Act targets Indians and coloureds
SOUTH Africa’s latest unemployment figures show that the country is not making any meaningful progress in creating jobs.
According to Statistics SA, unemployment during the first quarter of this year remained stubbornly high at 42.2% (according to the expanded definition).
However, some people are finding work. In the first three months of this year just more than 250 000 people found jobs. Almost half of the jobs created were in the Western Cape. This province also had the lowest rate of unemployment at just more than 25%.
South Africa’s employment equity laws, however, made it increasingly difficult for people from minority communities to be hired. And now, according to some opposition parties, changes to the law will make it next to impossible.
The Employment Equity Amendment Act was signed into law by President Cyril Ramaphosa and will come into effect on September 1.
In terms of the act, the Minister of Labour will set numerical targets for certain economic sectors that are based on race.
On Friday, draft regulations were published in the Government Gazette and the public was given 30 days to comment.
Gabriel Crouse, spokesperson for the South African Institute of Race Relations, said about 85% of the formal private workforce could be affected.
“What this means is that if a company is found guilty of not complying with the regulations they could be fined up to 10% of its revenue for repeat offences. For companies that want to do business with the state, they would additionally not receive a certificate of compliance and be banned from working with them.”
John Steenhuisen, the leader of the DA, said the proposed racial quotas appeared to target coloured and Indian South Africans. He warned that if implemented, it would deepen social divisions.
“The regulations set out racial employment quotas across 18 economic sectors and across all 9 provinces, which will affect every part of the South African economy.
“The quotas seem especially targeted at the groups defined by the regulations as coloured males, coloured females, Indian males and Indian females.
“People from these communities suffered discrimination under the previous regime, and now they are being re-victimised by a democratic government that has learnt all the wrong lessons from the past.”
He said proposed targets for coloured employees in sectors such as agriculture, forestry and fisheries, finance, arts and science were low, reaching 0.0% in provinces like Limpopo, Mpumalanga and Gauteng.
He said in Gauteng, employment for coloured individuals could be limited to below 1%.
“In the case of employees classified by the state as Indian, the targets are often as low as 0.1% across economic sectors. Consider the absurdity – a company with 50 employees that has even a single Indian person on the payroll will be in breach of the 0.1% limit, as 1 out of 50 is equal to 2% of that company’s total employees.
“Conversely, if that company fires its single Indian employee on the basis of race, it will also be in breach because it will then have 0% Indian employees.”
Steenhuisen has vowed to challenge the act in the Constitutional Court.
Dr Michael Cardo, the DA spokesperson on Employment and Labour, told POST that the proposals sent out the message that minority communities were second-class citizens who were no longer welcome in South Africa.
“It is an assault on minorities. It is a dangerous form of racial social engineering. Essentially what this piece of legislation does is, it hands the power to the minister of labour to move workers around like pawns on a chessboard.”
He said the proposed targets could hamper businesses being able to work with the state.
“There is a certain section of the act which says that state contracts will only be awarded to businesses that possess a compliance certificate which will be issued by the minister of employment. This is a recipe for disaster and gives too much power to the minister.”
Cardo said he felt the act was in breach of the Constitution. “I do not think the act will succeed in bringing about the redress of historical disadvantages envisaged by the Constitution.”
He also predicted that the act would affect investment.
“This will scare away investors and strangle growth and at the end of the day it will result in more job losses.”
Bantu Holomisa, president of the United Democratic Movement, said any act that sought to prevent equal rights for all should be rejected.
“I don’t think the government is holding to the spirit of 1994. We agreed at the time to improve the quality of life for everyone and that we are all equal. Any kind of discrimination when it comes to employment of South Africans must be rejected. We have passed the era of discrimination.”
The FF Plus also opposed the act. “The Freedom Front Plus is vehemently opposed to this act – we have been since the start. The fact that the minister is afforded the power to set race-based targets for private-sector businesses is nothing but social engineering and does not belong in a free, modern and democratic society.
“We are joining the legal fight against this act, initiated by Solidarity, on the basis that this legislation is unconstitutional and discriminates against white, Indian and coloured people,” said Heloïse Denner, FF Plus spokesperson.
“The effect of the act is just that, because it is race and demographic based, it automatically discriminates against people who are not represented demographically in a certain area. It is ridiculous and unacceptable.”
Michael Bagraim, a Bagraims Attorneys consultant and labour law expert, said amendments to the Employment Equity Act were unfair to coloured and Indian South Africans.
“This has created panic in the ranks of the employers. Many employers are saying they want to wait and see. This is incredibly negative for the future.”
He said many minorities were trying to seek work abroad.
“Others are being pushed into the unemployment queues. The reality is that the ANC government is not doing anything to help encourage employers to create more jobs but in fact they are doing the opposite. The more stringent legislation such as the Employment Equity Legislation is acting as a handbrake to job creation.”
Teboho Thejane, spokesperson for the department of Employment and Labour, released the following statement: The Department is perturbed by the way the DA has maliciously interpreted the proposed sector EE targets published for public comment.
It appears as though that the DA is using the same tactics of “divide and rule” adopted during the Apartheid regime, particularly in order to divide the black people of South Africa.
The purpose of the EE Act, as amended, is to achieve equity in the workplace by promoting equal opportunities and fair treatment in employment through the elimination of unfair discrimination; and the implementation of affirmative action measures to redress the disadvantages in employment experienced by designated groups (i.e. Black people, women and persons with disabilities) to ensure their equitable representation in all occupational levels in the workforce.
For sustainable growth and development, it is important that workplaces reasonably reflect the national and provincial demographics of the economically active population of the country, both in the public and the private sectors as required by section 42 of the EE Act.
In fact, nothing has changed, these EE amendments are not introducing any new legal obligations on employers because for over 24 years of the EE Act, employers have been legally required to set their own EE targets taking into account both the national and provincial EAP demographics as per section 42 of the EE Act.
The only change with these amendments is that the Minister of Employment and Labour after consultation with the relevant sector stakeholders and on the advice of the Commission for Employment Equity, has now regulated sector EE targets in a form of 5-year milestones towards achieving the equitable representation of the various groups in respective economic sectors.
Nevertheless, sector EE targets are not quotas as employers still maintain powers to determine their own annual EE targets towards achieving the regulated 5-year sector EE targets.
For those employers that have surpassed the regulated minimum targets proposed per sector, are encouraged to still be proactive in setting EE targets towards achieving the demographics of the EAP.
We are not surprised that the DA and the Solidarity Trade Union are opposed to the EE amendments and sector EE targets because they tend to be against any legislation, policy or efforts to transform the economic landscape of the country. They constantly refer the efforts of levelling the playing fields for all, as reverse apartheid.
The EE amendment Act is about equal opportunities in the workplace. The DA’s response attempts to entrench the inequalities of the past.