(FXI/IFEX) – The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) has written an open letter to the Royal Ascot Super Spar store in Cape Town to protest against the management’s decision to dismiss a worker, Vusi Sibeko, for writing an article that was critical of working conditions at the company. Apparently, the company dismissed Sibeko on the […]
(FXI/IFEX) – The Freedom of Expression Institute (FXI) has written an open letter to the Royal Ascot Super Spar store in Cape Town to protest against the management’s decision to dismiss a worker, Vusi Sibeko, for writing an article that was critical of working conditions at the company. Apparently, the company dismissed Sibeko on the grounds of misconduct, for “instilling a negative approach towards management through derogatory speech, and by making derogatory comments in a newspaper article.” The article was published in the newspaper of the Democratic Socialist Movement (DSM). Sibeko is a member of the DSM-linked Commercial, Services and Allied Workers’ Union (Cosawu).
In the letter, the FXI noted that it was deeply disturbed by the company’s decision to dismiss Sibeko, who was fired 17 November 2005. The FXI supported growing calls for Sibeko to be reinstated, and called on Spar to respect the freedom of expression of its workers. The Institute also pointed out that numerous avenues short of dismissal were available to the company if it felt aggrieved by the article, but it was disturbing to note that it had instead chosen to exact the ultimate punishment under labour law.
The FXI noted in the letter that the unjust decision would set an extremely negative precedent for freedom of expression at the shop-floor level. The FXI argued that the company had victimized Sibeko for exercising his constitutional right to freedom of expression.
Sibeko made numerous allegations in his article, including that the Spar store had not complied with minimum wage requirements for the retail sector – an especially serious allegation that demanded public exposure and debate. However, the company sought to stifle this debate, especially amongst Super Spar workers, a move that the FXI has interpreted as censorship. The FXI argued that by practicing censorship, the Spar brand had brought itself into disrepute, and that its management came across as petty, intolerant, and unreasonable. In fact, asserts the FXI, the dismissal decision puts Spar in far worse a light than if it were to have overlooked the article.
The letter further noted that, if unchallenged, the company’s dismissal of Sibeko would set a negative precedent for all workers in South Africa. Workers would feel unable to write articles critical of the companies that employ them, or to speak to the media about such matters, or even to publicize them within their own political organizations or trade unions, without fear of being dismissed. Workers have an inalienable right to raise public debate about their working conditions, and should be able to do so freely. An employment contract cannot be allowed to supersede these rights. This is especially so in the current climate of high unemployment and inequality in South Africa, where the conditions of workers are so fragile, and the corporate sector so powerful.
The FXI argued that that the dismissal also sent a negative message about the right of workers to engage in political speech and activity while in the employ of Spar. Workers in South Africa have fought an historic struggle to secure their right to participate in political organizations of their choice. Sibeko’s dismissal negates these hard-earned rights. Given the nature of the DSM’s publication, its contents would qualify as political speech. It is recognized internationally that political speech should receive the highest form of protection, precisely because, as a form of speech, it is generally under the greatest threat.
The FXI also noted its concern that Spar may be victimizing Sibeko because of the international exposure the case has received. Trade union members have a right to engage freely in activities that advance their collective interests, including international mobilizations, and for Spar’s management to hold his participation against Sibeko is unacceptable.
