The Sunday Mail
While the debate on how best to curb the ever ballooning Government wage bill has raged on for a protracted period, the surging employment cost has not showed signs of relenting either and experts are urging the Government to explore voluntary retrenchment.
The Government workers’ establishment rose from about 315 000 in 2009 to about 554 000 in 2014, a development which has seen almost 80 percent of the national budget going to salaries and wages.
This has left Government with barely a billion dollars to fund capital projects, service debts and operations.
A number of solutions such as retrenchment, employment freeze, salary cuts and restrictions have, however, been put forward to remedy the situation.
Experts say of all the solutions proposed so far employment freeze and retrenchment look to be the most realistic at the moment.
With employment freeze doing little to help the situation, experts say Government should not be afraid to retrench.
This also comes after Finance Minister, Cde Patrick Chinamasa, announced that the Government will begin the process of retrenching thousands of workers this year.
Renowned legal expert Mr Terrence Hussein said retrenchment is not about victimising individuals and could be beneficial if done in line with the law.
“The first thing you do when retrenching is to identify duplicity in positions which can be occupied by fewer personnel than the ones currently occupying them. You identify positions and not individuals, so that should not be a scary thing to do for the Government,” he said.
“You then approach the individuals occupying those positions with the view of negotiating the exit package and the finer terms of retrenchment. Should the concerned parties refuse to comply, the law still allows for a compulsory retrenchment.”
Mr Hussein said while the exercise should be done with highly skilled people given its sensitivity, it is not meant to victimise individuals but eliminate redundancy.
His comments epitomise the reports of poor human resource management in Government with thousands of workers believed to be well over the retirement age, unqualified or earning beyond what they should be getting.
Commercial law expert, Mr Agmos Moyo, presenting a paper at a recent workshop said while retrenchment can reduce employment cost, there are special measures which can be taken to avoid retrenchment.
“The special measures (however) cannot be taken for a period exceeding 12 months. The two options are short time work and shift work,” he said.
“The employer has an obligation to consult the employees, workers committee, works council or employment council and agree to the special measures.
“The measures do not interrupt continuity of employment (section 12D (7) of the Labour Act). Employees cannot look for employment lest they be deemed to be repudiating their employment contracts.”
Research also shows that it may be too costly to retrench and the process may require external funding.
Economic analyst Mr Chris Chenga said in future Government should put in place measures that guard against absurd salaries and laxity in parastatals.
“I think this is another reason why we need performance-based contracts because we have people collecting huge amounts yet they are doing nothing. It is unfortunate because it affects even those who earn less when it comes to retrenchment and salary cuts,” he said.
“So it should be looked at to see what is considered for one to earn certain salaries and benefits.”
