Abstract
The nature of the limitations to the right to strike in essential and public services in the nine sub-regional countries of Southern Africa – South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, Swaziland, Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe – is examined in this contribution. While all of these countries share common influences and face common challenges, there appears to be a vast disparity in the approaches taken to the right to strike in public and essential services in the region. A brief overview of the demographics and labour markets in the countries under discussion is sketched, the salient features of the ILO's approach to strike in essential and public services is highlighted, and a broad overview of the contrasting and disparate approaches to essential and public services in the region is provided. The focus is, however, on the legislative approach taken to essential service employees in South Africa. It is concluded that – with the exception of South Africa and Namibia – the limitations to the right to strike of public sector employees exceed those endorsed by international conventions, and the broad definition of essential services generally relied upon effectively results in an outright ban of public sector strikes in the sub-region.
Highlights
From the early 1990s, major labour law reforms were implemented in Southern Africa
It is concluded that – with the exception of South Africa and Namibia – the limitations to the right to strike of public sector employees exceed those endorsed by international conventions, and the broad definition of essential services generally relied upon effectively results in an outright ban of public sector strikes in the sub-region
A similar approach is adopted in Namibia and Malawi. This analysis has shown that, with the exception of South Africa and Namibia, limitations to the right to strike of public sector employees in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) exceed those endorsed by international conventions
Summary
From the early 1990s, major labour law reforms were implemented in Southern Africa. These reforms were driven by the adoption of new national constitutions (some entrenching the right to strike), a desire to democratise the workplace, and trade liberalisation.[1]. This article examines the nature of the limitations to the right to strike in essential and public services in the nine sub-regional countries of Southern Africa: South Africa, Botswana, Lesotho, Namibia, Swaziland, Malawi, Mozambique, Zambia and Zimbabwe. While all of these countries share common influences and face common challenges posed by high. Unemployment rates, dire poverty, and bleak economic development, there appears to be a vast disparity in the approaches taken to the right to strike in public and essential services in the region Of these countries, only South Africa (and to a lesser extent Namibia) follow a more nuanced approach to strikes in essential services.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
