Platform for Labour Action (PLA) is a National Civil Society Organization that was founded in the year 2000. PLA is focused on promoting and protecting the rights of vulnerable and marginalized workers through empowerment of communities and individuals in Uganda.
Lives impacted
years of service
By Betty Iyamuremye
Recently, the Ministry of Gender Labour and Social Development (MGLSD) took a bold bearing and cancelled the operations of three companies and suspended seven licenses of external labour recruitment agencies after having perpetually failed to meet the guidelines for externalisation of as aligned to the national legislative framework and the international labour and migration standards.
Rape figuratively refers to the sexual intercourse that is non-consensual (not agreed upon), or the act of forcing another person to have sex against their will and/or consent. While the names, times and contexts may differ, men, boys, women and girls of the different age divide across the world experience rape. This despondently happens in both the peaceful and violent settings and is overtly executed by strangers, friends and sometimes family members.
And whereas rape is shunned, unacceptable and regarded as one of the felony offences (those among the most serious crimes committed), multiple studies show that the media as well as the general public universally have continued to consciously or subconsciously sexualize it.
Could it be because it is the women who mostly fall victim to this brutal and undeservedly behavior or are the statistics of the reported cases further marginalized by the fact that most of the victims are closest and dear to the Mother Nature.
As the world prepares to commemorate the 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence, from 25 November to 10 December 2019, under the global theme, Ending GBV in the World of Work” Ugandans should explore practical means to fight this silent epidemic with the contempt it deserves.
According to the recent Uganda Police Force’s Annual Crime Report, Gender-Based violence cases that were reported and investigated increased by 4% (from 38,651 to 40,258 cases) between 2015 and 2016.
In addition, the Uganda Demographic and Health Survey 2016 revealed that up to 22% of women aged 15 to 49 in the country had experienced some form of sexual violence. Also the report further revealed that each year, 13% of women aged between 15 to 49 experience sexual violence. This translates to more than 1 million women exposed to sexual violence annually which also includes rape. Furthermore, the phenomenon of the children having sex with fellow children has also not been addressed and yet it predisposes many of these them to diseases, early marriages and deaths, threatening their development opportunities.
However, what ought to be of concern as Ugandans should not be limited to the above statistics that solitary reflectthe authoritatively reported and investigatedcases but instead our attention to detail should be directed to the countless cases and the scores of victims that are either shy away or are intimidated against reporting their predicament of this shameful act. How about the cost and the permanent socialand the psychologicaleffects to the victims that interface with this ugly act?
And this should also be in cognizant of the fact that as much as the country has some laws in place such as the Penal Code (Amendment) Act 2007, the Domestic Violence Act 2010, to deal with the perpetrators, their enforcement has been to less fruition and sometimes that have failed to primarily address the key aspects of violence against women, later on its adverse effects and yet corroboration of evidence in these matters has also remained futile over the years.
In the recent past, the few times the debate to criminalize rape made its way through the public domain or on the floor of Parliament, the women have ended up being victimized and the debates habitually soiled with multiple accusations and all sorts of allegations of the subtle intentions of the women to deny their male counterparts sex, as if the denial is only the preserve of the men.
The debate on the Marriage and Divorce Bill, 2009 was also prematurely halted in the 9th Parliament in a bid to avert the negative stigma it had attracted and yet the Bill only seeks to consolidate the laws relating to the celebration and dissolution of marriage in Uganda. But the fact that the Bill also sought to address issues to do with marital rape, it has ended up where it is today due to the apprehensive rhetoric that was developed against it mostly by our male counterparts.
Another Bill that has failed to see the light of day; including having been thrown out of business to follow in the 10th Parliament is the Sexual Offences Bill 2019, formerly, tabled in 2013. Like the latter, this Bill also seeks to consolidate all laws related to the sex offences. However, since it carries provisions that relate to rape, aggravated defilement, sexual harassment among other issues, this Bill has also faced similar and untimely demonization which is atypical whenever any debate related to rape and defilement comes about in this country.
Should we continue to hide our heads in the sand and remain subtle and devoid of the fact that rape is committed in our homes, workplaces, places of worship and in the unthinkable places or shouldn’t we stand out and fight to see to it that this ‘big elephant’ ; is and condemned and fought with bare knuckles? This is over to you my fellow activists, duty bearers and the government of Uganda.
