Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 17

Thread: Its constitutional to have a blacks only policy?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Platinum Member Marq's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,297
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 283 Times in 216 Posts

    Its constitutional to have a blacks only policy?

    Code of good practice......mmmmm.

    Is this a case of police harassment , or is this just standard practice in the workplace?

    Story about the constitution vs equity act here.

    The test is here and one can guarantee a sweep under the carpet reaction from the legal profession and a step to the right from the political arena.
    The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity.
    Sponsored By: http://www.honeycombhouse.com

  2. #2
    Platinum Member sterne.law@gmail.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durban
    Posts
    1,332
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 566 Times in 413 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Marq View Post
    Code of good practice......mmmmm.

    Is this a case of police harassment , or is this just standard practice in the workplace?

    Story about the constitution vs equity act here.

    The test is here and one can guarantee a sweep under the carpet reaction from the legal profession and a step to the right from the political arena.
    No it is not and the Employment Equity Act also does not say or allow this. First point - The Constitution is the supreme law however the EE and such acts which might be against the Constitution are allowed due to the neccessity to correct past errors and are mentioned in the Constitution, thus giving it credence.
    However no company may have an exclusion type policy. EE and such policies and the practice should be where there are similiar candidates a company may elect a "black" person as part of a EE policy. It is also clear that this need not be a deciding factor all that is required is that the person is deemed competent and capable of doing the job. Hence the argument that the white male is far better qualified and his non appointment is discriminatory is not relevant. The "Black" person need only be considered competent. A further point, relevant experience is also not neccessary, per se, as this is a form of discrimination against previously disadvantaged.

    So a policy of exclusion is not allowed but the practice of employing a previously disadvanteged person, as, very important, part of an EE strategy, is not discrimination or unconstitutional.

  3. #3
    Platinum Member Marq's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,297
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 283 Times in 216 Posts
    OK - thats what the act says....but then....

    1. Why are we seeing this court case and a test of the act?

    2. Are we not just playing with words? Here is an Act that talks about Affirmative action, Designated Groups and Equity plans that ensures specific numbers are met for the designated group (black only). Then put some words in that says we can lower the standards and employ anybody who looks like they can do the job. Then put some words that seem to be ambiguous when it comes to...oh - did you mean designated group or excluded group? The result and the practice and the reality is plain and simple - apartheid job reservation disguised in legalese.

    3. You cannot have a constitution which is supreme and says equal stuff for all and then say its ok to have other acts that override the supreme act because we are trying to correct the past. It makes a mockery of the supreme act and the whole scenario subjective.

    4. The past should be corrected through mechanisms that naturally raise the disadvantaged up - It cannot be corrected by stomping on or excluding the previously advantaged and making a race group as a whole guilty of an offence that the majority left in this country were probably not responsible for.
    The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity.
    Sponsored By: http://www.honeycombhouse.com

  4. #4
    Platinum Member Marq's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,297
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 283 Times in 216 Posts
    And if you have another view on this......thats fine ...but have a look at the latest rant from Manyi and the BMF.

    article here.

    He said "in general", however, that "everything is about racism" in South Africa.
    "In South Africa you are naive if something happens out of [the context of] racism," he said.
    "It is the lens through which we all see. It is a given."
    If thats not promotion of blatant racism, then I dont know what is. And coming from the BMF, I guess when they talk about affirmative action, they are talking about nailing the white folk.

    I suppose the constitution protects him in his right to freedom of speech, but then who is protecting the side being attacked. Should one turn a blind eye to the obvious and bring out the fancy sentences and words in defense of people like Manyi, and put head in sand? Should one be putting up a defense and rolling out a plan of action to eliminate racism and black apartheid that includes removing Black only associations that are getting more and more active as they gain confidence that there is no opposition to their actions? Should there be White Management Forums and the like started up to defend what is left from being decimated, as seems to be the objective of Black Management Forums?

    As it stands at the moment, the constitution is overwritten by other acts that are creating only one loser and that is South Africa. Revenge is creating a shadow, shading the vision of the future, if the current ruling party actually has one? (a vision or a future that is)
    The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity.
    Sponsored By: http://www.honeycombhouse.com

  5. #5
    Email problem
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Randburg - Johannesburg
    Posts
    15
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
    Marq: BMF is about race. To them race is important, its the very reason they started their organization. There is a need to support black managers. WMF, what will be its purpose, most managers are white already.

