Jomo Kenyatta's approach to trade unions reflected his broader political strategy of consolidating state power and subordinating potential sources of resistance to presidential authority. The trade union movement in Kenya had emerged during the colonial period as an organization of African workers seeking better wages, working conditions, and political representation. Independent Kenya inherited a vibrant trade union sector, but Kenyatta's government pursued policies designed to subordinate labor unions to state control and to prevent them from challenging government authority.
Kenyatta's government adopted legislation that gave the state substantial authority over labor organization and collective bargaining. The government regulated union leadership, controlled strike activity, and prevented labor unions from becoming independent political forces. The Central Organization of Trade Unions (COTU), which became the umbrella organization for Kenya's various labor unions, was effectively brought under government control. Union leaders who were seen as politically challenging to Kenyatta's government faced arrest, detention, and suppression.
The subordination of trade unions reflected Kenyatta's broader development strategy, which emphasized the attraction of foreign investment and the maintenance of favorable conditions for capital accumulation. Strong and independent labor unions would have demanded higher wages and better working conditions, which Kenyatta feared would deter foreign investment and increase business costs. By subordinating unions to state control, Kenyatta ensured that labor struggles would be constrained and that workers could not effectively challenge the low-wage conditions that characterized much of Kenya's economy.
Kenyatta's approach to labor also reflected his understanding of postcolonial development ideologies that emphasized the subordination of immediate working-class demands to broader national development objectives. In this framework, high wages or strong labor protections would supposedly hamper the accumulation of capital necessary for development. The suppression of independent labor action was thus justified as necessary for national development and for Kenya's long-term prosperity.
However, Kenyatta's policies also contained an element of accommodation and limited concessions to labor. The government supported some improvements in working conditions and some wage increases, recognizing that extreme labor exploitation could lead to unrest that would threaten the postcolonial state. Kenyatta sought to balance the interests of capital and labor in ways that would maintain his political control while allowing both capital and labor sufficient gains to maintain their acquiescence to his rule.
The subordination of labor unions was part of a broader pattern in postcolonial Kenya of the subordination of potentially independent political forces to the authority of the state and the President. Workers, like students, intellectuals, and potential political opponents, were prevented from organizing independently to challenge Kenyatta's rule. The result was a postcolonial state in which coercive and hegemonic power were deployed to prevent the emergence of autonomous civil society organizations that might challenge the President.
See Also
Kenyatta Opposition Suppression Kenyatta Economic Policy KANU One-Party Dominance Kenyatta Rise to Power Kenyatta and the judiciary
Sources
- Bethwell A. Ogot (ed.), Zamani: A Survey of East African History (Nairobi: East African Publishing House, 1974), pp. 234-267.
- David Throup, Economic and Social Origins of Mau Mau 1945-53 (London: James Currey, 1988), pp. 167-201.
- Cherry Gertzel, The Politics of Independent Kenya 1963-8 (Evanston: Northwestern University Press, 1970), pp. 78-112.