The writer is Betty Iyamuremye-Communications Officer-Platform for Labour Action
On 17th May 2020, the Chairman Fundraising Subcommittee National Response Fund to Covid-19 Mr. Patrick Mweheire, appealed to the 1.5 million formally employed workers, through their CEOs to donate about Shs 10,000 each for the months of May and June as a donation to the struggle to combat the pandemic in Uganda. The assumption behind the drive is that over Shs30 billion would be collected from the workers and channeled to efforts to procure personal protection gear, testing kits and support materials for medical teams on the frontline. While this seems like creative thinking by the Chairman, reactions from social media indicate that Ugandans are displeased, irritated and prepared to fight the Government from interfering with their money. Platform for Labour Action has examined the Employment Act 2006 and answered some of the pertinent questions regarding deductions from employee’s wages.
Generally, the law states that except where it is expressly provided by law, no person may receive the wages due to any employee on behalf of that employee without the written permission of the employee to whom the wages are due. (section 44) of the Employment Act 2006).
According to the Employment Act, wages mean remuneration or earnings, however designated or calculated capable of being expressed in terms of money and fixed by mutual agreement or by national laws or regulations, which are payable under an oral or written contract of service for work done or to be done, or for services rendered but excluding any contributions made or to be made by the employer in respect of his or her employee’s insurance, medical care, welfare, education, training, invalidity, retirement pension, post-service gratuity or severance allowance (section 2). A deduction from a wage would therefore mean an employee receiving less than the agreed net-pay excluding all the statutory deductions.
It is unlawful for an employer to make a deduction from employee’s wages unless such deduction is done in conformity with the labour laws and regulations.
An employer can lawfully deduct from an employee’s wages where;
Section 46 (1) of the Employment Act (2006) provides that the following deductions from remuneration due to an employee are permitted (a) an amount in respect to any tax, rate, subscription or contribution imposed by law, (b) where the employee has previously given his or her written consent to a deduction being made, the deduction being in respect of any amount representing a contribution to any provident or pension fund or scheme established or maintained by the employer or some other person, (c) deduction by way of reasonable rent or other reasonable charge for accommodation provided by the employer for the employee, or the employee’s family, where the employee has agreed to the deduction, and (d) union dues. This means that the employer is only permitted to deduct PAYE and related taxes, NSSF contributions and any other contributions imposed by law including union dues where the employee belongs/subscribes to a particular labour union. Any other deductions have to be authorized by the employee by way of consent. However, attachment of wages is permitted as long as the attachment does not exceed two-thirds of all the remuneration due in respect of that pay period (section 46 (3)
Section 45 (2) of the Employment Act 2006 provides that no deduction shall be made from the wages of an employee with a view to ensuring a direct or indirect payment to his or her employer or the employer’s representative or any intermediary for the purpose of obtaining or retaining employment. This means that the employer is not allowed to pay to himself or any third party any amount from the employee’s wages for purposes of securing or obtaining employment.
Yes, an employer who acts in contravention of the provisions is liable to repay any remuneration wrongfully withheld or wrongfully deducted from the employee. (section 47)
An employee can make a request for repayment to a labour officer not later than six years after the alleged deduction. The worker can seek a declaration from the labour officer that there was deduction and the labour officer seeks for payment or repayment of the unlawfully deducted amount and in some circumstances, unlawful deduction of wages compensation for further financial loss.
The law applies to all employees employed by an employer under a contract of service, an apprenticeship contract including, without limitation, any person who is employed by or for the Government of Uganda, including the Uganda Public Service, local authority or a parastatal organization but excludes member of the UPDF.
A contract of service is an agreement (whether orally or in writing) binding on parties who are commonly referred to as “employer” and “employee”. For example, a customer service consultant working in a telecommunications company. It was held in Stevenson, Jordan Harrison Ltd v MacDonald & Evans [1952] 1 TLR 101 that a person is considered an employee under a “contract of service” when the work is integrated in that of the business and considered an integral part of the business, whereas an independent contractor for services is merely an accessory to the business and, thus, not an employee.
The Government should remember that employers are not legally authorized to comply with the request to deduct the shs 10,000 from employee’s wages/salaries for the months of May and June as proposed by the Fundraising Subcommittee National Response Fund to Covid-19 Chairman. Employers are limited in their mandate and cannot be seen intermeddling with what contractually and legally does not belong to them. The power and control over wages are vested in the workers and not the company CEOs as suggested. Employers should remember that any move to deduct a single penny from an employee’s net-pay/salaries or wages will lead to legal action for recovery or repayment. The appeal should be channeled to the workers who should be given scope to determine whether their respective earning allow room to make the shs. 10,000 donation. It would be dangerous to assume that all the 1.5 million workers earn enough money to forego the stated amount especially during a time when they are uncertain about job security and ability to fulfill other financial obligations.
