Each
one of them, came forward with good intentions. The doctors had been on strike
for almost three months with no sign of an end in sight. So, they each came forward
with good intentions to mediate between the employer, the striking doctors'
union, and other stakeholders.
The
well intentioned mediators included: lawyers representing the Law Society of
Kenya, religious leaders, the human rights advocates, and the workers' union –
Central Organization of Trade Unions (COTU) - leaders. Each group took its turn
in the mediation efforts. In the end, the strike was ended by the intervention
of the court. By recognizing collective bargaining agreement (CBA) as the
logical, and the legal way forward with regard to the contentious remuneration
structure, the court finally brought to an end one of the longest strikes by
doctors in Kenya.
Rather
than entangle myself in the merits and demerits of the events as they
unraveled, I will "stick to my knitting" by confining my comments to
systemic and technical challenges that the mediators were up against.
First,
suffice it to say that the Salaries and Remuneration Commission (SRC) - an
intruder in the process - had pushed the envelope far beyond its boundaries,
thus creating confusion and unfavorable environment for any mediation efforts
to succeed. By recommending an untenable, and a baseless remuneration structure
for the medics, the SRC had introduced a new dimension that threatened to
circumvent a logical approach to resolving the standoff. None of the mediators
appeared knowledgeable enough about, or even considered, the SRC's delimitation
in the matter.
Second,
by adopting an ostrich approach, the employer had failed to take charge. By taking
'safe' refuge behind the SRC, the employer had abdicated his responsibility,
and the accountability that went with it. This action had failed the doctors
miserably. It was going to be a mammoth task to get the employer's head, out of
the sand. The mediators had no technical gears to enable them to perform this onerous
task successfully.
Third,
the media were of little help. They didn't appear to be able to disseminate and report accurately and fairly what was happening all the time the strike was on. But they kept the public informed about the
suffering that many patients, and those of kin, had to endure while the
doctors were on strike.
On
January 11, 2017, the media published the remuneration structure proposed by the
Ministry of Health, for the striking doctors. On March 7, 2017, a new structure
appeared, followed by another revision on March 9, 2017. As the public consumed the
new information, the hostility towards doctors increased. A perfect
"GIGO" situation had developed and was beginning to manifest itself
in the social media vitriol towards the doctors.
The
pace at which the successive remuneration structures were generated was
impressive. What was unimpressive were the salary curves generated from the proposed remuneration structures - quite disheartening!
Being
a smart lot, the doctors must have seen, or sensed that something was not right
– perhaps, even terribly wrong – technically. The remuneration structures made
little sense to, not just a competent job analyst, but even to a keen observer. The standoff continued.
On
their part, the mediators were, without a doubt, clueless
about the complex nature of structuring a sound remuneration system - one devoid of disparities and disputes. None of the mediators had the slightest
chance of succeeding navigating through a totally flawed system.
In
the end, the courts saved the day by upholding the CBA, as the best option,
under the circumstances. But, was this likely to be a lasting solution? Far
from it. As long as professional advice continued to be spurned, as long as the
public sector ignored advice to build capability in the relevant areas of
organization development, as long as the wrong interventions were applied to the public sector's remuneration structures, and as long as distortions
and disparities in remuneration structures persistently continued to be
exhibited in the sector, there could be no guaranteed end to the instability
and discontent within the sector.
Lastly,
until the SRC quits pushing the envelope beyond its boundaries, and
particularly into areas in which it has limited expertise, Kenyans will not have seen the last of the public sector's strike over pay.
Indeed, it will be a
pleasant surprise if the year 2017 ends without new battle fronts being drawn
over the implementation of some new pay structures. And yes, there will be
people with good intentions, willing to step forward and mediate, but,
unfortunately they will only be attempting to scratch on the surface of a deep
institutional problem, whose inner core they can hardly ever reach – and
perhaps not knowing that the surface they scratched, displayed only the
symptoms, while the inner core carried the ailment that needed the healing. Yes,
but tragically, so true.
