that Brutus’ dagger was the most lethal. What really pained Caesar was the fact Brutus was a close buddy, an associate, a friend and fellow comrade who abused his position of trust and attacked him. This scenario truly and wholly depicts what is transpiring between the three teacher organisations, the Progressive Teachers Union, Zimbabwe Teachers Association and Teachers Union of Zimbabwe and the teacher in Zimbabwe. If it were the government or parents saying this, we would have understood. But for teachers’ representatives to campaign against incentives boggles the mind.

The fallacious, one-sided and unbalanced arguments by the three organisations that incentives are illegal smirks of hypocrisy and are a wrong finding at law.
It is hypocritical in the sense that the three organisations have always stated that they are there to represent the teachers and fight for the betterment of their lives.
The gullible and trusting teachers (save for a few enlightened ones) had always thought that they had someone for them, a buddie in their corner as they fought against the “establishment” that had denied them a living and decent salary, that had impoverished them and generally rode roughshod over them. How mistaken the teacher was.

The truth of the matter is that circular No. 5 of 2008 only made de jure what was already de facto: in some schools, after seeing the plight of the reservoirs of knowledge (teachers) and the sterling work they were doing, parents thought of remunerating them.
In fact, some schools were already incentivising their teachers through pecks like cars, housing loans and telephone allowances even before independence, a practice they have kept up to the present. Of course, I must hasten to add that most of these are private schools. Later on, even the so-called Group B schools joined the band wagon and the Ministry issued the circular as a way of guiding and putting a semblance of order into something already existing.

If section 73 of the constitution gives a mandate to the Public Service Commission to set conditions of service for all teachers, this does not mean that it is illegal to incentivise the teachers.
Nowhere in the Constitution of Zimbabwe does it say giving teachers anything other than what is stipulated by the Commission is illegal. This is a wrong and deliberate misinterpretation of the law that is meant to justify an action that is unfair, improper and amoral: reduction of what the teacher earns in order to make him angry and indignant at the system which makes sense under trade unionism but no sense when the family has to be fed and looked after.

The constitution does not preclude or deter the teacher from receiving any help that will make him perform better as a classroom practitioner. In rural areas, for example, every school builds accommodation and has a source of water for the teacher and some have even electrified the schools. This then makes the unionists argument that incentives should be stopped because the rural teacher does not get them weak and baseless. The urban teacher pays for his accommodation, water and electricity and hence needs incentives as long as government salary is below the poverty datum line.

This is not exactly a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul but stopping to pay Peter because Paul is not being paid. This then becomes double tragedy, double sin: two families starve instead of one. The argument should be: Pay Peter, pay Paul, period. Two wrongs do not make a right. If the late Editor of the Sunday Mail Willie Dzawanda Musarurwa was alive, I am sure he would have put it more succinctly, “You don’t have to hate my mother in order to love yours. You can dearly love your mother without hating mine”.

The unions do not have to impoverish the urban teacher in order to show love and concern for the rural teacher. They can fight for improvement in teacher service without upsetting the applecart.
The teacher in Zimbabwe has suffered great indignity at the hands of our society. He has been mocked and ridiculed beyond measure but as a true patriot, he has soldiered on under trying circumstances. Even

those great men and women in very sector of life who can testify that they wouldn’t be what they are today if it hadn’t been for their teachers. The action taken by the associations to place the teacher between a rock and a hard place or, to change the metaphor, between the horns of dilemma and the deep blue sea is extremely unfortunate. It does not show love and respect to the teacher but great treachery and abuse.
Fellow teachers, let us not look down in desperation, lets look up (to God) for inspiration, for help, for He alone does not change (Mal 3 vs 6) which means he is faithful and dependable. Remember prayer has brought us thus for and God will lead us to Canaan, the promised land. The three siblings Moses (ZIMTA), Aaron (PTUZ) and Miriam (TUZ) may not enter the Promised Land, Canaan but teachers will. Take heart, amongst us true teachers must be a Joshua who will lead us into Canaan, land of milk and honey.

Could it be that these three organisations have become irrelevant and hence a new kid on the block may be needed – one untainted by the vagaries of politics?

  • Herbert Mugwagwa is a Doctor of Theology student, teacher and pastor

You Might Also Like

Comments

Take our Survey

We value your opinion! Take a moment to complete our survey