    And your blacks only quote is not correct as EE includes white women too.

    You know getting worked out about BMF talking race all the time is like getting worked out about COSATU burning labour brokers - I mean for COSATU, if employers can not easily access skills they don't wanna keep (e.g. boiler makers and fitters in construction) quickly through labour brokers, they will start keeping a certain number of permanent employees which will join the union and create more income for COSATU. So why are we suprised. Everyone is out to fullfill their mandate to those paying for his bread.

    So no matter how much noise we make, the mandate of the BMF is to promote development of black managers, period.

  6. #6
    Platinum Member Marq's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Posts
    1,297
    Thanks
    73
    Thanked 283 Times in 216 Posts
    I cannot find any part of any act that states that white women are part of the 'designated groups' as defined in the employment equity act. Further if one looks at the presentation of this police captains case as mentioned at the start of this thread, no where from either side was this even mentioned. The reason given by the police commission was
    A reason advanced by then national police commissioner Jackie Selebi was that Barnard's appointment was not representative of the police's employment equity goals, a senior superintendent who testified on behalf of the police told the court on Monday.
    "He [Selebi] wanted to ensure that all units adhered to the Employment Equity Act, in line with equity plans of the South African Police Service," said Senior Superintendent Johannes Phetolo Ramothoka.

    "The appointment of the candidate [Barnard] was not going to be in line with guidelines provided by the equity guidelines. White females were over-represented by five at salary level nine so her appointment would have meant an over-representativity on that level," he said.
    Does not look like white women qualify as a designated person given this argument and the prosecution did not offer it up as a reason either.

    Muzi: Perhaps you can point us to the part where the act has been changed.
    The cost of living hasn't affected its popularity.
    Sponsored By: http://www.honeycombhouse.com

  7. #7
    Site Caretaker Dave A's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    22,649
    Thanks
    3,305
    Thanked 2,676 Times in 2,257 Posts
    Blog Entries
    12
    I definitely agree.

    Look, there is no doubt we've got to take extra measures so that the previously disadvantaged can catch up and assume their rightful place. I would hope no-one objects to a balanced society, and in fact hope people actively support us getting to that point.

    But in the same breath we can't be just chucking talent and ability to one side to achieve this. The original thinking behind affirmative action is we would increase balance by expanding on top of what was in place already. To expect balance to be achieved by purely "expanding the market" was perhaps wishful thinking, but the greater the expansion, the less the pain.

    The question comes - are we seeing this expansion at all? In some areas we seem to be losing skills that are not even being replaced, let alone seeing the pool expanded on.

  8. Thanks given for this post:

    BBBEE_CompSpec (22-Nov-09)

  9. #8
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Cape Town
    Posts
    390
    Thanks
    407
    Thanked 55 Times in 43 Posts
    COSATU shocked at employment equity findings

    The Congress of South African Trade Unions is disgusted at the findings of the 2008/2009 report of the Commission for Employment Equality (CEE), which showed that white men still occupy 61% of all top management positions.

    48% of all those recruited at this level and 45% of all employees promoted to this top level are also white males, while the equivalent figures for black men are 10% in top management positions, 13% of those recruited and 13% of those promoted to this level.
    Indian men represented 5% and coloured men 4%, while white women represented 12%, black women just less than 4%, and Indian and coloured women each just more than 1%.

    This is despite the fact that in government the picture is very different. There 61% in top management are black, 12% coloured, 5% Indian, 21% white and under 1% foreigners. Although that still falls short of the target of matching the demographics of the country, the government is making good progress.

    On the other hand if you take the private sector alone, virtually no progress has been achieved. White people hold 74% of the top positions, followed by black people with 13%, Indians with just less than 6%, coloureds with 5% and foreigners accounting for about 3%.

    This is a shocking indictment of the private sector, which has done virtually nothing to transform the demographic structure inherited from apartheid.

