Task team reports on ‘jobs for cash’

BASIC Education Minister Angie Motshekga released the ministerial task team (MTT) report on the investigation of the “jobs for cash” scandal.

This was after media reports in 2014 alleged that teacher unions were selling posts to teachers for between R6 000 and R30 000.

The task team found that, “there appears to be collusion between union officials and district managers, and sometimes with provincial HR officials, leading to a system of patronage.

They also said, “So the Department of Education is effectively in control of education of onethird of South Africa’s provinces.That one third being Northern Cape, Western Cape and Free State.

“Weak authorities, aggressive Unions, compliant principals and teachers eager to benefit from Union membership and advancement are a combination of factors that defeat the achievement of quality education by attacking the values of professionalism.” 18.5% of all cases probed came from the Eastern Cape.

The school governing bodies (SGBs) also came in for some stick. “In the education sector, non-professional bodies (such as SGBs) are tasked with the recruitment and selection of professionals. This could undermine the credibility of the process.

In addition, dysfunctional SGBs add doubt about the validity of staff selection. ”

We have seen on many occasions in the province and district top departmental officials being removed as soon as Sadtu says so, whether rightly or wrongly.

When that happens it sends a message to whoever is in charge to avoid the ire of the union if they want to last a long time or have a smooth ride.

One might ask why would you not use the clout you have to advance the interests of your members? Is that even illegal?

If the departmental officials are weak or incompetent, or both whose fault is it? I was once told the story of a principal post which the district office wanted to be given to a certain prominent Sadtu official against the wishes of the SGB. All sorts of shenanigans were attempted to try to make sure that the employment of the preferred candidate of the SGB didn’t go through. Months later and after many trips to the head office the appointment finally went through.

This case, I am sure, was not one of the 81 cases investigated by the MTT. If this did happen imagine how many other cases were successfully manipulated throughout the country. Does it mean having a dominant union is a bad thing? Can actions of members of a union be blamed on the union as a whole? Can we conclude, therefore, that it is the culture of this particular union to do these things? Is it fair to single out Sadtu because of its huge numerical dominance in the sector? Has the bad outweighed the good it has brought into this sector? Is the department blameless?

I am sure we are going to hear more on this in future.