DPSM, Doctors’ union clash over allowance strike

Directorate of Public Service Management (DPSM) has filed with the Industrial Court an application to request the court to direct Botswana Doctors Union to order its members to end an alleged unlawful strike.

On 1st August 2023, the union issued a Press Release stating that medical and dental officers who are its members will cease to perform Emergency Call duties. The matter arose from issues of collective bargaining which the DPSM and the union together with the Ministry of Health have been engaged in negotiations on since the year 2022.

The Doctors' Emergency Call Allowance constituted part of the 2022/23 and 2023/24 negotiations which were concluded on 13 May 2022, when the Employer and the Unions agreed to defer the issue of Doctors' Emergency Call Allowance to a later date.

While the union argues that the Doctors Emergency Call Allowance is pending DPSM argues that as things stand, the only outstanding issues relating to the Doctors Emergency Call Allowance are: Doctors Emergency Call policy; Doctors Emergency Call duty contract; and Doctors Emergency Call duty roster/schedule for rest days at health facilities.

DPSM wants a Rule Nisi declaring the strike and/or industrial action by members of Botswana Doctors Union employed as Doctors under the Health Services enumerated as essential services to render essential services constitutes an unlawful strike and/or industrial action in breach of the Trade Disputes Act and is therefore an unlawful and unprotected strike and industrial action.

DPSM wants the court to interdict and restrain the union and its members employed in essential services and/or who render essential services who are currently on strike or industrial action from breaching the provisions of the Collective Agreements concluded between the union and the said members' employer (DPSM).

DPSM also wants the court to make an order directing and ordering the Respondent (union) to intervene and ensure that their members employed by the Applicant (DPSM) in essential services and/or who render essential services comply with the provisions of the Trade Disputes Act and the terms and conditions of their contracts of employment and/or Collective Agreements concluded between the said members' employer and the union.

DPSM Director Gaone Macholo stated in her affidavit that the parties agreed that fair labour relations are essential for the effective functioning of the Public Service. She said it was agreed that whilst their interests may differ, they will consult to resolve any difference or dispute which occurs and the parties agreed to deal with each other in good faith.

“The parties undertook to encourage their constituents to act in ways which develop trust; be participative in responding to challenges and work as partners to develop outcomes, which benefit all. It was agreed the parties shall negotiate in good faith and endeavour to reach mutually acceptable solutions to all disputes which may arise between them and they shall consult each other when they anticipate that disputes may arise.

“The parties agreed in term of Clause 13.3 of Public Service Act (PSA) to adopt specified procedures in an attempt to resolve all disputes which have arisen through negotiations,” Macholo argued.

The Director indicated that the parties agreed that they shall not cause, take part in or support any industrial action. In terms of Section 48(5) of the Trade Union and Employer Organisation Act (TUEOA), the Respondent is obliged to bargain with the employer in good faith in relation to inter alia remuneration and other terms and conditions of employment and employment benefits, she said.

Macholo avers that no employee in essential services shall take part in a strike according to Section 47(a) of the Trade Dispute Act (TDA). She added that an employee who wilfully breaches his or her contract of employment knowing or having reasonable cause to believe that the probable consequence of his or her doing so, either alone or in combination with others will be to deprive the public or any section of the public, either wholly or to a substantial extent, of an essential service or substantially to diminish the enjoyment of an essential service by the public or by any section of the public, commits an offence.