Power struggle between government and the teacher unions in South Africa

Abstract

The article under the title ‘Power Struggle between the Government and the Teacher Unions in South Africa in \nthe 2007 and 2010 Salary Negotiations sets out to show, inter alia, that there can be no doubt that the intention \nof the legislators and the policy makers was that the laws governing labour relationships between employers \nand employees should be harmonious so that conflict can be minimized in the places of work. After 17 years of \nfreedom South African schools are still experiencing disruptions as a result of the intertwined nature of politics, \neconomics and education. The status of education features aspects such as the underperformance of the \neducation system, abusive and violent learners, incompetent officials, unprofessional behaviors and inadequate \nresources. The opportunities for participation of educators in decision-making via their union representatives \nare weakened by the government’s strong central control of power and decision making approach. \nRepresentative democracy is more emphasized by government at the expense of participative and direct \ndemocracy. The researchers argue that the conflict (2007 and 2010 salary negotiations) came as a result of \neconomic discrimination of the workforce and not as a result of politics as alleged by government \nrepresentatives and the media\\newspapers. The article argues the issue of power struggle between government \nand union negotiators and comes to the conclusion that the status of public education has declined, poverty has \nincreased and political tactics have been used to blur the real problematic issues in the country during the 16 \nyears of freedom. The researchers are of the opinion that the government and the unions undermined the \nprocess of negotiations and either one or both of the parties negotiated in bad faith and undermined our fragile \ndemocracy. The parties did South Africa a disservice by negotiating for such a long period of time. This \nconclusion is followed by a number of recommendations, namely that, Educators’ affairs should be separated \nfrom the Public Service and Administration Ministry so that accountability should be vested with the Minister of \nEducation. The two centers of power (Ministry of Public Service and Administration and the Ministry of \nEducation) should be corrected if we need quality education in South African schools; there should be a \nrestriction in promoting the ideals of the market economy outside the realm of business; the advice Mahlangu \nand Pitose propose is for the government to abandon the economic theory of the invisible hand (someone – \nMinister of Public Service and Administration not directly involved with a sector but taking decision for a sector \n(Department of Basic Education) and develop a theory of social and political planning

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 14 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.