Posts
There is an ugly cliché in this country that when negotiating
workers’ service conditions, the only language
governments understand is strike;
to legitimize that theory, workers’ unions
often wield strike as a weapon during negotiations. The reality, though, is
that unions tend to be strike-happy.
Industrial actions constantly have victims. Eleven years ago, I surveyed a
cross-section of polytechnic graduates – mostly 1980-2009 – in order to ascertain
their impression of the polytechnic system. Among the variables was what
hindered participants’ studies. To that question, all participants responded,
“teacher strikes”.
Anybody who was even slightly associated with the polytechnic
system in those decades would fully appreciate the sentiments of the graduates.
It became so bad that a cross-section of Ghanaians labelled the Polytechnic
Teachers’ Association of Ghana (POTAG) “strikers”; the Association actually
lost government favour. Therefore, at its Emergency National Congress in Cape
Coast in 2006, there was a consensus to reverse the reputation of POTAG. The
Association resolved to use dialogue, rather than strike, to negotiate
conditions of service and other professional matters. Apparently, we have
failed in that resolution, because in transitioning from POTAG to Technical
Universities Association of Ghana (TUTAG), the status quo has remained. Indeed,
old habits die hard.
The timing of the current strike raises grave ethical
questions about TUTAG’s position as academicians and major educational stakeholders.
A week after teaching began, the strike was announced. Many parents had gone
through extreme pains in order to raise funds for admission forms, tuition and
accommodation, to name these. A cross-section of self-sponsoring learners
shared the same stress in order to meet funding obligations, only to be slapped
with a sit-down strike after a week of lectures. A learner who belongs to the
second category lamented to a key media personality. The latter informed the
learner that POTAG/TUTAG relishes and thrives on strikes. The timing makes it
rather unethical to defend TUTAG.
A second ethical questions pertains to distracting stakeholders
from the business of implementing the double-track secondary education policy. The
new concept might change the face of secondary education. Successfully
implemented, the tertiary system would be a major beneficiary. In four years,
some products of the double-track system would enter technical university classrooms.
Logically, one would expect TUTAG to give full attention to the implementation
of the new policy, lend constructive input in order to ensure a successful
implementation of the policy, as well as add some needed quality to teaching/learning. Well-equipped
secondary graduates are an asset to the tertiary classroom. In fact, TUTAG has
an obligation. However, not only has it failed to monitor and contribute to the
implementation of the double-track initiative, but it is also distracting attention
from the implementation processes. Other serious ethical questions arise:
Should Government halt ongoing efforts in the double-track
implementation in order to attend to TUTAG migration
issues? Could the feet-dragging issue not have been effectively addressed in a
non-combatant manner? Could a few more months of tolerance not have been a
better option than this sit-down strike? Who really is at the receiving end of
this harsh pay-out, Government or the ordinary Ghanaian tax-payer, some of whom
also double as parents and learners?
Analysed through such questions, the strike assumes
layers of oppressive implications for the Ghanaian tax-payer such that it fails
to raise sympathy for TUTAG. Rather, it projects us as academicians who place
less stock on genuine intellectual development. Since others have rejected the
strike, who becomes collateral damage? Can the striking groups claim to have
honoured all the required conditions for the migration? The answer could
determine whether the action is hasty or compelling.
Making connections, another ethical question has to do
with the path being created for the growing generations in our homes, classrooms
and communities. If the message constantly being sent to them is that dialogue should
be despised in favour of combat during worker-government negotiations, what
leadership qualities would we be nurturing in them? And if they became leaders without
adept negotiation skills, how would they protect/advance domestic, community,
sectional, institutional, (inter)national interests? How would national key players
pursue established – or initiate – bi-lateral, multi-lateral relationships?
Above all, individual, community, (inter)national
issues are always interconnected in this world; an agency neglects such connections
to its own doom. It is time Ghanaians began to weigh the future implications of
present activities. Apparently, some generations failed to do so in the past
decades. Consequently, a cross-section of contemporary generations are so
bankrupt in community and national sense, unable to connect present to the
future. Yet, living for the present alone negates our very humanity.
Thus, TUTAG has major obligations to the contemporary
and future generations in reversing a national habit of dodging dialogue for
adversarial approaches when it comes to negotiations. Since university
classrooms are spaces for critical, analytical and reflective thinking
processes, they ought to champion the course in changing national thinking
order. Per their close links with industry and hands-on-training nature,
technical universities should be icons of synergy and dialogue, through
curricula and extra-curricular activities. It cannot afford to represent any
other sentiment.
Government will always be government and employer, so
it seeks to save as much money as it can, even as workers’ union seek to pry as
much money as it can from the government. That push and pull trajectory has never
converged through combat. Negotiating parties have always resorted to dialogue in
order to resolve sharp divisive issues. Yes, parties will attempt to stall
processes, for genuine and selfish reasons. There will be fulfilled and broken
promises. Some expectations will be met, whilst others will be dashed, all
inevitable outcomes of union negotiations. I am not an expert in trade issues;
my pragmatic sense tells me one thing only: Dialogue is, and will always be,
the best option. Over to you TUTAG!