    The report totally demolishes the argument that black economic empowerment is now redundant because we now live in an equitable non-racial society and that BEE and affirmative action are ‘anti-white’. On the contrary we still live in a society in which wealth and power remains heavily biased in favour of the white minority.

    The federation agrees with the CEE Chairperson, Jimmy Manyi, that the government's approach of persuasion was not having the desired effect, that black and coloured people were bearing the brunt of it, and that the present law “is very forgiving”.

    We welcome his statement that “the department and the commission are going to take a much less conciliatory view”, that “those who are not playing ball we will name and shame” and that there are going to be a lot more prosecutions.

    His report powerfully reinforces COSATU’s view that BEE is as necessary as ever, and the federation backs the Department of Labour’s proposed amendment to the Employment Equality Act which would penalise companies not abiding by racial diversification in the workplace.

    COSATU concurs with Labour Minister Membathisi Mdladlana’s opinion that to remove legislation dealing with the lack of racial diversity - a legacy of apartheid - was tantamount to "throwing away the Constitution" and that “previously disadvantaged people would soon get frustrated with extending an olive branch to people who had formerly oppressed them during the violent apartheid era.

    The minister spoke of an “impending revolution” and warned employers "that the revolution will be a revolution of all black people".

    COSATU will back to the hilt attempts to enforce the existing legislation but will also continue to argue for a far broader form of BEE which benefits the majority of the formerly disadvantaged and not just a small elite minority. Much more needs to be done to empower the workers and to establish and sustain worker and community co-operatives.
    Last edited by BBBEE_CompSpec; 22-Nov-09 at 03:28 PM. Reason: syntax error and typographical error

  10. #9
    Diamond Member tec0's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    South Africa
    Posts
    4,624
    Thanks
    1,884
    Thanked 463 Times in 410 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    I am sorry but no. Despite the numbers one must consider wealth. When you look at our government structure you see that government is extending loans to particular race groups and totally deny access to other race groups. These loans only have to be paid back within the next 3 years.

    The loans are used to create a foundation for business creation and these businesses must be favoured when it comes to vendors and contract allocation. Thus the free enterprise system itself becomes moderated and controlled by government.

    The second reason why contractors are basically “white” orientated is because it is the only way to generate an income. Permanent jobs at Telkom or Eskom are none existent and the same was true with our military system and is focused on the Caucasian groups.

    The mining groups is are external assets and cannot be counted because the owners like Anglo American has a basic admin structure that is local however the upper management structure is located in America. Also little to no training is extended to South Africans “I stand to be corrected”

    Lastly one must understand that government has basically manipulated existing structures and created laws to facilitate there need to empower. It is of note that there is not a single “new” job creation inactive that materialized or worked successfully. Despite the mentioned numbers of successful endeavours done by government one must look at the failure rate and the costs that were involved.

    All of this mentioned there is a second more concerning problem. When you look at job creation the labour broker is becoming the alternative system thus a hidden tax on the people that use labour brokers to get work. This system is really unacceptable and must be eliminated because the citizen must now pay both the labour broker and the government just because she or he is working.

    The fact is we are burdened to the point where jobs are becoming inaccessible and this will lead to future recessions that will quantify within the next 5 years. If jobs are to become inaccessible, the TAX ratio will diminish to the point where government will be unable to generate money. It is a self-defeating system and by its nature there will be no future for all races involved.

  11. Thanks given for this post:

    BBBEE_CompSpec (23-Nov-09)

  12. #10
    Platinum Member sterne.law@gmail.com's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Durban
    Posts
    1,332
    Thanks
    38
    Thanked 566 Times in 413 Posts
    Blog Entries
    7
    Perhaps it is an indictment of the private sector BUT the private sector reports to shareholders and IS the economy. Government is not a business, though it should be, there in board no accountability and they start with budgets that are negative anyway so underperforming and shareholder value are not criterie now are they?

  13. Thank given for this post:

    BBBEE_CompSpec (23-Nov-09), Dave A (24-Nov-09)

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Request for comment on B-BBEE Preferential Procurement Policy Framework Act
    By I Robot in forum BEE and Employment Equity Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 21-Aug-09, 12:33 PM

Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.

Did you like this article? Share it with your favourite social network.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •