By Shadreck Zangairai
Deregulation of wages and salaries: – Before Neoliberalism, the Zimbabwean government used to determine minimum and maximum wages and salaries for each industry. Neoliberalism however advocated for free industry or enterprise based collective bargaining through NECs and Works Councils. This saw the removal of State Corporatist controls on wages. Collective bargaining structures tended to favour management whose salaries are individually negotiated and workers grew impatient which led to recording of more strikes and stay away in 1996. The major implication was that most Workers Committees and Trade Unions were not good in negotiating which saw salaries lagging behind the costs of commodities. The gap between most managers and employees kept on widening. Employers on the other hand were helped since they could pay workes based on productivity as opposed to a one size fits all approach. Income got eroded nearly every time affecting the worker’s purchasing power. Most employees left the Zimbabwean Companies for greener pastures mainly South Africa and Britain often referred to as the brain drain.
Decentralisation of disciplinary issues to the Works Council and NECs: – Neoliberalism decentralised disciplinary procedures to enterprises and industry with the individual Companies and industries being encouraged to formulate own Codes of Conduct for use in disciplinary hearings. The major implication was that those who authored most Codes did not understand the environment in which the Code would be used and most offences covered in various Codes left room for various interpretations. There were also notable cases of Codes of Conduct being implemented by untrained personnel and gross violation of the principle of natural justice. This impacted on the industrial climates.
Deregulation of the Labour Market: – Neoliberalism brought about labour flexibility. It saw labour laws being amended in the name of market flexibility. The major call for flexible labor markets, in particular the freedom of entrepreneurs to hire and fire workers at will and to reorganise work as needed; and, for some, the need for the free mobility of labor within and across countries. This weakened Trade Unions. Introduction of concepts such as commitment has seen the emergence of job creepers, individualism which eroded worker collectivism. Since 1990, a number of retrenchments have been happening, casualization of labour and colleges have been churning out graduates with low uptake of these graduates in industry. The keenly felt impacts of ESAP upon workers and their families led the 1990s to become ‘a decade of unprecedented industrial and social action’ to borrow Bond and Saunders’s assertion.
Deindustrialisation of the economy: – The cumulative impact of liberalism and economic crisis has led to serious poverty and hardship for the majority of the Zimbabwean population leading to the informalisation of the economy. The Zimbabwean economy has been deindustrialised and a new economy has been formed called small to medium enterprises (SMEs). These were formed in response to closure of companies, unemployment. Employees in this sector are largely non-unionised since recruitment based on nepotism since most SMEs are family entities. Other positions are filled with personnel recommended from friends whose conduct is mainly driven by need to keep good friendship. There has been harmony in some case since these are unitary institutions. According to Harvey (2007, Trade Union numbers have been on the decline mainly driven by informalisation of the economy.
Cutting of government subsidies: – The government removed subsidies on most basic commodities, including large cuts to the health and education budgets (McCandless 2011). This saw prices of commodities going up to unaffordable levels thereby giving rise to continued call for wage reviews in line with the inflationary thresholds. Workers began to push for other benefits such as medical aid cover, funeral cover and in some cases companies began to pay school fees benefits as part of salaries. Companies without these benefits remained with a challenge to retain key talent.
Deregulation of investment: – Neoliberalism penned doors to foreign direct investment. However, with the continued industrial unrest, investment in Zimbabwe did not increase as anticipated. The labour cost remained being viewed as much on the high. With a few companies operating, employees continued to feel like being taken for granted.
Deregulation of price controls: – Neoliberalism advocated for removal of price controls. This led to prices being subjected to market competition. With local industries competing with outside countries with different platforms altogether, local products became more dear from time to time prompting local people to go for cheap imports. This paralysed local industries thereby leading to organisations restructuring, reducing labour complements through retrenchment (Saunders 2001). In 2007 and 2008 when government instituted price controls led by Masimirembwa, shop shelves became empty and people survived on imports mainly from Botswana and South Africa.
Multiplicity of Trade Unions: – Neoliberalism has advocated for multiplicity of Unions in the name of Union democracy. This has divided employees and weakened their strength based on numbers (Gwisai 2009). To the employer, union democracy has brought a lot of work since there is need to deal with one union in deducting union dues etc.
Based on the above discussions, it can be widely accepted that the turn from paternalistic ideology by the Zimbabwean government to neo-liberalistic inferences had a lot of negative implications on employment relations than positive. I discussed the main implications of neoliberal corporatism on employment relations in the Zimbabwean context. Such inferences are still felt in today’s industry hence the continued industrial unrest which is unpronounced.
Disclaimer: Shadreck Zangairai is a Human Resources Practitioner, for feedback email:
shadreckzanga@gmail.com, +263772939877/713068365. The information contained herein does not serve as alternative to legal advice. The author do not accept any liability for any damages or losses suffered as a result of actions taken based on information contained herein.
