Search Results

Talita Laubscher and Melissa Cogger | 9 May 2025 An important step for designated employers to ensure compliance with their affirmative action obligations under the Employment Equity Act, 1998 (as amended) (EEA) and the newly enacted Employment Equity Regulations, 2025 (General Administrative EE Regulations) is the preparation and implementation of their employment equity plan (EE Plan). Period of the EE Plan and timing In terms of section 20(1) of the EEA, all designated employers must prepare and implement an EE Plan which will achieve reasonable progress towards employment equity in all occupational levels in the employer’s workforce. While section 20(2)(e) of the EEA provides that the duration of a designated employer’s EE Plan may not be shorter than one year or longer than five years, the General Administrative EE Regulations state that the EE Plan’s duration must be five years, from 1 September 2025 to 31 August 2030 (there is some debate as to whether this requirement for the EE Plan to be a five-year plan is indeed so). As indicated, in terms of section 20(2)(e) of the EEA, the EE Plan may be shorter than five years, and this section has not been amended. Our considered view is that it remains open to designated employers to have an EE Plan that is shorter than five years, but we caution that there will then need to be careful alignment with the five-year sectoral targets in the employer’s subsequent plan/s. Further, if an employer becomes a designated employer after 1 April 2025, its EE Plan may be shorter, as the employer must prepare an EE Plan for the remainder of the period until 31 August 2030. The prescribed commencement date of the EE Plan must be 1 September 2025. Designated employers will therefore need to work timeously to ensure that a draft EE Plan is prepared well in advance, to allow sufficient time for the analysis to be conducted in accordance with the EEA12 form (which informs the contents of the EE plan) and for consultation on the EE Plan with employee representatives, as required by section 16 of the EEA.  Our suggestion is that EEA1 forms (used to collect the information necessary for the workforce profile) should be collected during May and that employers prepare the draft barrier analysis by early June 2025. Designated employers would then use June to consult with employee representatives on the contents of the analysis and aim to finalise the analysis at the end of June 2025. The new draft EE Plan should be prepared in parallel with this and designated employers should aim to have a draft EE Plan ready for consultation by early July. Consultations with employee representatives on the EE Plan would then take place during July and August 2025, so that a finalised plan is in place by the end of August 2025. Contents of the plan The EE Plan must incorporate all of the elements contained in the EEA13 form (annexed to the General Administrative EE Regulations), including the following: the objectives for each year of the plan; the affirmative action measures to be implemented as required by section 15(2) of the EEA; where there is under-representation, the numerical goals to achieve equitable representation of suitably qualified people from designated groups within each occupational level, the timetable to do so and strategies to achieve these goals; a timetable for each year of the plan on both numerical and non-numerical goals; the duration of the plan; the procedures to monitor and evaluate implementation of the plan, including procedures to monitor reasonable progress towards employment equity; the internal procedures to resolve disputes regarding the implementation of the plan; the senior manager and other persons responsible for the monitoring and implementation of the plan; and any other measure that is consistent with the purposes of the EEA. Objectives for the EE Plan must be SMART – specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound. When it comes to the affirmative action measures, these will be informed by the barrier analysis and must include: measures to identify and eliminate employment barriers, including unfair discrimination that adversely affects people from designated groups; measures designed to further diversity in the workplace based on equal dignity and respect of all people; making reasonable accommodation for people from designated groups in order to ensure that they enjoy equal opportunities and are equitably represented; measures to ensure equitable representation of suitably-qualified people from designated groups; and measures to ensure that people from designated groups are retained and developed, and to implement appropriate training measures, including measures for skills development. These measures exclude quotas and absolute barriers and must include both numerical and non-numerical measures. As an example, some non-numerical measures that could be taken to improve the representivity of the pool of potential candidates from designated groups could include bursaries, vacation programmes, or graduate programmes, training programmes as well as programmes aimed at the development of women or special measures to facilitate the appointment of people with