one is to do that. And we just had an important Supreme Court case that upheld the right of the states to impose and to enforce this restriction”
There are 538 electors at the Electoral College, 270 is the magic number, the candidate who gets 270 or more becomes President of the United States.
If however there are more candidates, and this happens extremely rarely, and a third candidate got some electors to the Electoral College denying the two major party candidates, either one getting a majority, nobody gets 270 or more, then the election goes to the House of Representatives and the House of Representatives votes among the top three vote getters as to who should be the next President.
“You’d have to go back to the early 19th century to have such a scenario, and that’s not going to happen this year unless there is a statistical oddity, which would be a perfect statistical tie of 269 to 269 which could happen but you can just imagine how incredibly unlikely that is,” stated Dr Rozell.
BLUE STATES vs RED STATES
Since the 2000 United States presidential election, red states and blue states have referred to states of the United States whose voters predominantly choose either the Republican Party (red) or Democratic Party (blue) presidential candidates.
Many states have populations that are so heavily concentrated in the Democratic party or the Republican party that there is really no competition in those states.
California is a heavily Democratic State, so is New York and Maryland. It is given that Joe Biden will win those states. Meanwhile Texas, Florida and Alabama are republicans. So, the candidates will spent no time campaigning in those states because it is already a given.
However there are swing states, where there is a competition between about five and 10 states total in each election cycle that make a difference, and that is where the candidates end up spending almost all of their time.
“So it ends up making a national contest for the presidency actually look like several state-wide contests with candidates spending a lot of time talking about State and local issues in those parts of the country,” said Dr Rozell.
High Commissioner of the Federal Government of Nigeria to Botswana, His Excellency Umar Zainab Salisu, has challenged President Dr Mokgweetsi Masisi to move swiftly and lobby Africa’s richest man, Nigerian Billionaire, Aliko Dangote to invest in Botswana.
Speaking during a meeting with President Masisi at Office of President on Thursday Zainab Salisu said Dangote has expressed massive interest in setting up billion dollar industries in Botswana. “We have a lot of investors who wish to come and invest in Botswana , when we look at Botswana we don’t see Botswana itself , but we are lured by its geographic location , being in the centre of Southern Africa presents a good opportunity for strategic penetration into other markets of the region,” said Salisu.