OLD or NEW South Africa

[Justloadit]

If you say so, to me it is intertwined, when your T/O exceeds the threshold, you are classified as an employer, and it is no longer voluntary.

[Greig Whitton]

Hopefully this will help:

The Employment Equity Act is a labour law that prohibits discrimination at work. It is mandatory for all employers, regardless of turnover or workforce size. It includes affirmative action provisions that promote demographically representative employment, but these are only mandatory for some companies (e.g. those exceeding the annual turnover threshold for their particular industry).

The Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act (and the accompanying Codes of Good Practice) is a completely separate and entirely voluntary law. In theory, it encourages all companies to implement a range of practices (including ownership, employment, training, and procurement practices) intended to broaden black economic participation. However, in practice, the relevance of the "incentives" for implementing these practices can vary dramatically from company to company. This is one of the reasons why it hasn't been particularly effective in achieving its purpose, since some companies take it seriously while others don't.

[HR Solutions]

Hope that answers your question Chris .....

[Justloadit]

Hopefully this will help:

The Employment Equity Act is a labour law that prohibits discrimination at work. It is mandatory for all employers, regardless of turnover or workforce size. It includes affirmative action provisions that promote demographically representative employment, but these are only mandatory for some companies (e.g. those exceeding the annual turnover threshold for their particular industry).

The Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act (and the accompanying Codes of Good Practice) is a completely separate and entirely voluntary law. In theory, it encourages all companies to implement a range of practices (including ownership, employment, training, and procurement practices) intended to broaden black economic participation. However, in practice, the relevance of the "incentives" for implementing these practices can vary dramatically from company to company. This is one of the reasons why it hasn't been particularly effective in achieving its purpose, since some companies take it seriously while others don't.

Nit-picking, so in the one instance you get fined for not following the employment equity act, and the other instance you do not get business from the corporates because of your score, especially for non niche small companies. It still follows the undertones of the manner in which selection is made, whether in law or implied. A white male is handicapped when looking for employment.

Having an all black organization or business is seen as a great achievement, however, having an all white organization or business is racist.

[Greig Whitton]

so in the one instance you get fined for not following the employment equity act

Yes, and rightly so.

and the other instance you do not get business from the corporates because of your score, especially for non niche small companies.

No, because the strategic importance of B-BBEE varies dramatically from one company to the next. Some corporates take it very seriously and will prefer suppliers that have high scores; others couldn't care less and procure on the basis of traditional criteria (cost, quality, etc.) There will always be a demand for suppliers that offer something exceptional, regardless of their B-BBEE status. Many small companies are actually at an advantage since they automatically qualify for level 4 B-BBEE and don't have to worry about the scorecards at all.

A white male is handicapped when looking for employment.

As with exceptional suppliers, there will always be demand for exceptional employees - regardless of race.

[JanChris]

Hope that answers your question Chris .....

HR, not really. The comment by justloadit makes much more sense. If you do not have a black partner you will NOT get government work (or very little). I have experienced this more than once.

Maybe ALL business owners should take note. Watched a program on tv last week where they discussed the level of education for students that have entered the universities. The director of an electronics company said that the maths level for many students are equivalent to a Gr10 student. This was acknowledged by a government official that was on the panel. The director mentioned that "some" of his employees did not understand basic maths related to their education level. Makes you think, doesn't it HR.

[HR Solutions]

Makes you think, doesn't it HR.

Yes and no - my son is 4th year engineering and believe me his maths level is of an extremely high level ! The dropout rate has been very high - so if you do not have the maths level for e.g. you will fall out.

With regards to

If you do not have a black partner you will NOT get government work (or very little).

- From a simple business owner's opinion - I understand this to the extent that if we were not forced someway to hire across the board, we would not have done and given a fair chance to everyone. The statement that "you will NOT get government work" is not true at all. I know quite a few people who does work for the government, so perhaps it is from your experience, perhaps that person's price was not right and they take up this attitude.

[JanChris]

HR, you must be very proud of your son and you should be. He still has to find work and I hope that he is successful as not being employed is not a pleasant situation to be in. But with all respect, you son has the ability to understand and will get his degree for which he has studied for, your son is a drop in the ocean when it comes to MANY students who DO NOT HAVE the means of applying what they have studied. I was a Production/Factory Manager for over 25 years and I have encountered engineers who do not know how to apply their knowledge. Do they study at varsity like parrots?

[Greig Whitton]

If you do not have a black partner you will NOT get government work (or very little).

Government, understandably, favours black-owned suppliers and this is detailed in the Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act (which is distinct from the Employment Equity Act and Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act). However, much like the private sector, government doesn't make procurement decisions on the sole basis of social impact. Traditional transaction criteria (i.e. cost, quality, etc.) are still very much considered. In fact, if you go through the preferential procurement policy, you will see that a supplier's B-BBEE score actually has minority weighting. So suppliers that have something exceptional to offer can still win tenders regardless of their B-BBEE score (although it would be senseless for them to neglect their B-BBEE status altogether).

Of course, nepotism and corruption make a mockery out of all of this. However, just because a tender decision maker awards a contract to an undeserving supplier that happens to be black-owned does not mean that preferential procurement as a policy is to blame or that scrapping B-BBEE, etc. would make any difference.

[Justloadit]

Of course, nepotism and corruption make a mockery out of all of this. However, just because a tender decision maker awards a contract to an undeserving supplier that happens to be black-owned does not mean that preferential procurement as a policy is to blame or that scrapping B-BBEE, etc. would make any difference.

The policies condone these actions, much to the detriment of the country, siting ESKOM as one of them.
On a number of occasions, in fact even Woolworths have blatantly stated that employment is only available for blacks. So much for a white person having a degree on procurement or warehouse management, or even for that matter finance or quality control, you simply not going to be employed by them.