disabilities. It is advisable to include sufficient details of these non-numerical affirmative action measures in the EE Plan. Ultimately, these measures are aimed at improving the pool of suitably qualified candidates and can go a long way in ensuring sustainable and genuine transformation of the workforce. The affirmative action measures that are referred to in the EE Plan must be aligned to those indicated in the analysis undertaken in line with the EEA12 form. The new EEA13 form requires designated employers to specify in their EE Plan any applicable SETA classification and bargaining council, and business type, which was previously only required for the report. Numerical goals and incorporation of the sector targets The numerical goals set by an employer in its EE Plan must now comply with the newly published final sectoral targets. When setting goals, the employer must also take into account its workforce profile and the applicable economically active population (EAP). The EEA13 form requires employers to specify, upfront on the EEA13 template, whether the national or provincial EAP has been referred to when setting numerical goals and targets. It should be noted that the sector targets have been set broadly for males and females, respectively, from designated groups. Designated employers will need to conduct a mathematical exercise to extrapolate these targets into the various race groups, in proportion to the applicable EAP, to set their targets.  The sector targets have only been set for the top four occupational levels in the workplace, and the employer will need to set its own goals for the remaining occupational levels (ie semi-skilled and unskilled) with reference to the applicable EAP and any other appropriate factors. Employers can be guided by the EEA9 form when it comes differentiating among the various occupational levels. In addition to the workforce profile, sector targets and EAP, employers may also take into account the following factors when setting targets: the inherent requirements of a particular job; the pool of suitably qualified persons; the formal qualifications, prior learning, relevant experience or capacity to acquire within a reasonable time, the ability to do the job; the rate of turnover and natural attrition within the workplace; and recruitment and promotional trends within the workplace. If any of these factors is taken into account in setting targets for specific occupational levels, it is advisable to include sufficient detail regarding this in the EE Plan, and to retain supporting documents evidencing these factors. In addition, in light of the decision of the Constitutional Court in Correctional Services , it is advisable to include a provision in the EE Plan to the effect that the goals and targets in the EE Plan are not quotas and that they do not amount to absolute barriers to the advancement of over-represented groups; also, that the employer is permitted to take race and gender into account in making appointment and promotion decisions, but that it is not obliged to do, and hence that it may, in appropriate circumstances, make decisions that have the effect that over-representation of certain groups is not addressed immediately. Detailed records of the circumstances resulting in maintaining over-representation for the time being must be kept. Such circumstances would need to tie in with the justifiable reasons that the Department of Employment and Labour (DoEL) would take into consideration where the sectoral targets are not met.   Publication and retention The EE Plan does not need to be submitted to the DoEL, and it is not a public document. However, it must be made available to a designated employer’s employees for copying and consultation and may need to be produced upon review by the Director-General or labour inspectorate. A copy of the EE Plan must be retained for at least five years after its expiry. What must be submitted to the DoEL is the employment equity report. Written by Talita Laubscher and Melissa Cogger, Partners and Chloë Loubser, Knowledge and Learning Lawyer, Bowmans South Africa   ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.polity.org.za/article/further-details-for-compliance-with-employment-equity-plan-in-south-africa-2025-05-09

Daily Investor | 10 May 2025 For years, Eskom prioritised race targets over retaining and developing valuable technical skills. The power utility is now paying the price for this strategy. For years, Eskom prioritised race targets over retaining and developing valuable technical skills. The power utility is now paying the price for this strategy. During Eskom’s 2025 Winter Outlook briefing, chairman Mteto Nyati said the power utility did not meet expectations. “We have not been proud of how we have performed. A few metrics showed that things did not align with what we were capable of doing,” he said. The problems included power plant reliability, a delay in returning generation units to service, and issues with its coal supply. He said the Eskom board and executive team discussed the problems. “We spend a lot of time establishing the root causes of the problems,” he said. They have learned that Eskom does not have equipment