Apartheid

The Malta Independent

Apartheid

Apartheid may have been consigned to history in South Africa but in Malta it is alive and kicking.

The way different categories of workers are treated with regards to job security and redundancy provisions shows that de facto, if not de jure, not all Maltese are equal citizens.

Employees in the private sector are heavily exposed to redundancy risks.` The law provides no more than eight week notice period to redundant private sector employees even if they have 30 years of faithful and efficient service to their employer. Any additional compensation depends on the strength of the union representing the employees, if any, and on the financial position of the employer. The fact that the employer was forced to discharge employees through redundancy is itself indicative that the financial position is probably not at its best.

At the other end of the spectrum there are central government employees and employees of public bodies who either deliver a monopoly service or are some part of a regulatory organisation. These operate under scant controls of accountability and enjoy maximum job security.` In general their level of efficiency is inferior to that of the private sector, but,` if not in terms of salary level, their job provides superior quality of life conditions including summer half days, job security` and all.

Inefficiencies are hidden in government general recurrent expenditure budgets or in case of monopolist suppliers in excessive charges for delivering a monopoly service.

Somewhere in between these extremes there are employees of publicly owned commercial companies or` organisations who have to compete with the rest of the world to earn their living.` These would include the shipyards, Freeport, Air Malta, Maltacom etc.` When these organisations fail to achieve economic sustainability they seek financial support form the government through subsidies, loans, financial guarantees etc. These become all too evident and give rise to general level of discontent by general taxpayers even though their` financial drain is not as big or as permanent as that applicable, though less visible, to central government employees.

For this category of employees the redundancy `offer` comes with a four or five digit cheque and a veiled threat that unless accepted `voluntarily` there can be no guarantees.

As a taxpayer I can only say one thing: what a waste of resources. It is quite obvious that the redundancy cash offer will be accepted, if at all, only by the more able and skilled employees thus depriving the organisation from the very ingredients necessary for its revival.

The resources should be devoted to launch massive retraining programmes for all employees irrespective of who their employer happens to be. Retraining is an obligation of the whole society to all employees to provide them with the best prospects and security against redundancy. It produces mobility and flexibility so much necessary to keep our economic structures evergreen with new green shoots replacing the dried twigs. And in the interest of social justice retraining opportunities have to be offered to one and all and redundancy protection has to be harmonised to treat all Maltese as equal citizens.