Populist political rhetoric and labor protests in South Africa
Political demonstrations have the potential to be fatal as well as economically damaging. In South Africa, protests are becoming more violent rather than just happening more frequently. Due to its profusion of protests, South Africa has earned the moniker “the protest capital of the world.” Protests against labor broking and exorbitant tolls have been organized over the years by trade union federations including the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU). Protests are employed for several purposes, one of which is the provision of services. These protests are linked to large-scale movements, aim to completely stop economic activity, and frequently end in coercion, violence, and property damage.
South Africa’s Legal Framework for Labor Protests
Workers in democratic South Africa have increasingly turned to protest actions, such as stay-aways, to voice their disapproval of government policies since the 1980s and 1990s. The Industrial Court, however, ruled that these activities were illegal since they were not covered by the Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956. The 1956 LRA, on the other hand, defined and controlled strike action. The 1956 Labour Relations Act’s restrictive definition of “strike” was condemned by the International Labour Organization’s Fact-Finding and Conciliation Commission on Freedom of Association, which maintained that workers need to have the right to strike in opposition to the government’s social and economic policies.
The Republic of South Africa, 1996 Constitution, section 17, clearly states the right to peaceful and unarmed assembly, demonstration, picketing, and petitioning under the current democratic regime, and section 23(2)(c) grants employees the right to strike. Meetings, picketing, protest marches, and demonstrations intended to convey a shared viewpoint have all been construed as being under the definition of “assemble” in section 17. These constitutional provisions allow employees to utilize their economic power to support the demands that they have for themselves. The objectives of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 are to advance workplace democracy, social fairness, economic development, and labor peace. It accomplishes this, among other things, by giving workers and their organizations the freedom to stage protests.
Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act states that whereas protest actions center on the “socio-economic interests” of employees, strikes are centered on “matters of mutual interest” between employees and their employer. By influencing governmental decisions, protests give workers, their trade unions, and federations a bigger voice in society.
In a democratic South Africa, protesting is not a novel thing. Workers utilized a lot of stay-aways in the 1980s and 1990s to express their disapproval of government policy. The Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956, however, declared such activities unconstitutional since the Industrial Court was unwilling to protect them. In contrast to protests, strike action was defined and governed by the 1956 LRA. However, the 1956 LRA’s narrow definition of “strike” was criticized by the International Labour Organization’s (ILO) Fact-Finding and Conciliation Commission on Freedom of Association, which held that workers should be able to strike in opposition to the government’s social and economic policies.
The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, which established a democratic government, states unequivocally that everyone has the right to peacefully assemble, demonstrate, picket, and present petitions (Section 17), as well as the right to strike (Section 23(2)(c)). Section 17 of the Constitution’s definition of “assemble” has been construed to include gatherings, picketing, protest marches, and other public displays to voice a shared viewpoint. Employees can therefore utilize economic power to support their demands in light of these fundamental guarantees.
In addition, the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 states that its goals are “to advance social justice, labor peace, economic development, and workplace democracy.” This is accomplished, among other things, by granting the freedom to protest to workers and their organizations. As to the Labour Relations Act, Section 213 pertains to “matters of mutual interest” between the employer and employees, while protest action centers around the “socio-economic interests” of the employees. Protesting allows workers to have a bigger, more influential role in society through their trade unions and federations. Employees can impact societal policy decisions by participating in protests.
The freedom to protest is essential in a democracy such as South Africa. Protests are often the primary source of income for many families, but they can also negatively impact the economy and lead to job losses. Prolonged and violent protests have the potential to negatively impact several economic sectors, which can therefore result in poverty. Thus, the introduction of interest arbitration is required to address the problem of frequent and violent protests. The Labour Court has the authority to step in and put an end to a strike or picket, and interest arbitration can force parties to settle their differences. In Australia, if protracted strikes are perceived to be having a detrimental effect on the economy, the Fair Works Commission has the authority to call off industrial action. Through the addition of interest arbitration to the Labor Relations
Does SA’s Populist Political Rhetoric Add to the Fears of the Public?
Conversely, populism has a bad reputation and is typically connected to actions that defy established political conventions. Populist movements see politics as a conflict between the good people and the wicked elites, with the main objective being to represent the often poorly constructed popular will. They lack an objective and methodical investigation of clearly defined political issues. Studies have revealed that political parties in South Africa are fond of populism, with the EFF using populist language to an especially high degree. The Democratic Alliance (DA) and the African National Congress (ANC) speak less populist. Even while populist language is widely used in South African politics, the economy of the nation does not seem to be significantly impacted by it. Rather, populist and
All the same, there was a clear feeling of discontent among participants in the protests in South Africa. The impression of injustice and the moral outrage that follows being harmed are the main causes of this frustration. Identifying the person(s) responsible for a claimed injustice through cognitive processes is one way that frustration is expressed. When people realize that their government is unfairly preventing eligible people from taking advantage of career possibilities, they frequently experience a sense of unfairness. Nepotism and corruption are frequently the root causes of these kinds of grievances. It is considered an act of injustice when the government unjustly refuses to provide citizens with entitlements. Note that the feeling of injustice stems from the assignment of blame rather than the government’s inability to create jobs.
How Labor Protests Affect Economic Growth
It’s widely held that when a nation’s economy is stable and its resources are distributed among its people, people’s quality of life improves. But it gets challenging when exercising one or more of the rights enshrined in the constitution, like the right to protest, impedes economic growth. Businesses are impacted, as are workers and their families, and eventually the economy. If protests are followed by acts of violence that result in property damage and personal harm, the economy and society as a whole are put in greater jeopardy. For the economy of a growing nation such as South Africa, the length of the protest is problematic. Because they have caused property to be destroyed, protests are costly and disastrous.
Bongiwe Khumalo is a researcher and educator. She writes in her personal capacity.
