Friedman cherry picks

It seems that Steven Friedman will take any bunch of facts and by omission or cherry-picking will make them fit his world view (Vodacom row over rewarding merit touches a nerve, February 6).

He quickly moved from the specific Vodacom issue to the general one that big business tends to use its position to keep out newcomers, which is true. However, while the “research” (if research was even needed) finds that big players have many ways of keeping newcomers out, Friedman prefers to highlight only those who live in shacks in Soweto and claims that this is seen as the white man keeping the black man out.

If this is indeed the perception, he would be better occupied repeating the facts rather than repeating the perception.

As I understand the Vodacom issue, an employee suggested an idea to his employer, which under normal circumstances would mean the idea belonged to the employer. Backed by financiers driving the litigation, the court found he was entitled to compensation, because of the reasonable belief that the manager who said he would be compensated had authority to do so.

Although the court sensibly sent the matter back to the parties to negotiate the quantum of the settlement, this has morphed into a claim of R70bn.

The reason the law usually grants ownership of an employee’s idea to the employer is that the idea arose of the employment and the costs and infrastructure required for its practical implementation lie with the employer. Although the financiers who have been paying fees and have patiently been waiting for their big payday won’t agree, R10m seems more than fair.

Sydney Kaye Cape Town