Internal Communication Forums

According to most of the Johannesburg and Witbank CSO and Supervisor Individual and Group participants, there are no known or available internal forums to communicate inefficiencies in the system when and if the immediate attempts of the different frontline participants through line management are not attended to. To support the above assertion, a Johannesburg Supervisor described a situation where many attempts were unsuccessful only

to have relief when the President’ mechanisms to attend to service delivery challenges are enlisted, “Listen, it’s escalated, and it’s escalated until there’s no escalation left. It’s a

problem and what I’m talking about it is things that happened.”

According to some Johannesburg Supervisors, the consultations that DoL senior management seem to engage staff on, are merely a ruse, a formality without commitment because the above participants believe that long before even that supposed official consultation, decisions affecting DoL staff have been taken in their absence. The above cited participants said, “We

had meetings with the Minister, with the DG… you know things were raised. But it seems like there were already decisions made. So what’s the use of giving contributions… They don’t listen to anybody that is nothing.” For instance, according to the above participants,

“Work-plans are being drafted, without the people dealing with the things themselves being

involved in drafting these work-plans as far as norms and standards are concerned... And they decide on these things. When it comes to us, we must implement or you must give input, but the input still not being considered.”

According to most of the Johannesburg and Witbank Individual and Johannesburg Group CSO participants, the line management protocol system that is in place in the DoL is not effective to address the work-related frustrations and violation of basic interrelations conduct of some Supervisors towards their junior frontline staff members. Some Johannesburg CSOs said, “Even as you go to the Manager, the Manager will say, ‘I’m not gonna listen to you.’

They don’t want to even listen. ‘I’m listening to my Supervisors...’; They’ve already taken a side...; You have not started to talk, you have not even opened your mouth. They say ‘I can see from your face. You are so arrogant’ You are already wrong... Isn’t it, they have already told her about you... that you are the one that chats back. You have a big mouth... So what will you say?”

According to some Johannesburg CSOs, the option of reporting the behaviour of Supervisors towards CSOs may actually attract the risk of victimisation of the participants, so they prefer to keep quiet, “The CSOs are always wrong... So, we choose I mean to keep quiet because

whether you report or not, the situation will remain the same. Or worse than before, because now you have reported the man so someone will be sitting on your neck.”

The assertions on the absence of forums and fear of victimisation were also cited by a Witbank CSO, “I feel that, maybe we are not given a platform to express how we, or maybe

we are scared some of us. That maybe if you express and then victimisation and stuff... that they will see as if this one knows too much and what not.” According to another Witbank

CSO, the fear to report or communicate matters of concern is not only confined to CSOs but even the Supervisors seem to be scared, “… is like when the other times the Supervisors

we’ve told them. You can see that they are scared they would say ehhhh, eeeehhh, you can see if they also are afraid, then we see that we should not talk.”

The protocol system of the DoL is ineffective even for Supervisors when they need a higher authority’s intervention to administer disciplinary processes, according to a Johannesburg Supervisor, “I think perhaps I could speak to ‘the authorities’ but I don’t know whether it’s

gonna help. I don’t really have faith in the system as such.”

Some of the Johannesburg CSOs cited the workers’ unions through shop steward representatives as one of the structures approached by the participants to address the unacceptable treatment the Johannesburg CSOs receive, “As we are members of Nehawu,

some are PSA. Some are this some are that, I’m not sure, I’m not sure but most of the times we try to talk to our reps…that our treatment in the office is not good. Sometimes you go to the Manager but you see a person still continues.” The Johannesburg CSOs discussed the

unions in this manner, “We haven’t communicated anything to them. They don’t know

anything… We don’t even know who to report to; I wanted to say that if unions are not involved by us, I mean, they won’t know, the problems that we are experiencing.”

The peak of frustrations and hurt, as the result of ongoing ill-treatment by the Supervisors sometimes, leave some CSOs in a desperate state according to a Johannesburg CSO, “…there

was time whereby we speak to the Labour Centre Manager, ‘so and so.’ Particular me, I end up crying in the meeting, make the Labour Centre Manager aware. That ‘‘so and so’, one day you will be surprised that police are here to collect one of the CSO because they’ve stabbed a Supervisor with a pen or has hurt the Supervisor or has done something because out of anger, you can retaliate take something hit you kill someone or you hurt them.”

The frustrations as a result of no avenue to vent and no hope to resolve long-standing and continuous service delivery challenges were expressed by some Johannesburg Supervisors, “I

have just cited one example neh, one of which is like Head Office is not doing what they are supposed to do for me to look at the needs of my clients. Now I’m frustrated because I’m in the middle. I’m waiting for an answer from them to give to the client. The client, I deal directly with the client. They don’t deal directly with the client. So I’m waiting for them for an answer. The client comes to me. The client fights with me. Who must I fight with? I’ve got nobody to fight with... You know some of us can still, can still keep that frustration to ourselves and try and ‘eish, you know, cant this client quickly move away before I explode but then you get some of us that just explode. You know, so, the outlet it’s either at home, it’s at the office with your colleagues or the public; I’m suggesting the pub.”

Another issue that was raised by a Johannesburg CSO is the ignorance of senior management about the state of operations on the frontline of DoL offices. According to the participant above, the sheer apathy of senior management result in them giving orders and instructions that are not practical, “…sometimes they expect us, things that we cannot do, we at ground

floor... we know it’s not going to work. But sometimes they are far, they are far there on third floor. Sometimes they will come down and say ‘hi, how are you’ and that sort of thing but normally, normally they stay there in their cocoons and they don’t really understand what we are going through on the ground floor.”

A Witbank participant said regarding what used to happen compared to the current situation to address service delivery challenges, “…there are no more meetings like before, where you

can be able to table these type of concerns and the challenges that we face. But previously I think it was better because we could meet... we discuss the workflow as to where the challenges arises... then come up with a better solution so that we can fast track the service... With the mind that maybe the BUM or the person in charge will table those things up.”

As far as the internal communication forums are concerned it was revealed that in Witbank, and especially in Johannesburg, how almost every shortcoming identified and experienced by the DoL frontline team yielded no forum within the DoL where issues could be constructively articulated in the right context. The DoL and ProductivitySA Key Informants stated that there were communication channels between the frontline staff and the Key Informants’ offices, although the approach would be different due to the different roles of the informants’ input into the study. In the DoL, according to the DoL Key Informant, the internal communication forums between Head Office and frontline staff rely on DoL circulars

and officials can in turn make use of the intranet to communicate with Head Office if they are not happy with the matter and unable to resolve it in their respective offices. The DoL Key Informant also seemed to espouse for an open-door policy preferences at an individual level. The researcher finds the latter, a dilemma because the role of the participant holds is exactly that, to create such needed forums for the DoL.

Therefore, the researcher believes that a system of communication of all hiccups in the system be put in place. Seppänen, Kosenen, Vanhala and Ellonen (2014), note that managerial communication and its forums, are crucial in developing a trust relationship and lines of communication within the workplace. This study found that such systems are lacking within the DoL, resulting in broken relationships and a lack of consultation. In a study conducted by Holland, Cooper, Pyman and Teicher (2012) of trust in management by employees when vocal communication lines existed, these authors found that the trust relationship increased, while a negative view of union vocal communication lines by management evidenced distrust in management.