MBABANE CITY ISSUES NEVER CEASE TO AMAZE

Recently, I commented through this column about what appears to be an ongoing and endless conflict that does not seem to be focussed on the best on the best interests of the rates payers of the capital city.

That article drew overwhelming responses from the readers; some of them offering me extensive information to glean from and make informed comments on this issue. I am, therefore, highly indebted to all those who have taken the trouble to give me the information about the issue. The emerging developments are raising as many questions as possible as to how and why has this community found itself in this mess; which ministers appear to have so much interest in protecting the subject of this conflict.

address one or two issues

But before I go to the crux of this issue; kindly allow me to address just one or two issues whose revelation in the public domain has shocked many citizens of this country, especially those who were employees of some of the reputable textiles and apparel companies which were shut down. As a result thousands of our children lost their jobs with no means for survival after the closure of the companies.
On Tuesday, the Times of Swaziland carried a front page headline saying ‘Textile firm closes, 1115 lose jobs.’

That explains the gravity of this issue and one asks himself, ‘how many others will shutdown or be liquidated leaving hundreds of our children without any hope of ever getting any payments of their terminal benefits?
On this very sad day, one of the union leaders allegedly went on Facebook to insult me; accusing me of being a bogus human rights activists because I have been the one advising some if not all of the employers who found themselves having no choice but to shut down or be liquidated as we have seen both Langa Bricks and Spintex doing.

After all is said and done, I found it surprising that this particular trade unionist had been in the know about all these difficulties which finally forced these employers or companies to either choose liquidation or just shut  down until the markets improve so that they can resume  their operations .

This bogus unionist is a result of an alleged grave mistake made by the Labour Commissioner who registered it as a union under Section 27 of the Industrial Relations Act, 2000 (as amended),  instead of registering it under Section 41(1) of the same Act that talks about amalgamations. We are then paying a dear price for this grave mistake.

How I wish our children should choose unions or associations such as SUFIAW and SNAT, whose objectives are to improve the lives of their members instead of using them to push political agendas.
Now back to the theme of this weekend. This is my first article in a series which are coming on this subject not only for Mbabane but I would also tackle general subjects; showing how politicians, especially ministers, on their powers over rate payers in this country. But today, we are dealing with the case of Mbabane.

From the information at my disposal, the Chief Executive Officer joined the institution in 1990; not as a CEO but as the city’s engineer. Between 1994-1995, he then ascended to the position of CEO.

CONTRACT not renewed
There was nothing much that was written about him during this period until January 31, 2003 when his contract of employment was not renewed just as we are witnessing today.
He then took the matter to the Industrial Court on June 5, 2007 (Case N0.251/07) which he lost with costs in favour of Council on December 9, 2008. Among the many reasons he lost that case was that he had relied upon Section 116(1) of the Urban Act of 1969, which the Court found to be contrary to Part III of our National Constitution. But somehow, he found himself back on the seat once again.  It is reported that his stay this time was not the best - hence he then resigned, and as we all know, he went to join the Royal Swaziland Sugar Corporation where he worked for some time.
Next week we shall be looking at how he had then found himself in the same seat which he left quite unceremoniously! We shall also be looking and analyzing the role of the minister concerned in this case, asking the question, ‘what is his interest in this case? Is it in the best interests of the rate payers? And is the law he is quoting really constitutional? If not, why is he insisting on this officer against the Councillors?   What is really in it for him, and is it for him alone or for the collective interest of his Cabinet colleagues? Watch this space!

PEACE!

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: