Institutionalized Social Dialogue and Socio-Economic Development Tayo Fashoyin International Consultant on Labour Market Governance (Former Director in the ILO, Geneva) Presentation at a Tripartite Seminar in Bahamas July 16, 2015

2 Summary  Social dialogue is useful for achieving peaceful process of policy change through tripartite cooperation.  Social dialogue promote trust, cooperation and consensus building around key social and economic issues.  Mechanisms for tripartite consultation on labour and social and economic development are in place in most countries.  Institutionalized social dialogue is established through the legal framework or administrative directive.  There are two types, namely bipartite dialogue, and tripartite and tripartite plus dialogue.

3 Challenges  The willingness to consult, bargain or share information with social partners in meaningful and sustainable manner.  Narrowly defined mandate that restricts social dialogue institutions to “labour issues”, thus excluding key stakeholders.  Absence of clearly defined procedural route for approving decisions and their implementation.  Absence of clear organizational and technical support services to assure effective and sustained interest of the stakeholders.

4 Approaches to Institutionalized Social Dialogue  Most common is legal framework for tripartite or tripartite plus social dialogue. (Many countries in the developing world have followed this route.)  In few exceptions, institutionalization has been achieved through administrative directives.  The most assured approach is legally mandatory social dialogue at the national level.

5 Charateristics of SD Institutions  Most social dialogue institutions serve as advisory bodies to the Minister responsible for labour.  Examples exist across the developing economies, e.g. the TCLC of Zambia and Botswana’s LAB.  A few exceptions: negotiates agreements and makes decisions before ratification by government.  Examples are Nedlac of South Africa; CLC of Mozambique, and TNF of Zimbabwe.)

6 Benefits of Institionalized Social Dialogue  Provides incentives for social partners to channel their demands and grievances in an organized and peaceful manner.  Promotes trust among parties and assures cooperation in finding a common position or solution.  Demonstrates political will on part of government to consult, and promote good governance.

7 Mandate of SD Institutions  Varies, depending on the institutional framework.  Influences outcomes, merits and commitment of partners to social dialogue.  Across Africa, Asia and Latin America, mandate is specifically limited to labour market issues, including ILO matters.  Tendency to ignore the causal relationship with macroeconomic issues that shape the labour market.  In effect excludes the participation of other key stakeholders, e.g. Min of Finance, Econ. Dev., Industry, CSOs.  In such cases, the institution plays advisory functions.

8 Representation and Participation  Institutions are interest-based, made up of representative organizations.  Derives their legitimacy from the legal framework and constituent stakeholders.  Universal inclusion of the tripartite partners: government, employers and workers.  Most often includes other stakeholders. Particularly when it deals with socioeconomic and labour market issues.  Scope of participation influence outcomes, merits and sustainability of the process.

9 Administrative and Technical Support: The Secretariat  Generally lacking in most social dialogue frameworks.  However, a Secretariat is indispensable for information gathering, dissemination, reports, research, monitoring, implementation and follow-up.  Common practice is MoL to service SD institutions. In a growing number of cases, autonomous institutions are prescribed in the legal framework.  One notable example is South Africa’s Nedlac. It has a full-time secretariat.

10 The South African Model: Nedlac  Established by law, with clearly defined mandate; capacity to negotiate, make decisions which are referred to government or Parliament.  Participate in ’’economic decsion-making and social equity’’.  Reach consensus and conclude agreements on matters pertaining to social and economic policy.  An Executive (Management) Council.  Provides for a Secretariat that services the Executive Council.

11 The Nedlac Secretariat  Carry out investigations, conduct surveys and analysis of social and economic affairs.  Keep abreast of interntional developments, conducts research into social and economic policy.  Work in close cooperation with government, employers, trade unions and other bodies, NGOs, CSOs on social and economic policy.

12 Conclusions  Institutionalized social dialogue helps to resolve disruptive conflicts.  When faithfully pursued, social dialogue can bring about social partnership.  A means for labour market governance; contributes to good governance.  Can defuse resistance of vested interests towards national economic policy.  Assures well-defined and functional procedures for interest mediation, consensus-building, and a clear route for attaining approval and implementation.

13 THANK YOU