Guaranteeing employee safety reduces tension at workplace

By Kaliija Julius

trueEmployee motivation is the key to increasing labour productivity and it is directly proportional to employee safety at work.

Any astute observer can realize that the Ugandan labour sector is in turmoil unless policymakers, employers and employees work together to avert this dangerous trend.

Cases of employer-employee tension reported in the media are just a tip of the iceberg since other mistreated and injured employees are cowed into submission, summarily dismissed or quietly resign to protest incessant mistreatment by their employers.

Deliberate mistreatment of subordinates by managers at workplace is a major cause of employee disillusionment at work. Biased company policies may tacitly give leeway to arrogant senior managers to mistreat their subordinates with impunity. Disciplinary policies should mete out tough penalties for managers who deliberately intimidate and victimize employees. Occupational safety and health policies should also be meticulously designed to safeguard employees against all forms of injury in the course of their duties.

Human life is priceless and cannot be made up for, even by monetary compensations. Workers’ Compensation is globally enshrined in labour laws and Uganda is no exception. The Uganda Workers’ Compensation Act 2006 and the Employment Act 2006 clearly cite situations under which an employee is to be compensated in case of injury. Thus, employees demand compensation not to punish their employers but to ensure justice and fairness.

Referring to Kasim Ssuuna’s case against Mukwano Industries, Paul Busharizi  erroneously claims in his article in The New Vision of October 14, 2013 entitled Trade carefully on labour, management tension (sic) that ‘by taking the law into his own hands, Ssuuna threatens the viability of Mukwano Industries and puts hundreds more jobs at risk…’ It is spurious for him to insinuate that in essence, any employee protesting against mistreatment aims at ensuring the collapse of his employer’s company thus putting in jeopardy the job security of other employees in the company.

Paul Busharizi ignores the clear fact that by trying to circumvent the lawful resolution of the crisis, Mukwano Industries was threatening its own organisational cohesion and unknowingly demoralizing its hardworking employees. It is foolhardy for any employee to offer his best at such a workplace well aware that other employees who have (previously) been diligent in the same company or organisation have been neglected, ignored, overtly tortured or summarily dismissed after incurring life-threatening injuries at work.

An ideal employer must advise injured or aggrieved employees on proper procedures for seeking redress rather than waiting for employees to ‘take the law into their own hands’. Unfortunately, few employers willingly compensate employees injured in the course of duty or due to employer’s deliberate acts of malevolence towards employees. Most employers pray that injured or aggrieved employees drop or ignore unrequited demands for compensation and silently go back to work as if nothing happened. Threateningly gagging employees is unfair and contrary to labour laws. Employers are willing to shoulder the legal and financial burdens of injuries and their acts of violence against employees only when compelled. This is the main cause of labour-management tensions in most companies.

Employers should organize training programs for employees on how to identify, report, mitigate and respond to risks at work. The occupational safety goals, programs, policies, plans and procedures of companies need to be documented and shared with employees. Employers should ensure that employees who report cases of mistreatment, intimidation and harassment don’t face reprisal from their supervisors. The implementation of processes to handle injuries and grievances will make workplaces safer thus minimizing employer-employee tensions. This will motivate workers thereby increasing labour productivity.