issues. Instead, the problems centre around its employees. “It is mainly leadership-related. We have to make sure they follow standard operating procedures and we hold people accountable,” he said. “We need to have tough conversations when we need to. We also need to recognise them when they do things well.” “All of the problems are leadership and management-related issues. That will be our focus when we move forward.” Nyati’s comments about employee problems are no surprise. In 2023, energy analyst Professor Sampson Mamphweli said Eskom experienced a skills crisis. “When you look at the skills required to run Eskom, the utility no longer has them,” Mamphweli said. “The fact that maintenance runs overtime and over budget, while also being of poor quality, reflects the lack of skills at Eskom.” He said the exodus of skilled employees began over a decade ago when the utility underwent an aggressive transformation process. As part of this agenda, Eskom trained black engineers and pushed them into high-ranking positions within the organisation. “In that process, Eskom lost good white engineers who chose to work overseas or in the private sector due to the increased political interference at the utility,” he said. Even black engineers trained at Eksom have begun to leave the utility because of the deteriorating working environment, heightened political pressure, and low employee morale. He added that it affects Eskom in the immediate term and will have an even greater impact over the coming decades. He said the power utility has lost the ability to train engineers and has lost employees with operational experience. Many other experts have also warned that only a small percentage of Eskom employees have the needed skills to perform their duties, especially in technical and engineering departments. Former Eskom COO Jan Oberholzer, for example, blamed load-shedding on “pure negligence” by Eskom staff. He said employees did not perform their duties, which included ignoring alarms at power stations. Eskom focused on transformation at the expense of retaining skills Eskom’s struggle with skills should not come as a surprise. For three decades, it has strongly focused on transformation, which has caused it to lose valuable skills. Battles between Eskom and trade unions date back over two decades. For example, in 2001, the former Mineworkers Union (MWU) sued Eskom over racial discrimination. At the time, Eskom said it had strict racial and gender targets and would not compromise on meeting them. “We are committed to achieving that target to make sure that our workforce reflects the demographics of our country,” it said. In 2015, trade union Solidarity warned that it was playing with fire by alienating white employees. This was after news emerged that Eskom wanted to decrease its white employees by up to 3,400 to meet strict race targets. By then, Eskom had already shed more than 10,000 white staff, including many experienced and skilled technical personnel. Eskom was on an aggressive drive to reach its target of reflecting the national racial demographics by 2020. While Eskom denied that it would retrench white employees to meet its racial quotas, Solidarity said the power utility created an environment which encouraged white staff to leave. Solidarity said that Eskom’s decline, which caused load-shedding, was linked to its aggressive affirmative action policy through which it lost thousands of skilled employees. “The problem is not that those who left the utility were white but that they were people who possessed managerial and technical skills,” Solidarity CEO Dirk Hermann said. The trade union added that Eskom lost many skilled employees and the institutional memory needed to create a stable company. The same thing happened in 2023, when Solidarity published a strategy within Eskom to get rid of white men. “The current number of white men at Eskom totals 1,873. According to Eskom’s targets, it wants to reduce this number to 1,379. Eskom therefore wants to get rid of 494 white men,” it said. “This group was mainly responsible for maintenance work at Eskom. Those employees have skills that must be protected and preserved at all costs.” The trade union warned that plans to get rid of more white people were to the detriment of the individuals, Eskom and of South Africa. Despite these warnings, Eskom continued its aggressive transformation agenda, which resulted in the widespread skills loss. Therefore, Eskom’s current skills problems resulted from decades of focusing on employment equity targets instead of retaining and building skills. The power utility continues to track and report on its transformation, focusing heavily on the demographic breakdown by race and gender. This article was first published by Daily Investor and is reproduced with permission. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://mybroadband.co.za/news/energy/594204-why-eskom-chased-away-skilled-workers.html

SA News | 7 may 2025 Tourism isn't just about breath-taking landscapes and unforgettable experiences -- it's also a powerful engine for job creation and economic growth.  This was the message from Tourism Minister Patricia de Lille at the opening of the Middle East Africa (MEA) