Service and Administration, Honourable Geraldine Fraser-Moleketi
13 April 2007
As part of the conciliation process, the employer and public service unions
met, under the leadership of the facilitator, to find an appropriate resolution
to the current stalemate. The parties met in Centurion over the past two
days.
The public sector unions are still demanding a one-year salary agreement
that entails a 12% general salary increase, the collapsing of salary levels one
and two, the revision of the percentages between the notches for pay
progression, an increase of the housing allowance for all public servants to
cover a bond of R300 000 and the alignment of the medical subsidy for all
employees, regardless of whether they are members of Government Employees
Medical Scheme (GEMS) or not. Note needs to be taken that the demands of labour
equate to approximately R198 billion for one year. This is unaffordable and
unsustainable as it doubles the current wage bill of government in one year. It
will also comprise other budgetary commitments of government in terms of
operational and infrastructure expenditure.
The employer has tabled a proposal, as part of the conciliation process
which is a package for the next four years, i.e. a multi-term agreement. The
employer is of the view that the multi-term agreement is the most efficient and
effective way to address public service challenges. It is beneficial for both
the employer and the employees. The multi-year agreement brings about stability
in the planning for personnel expenditure while ensuring the public servants
receive real wage increases over and above the general salary increase. It
therefore stabilises salary expectations in government.
In these negotiations, the employer has tabled a proposal that addresses the
following principles:
* general salary increases
* the attraction and retention of skill in the public service
* growing the capacity of the state through job creation.
To deal with issues of attracting and retaining skills in the public
service, this round of negotiations, the employer will be implementing the
occupation specific dispensation. This dispensation recognises experience,
improved competencies and rewards performance within occupations. It also
provides career pathing opportunities for public servants within the different
occupations. Public servants in identified occupations will receive substantial
salary increases through this dispensation. The employer has committed to
finalising and implementing this occupation specific dispensation throughout
the duration of this agreement for health professionals, educators and certain
legally qualified professionals in the justice sector.
In terms of improving medical subsidy for all public servants, the employer
is committed to promoting GEMS as a medical scheme for all public servants,
therefore labour's demand cannot be considered as it goes against the principle
of establishing the GEMS. Parties have signed an agreement to this effect
(Resolution 1 of 2006). Government envisages GEMS as a sole medical scheme for
all public servants.
Regarding the housing allowance, there is currently an agreement (Resolution
2 of 2004) that expires on 1 January 2009. The employer urges the parties to
allow for the full implementation of this agreement, while a joint review on
the matter is done, of which the recommendations will be subjected to
negotiations. The employer is committed to improving staffing numbers and
filling vacant funded posts in the public service. The employer is further
committed to ensuring that the public service grows in an efficient and
effective manner thereby improving service delivery in the public service.
The employer believes that the proposal it has tabled is prudent,
comprehensive, forward looking and paves the way for improving service delivery
and performance. It also addresses the challenges that are currently faced by
the public service. The package is therefore beneficial for both the employees
and the public service.
For more information, please contact:
Kenny Govender
Cell: 082 555 5834
Issued by: Department of Public Service and Administration
13 April 2007
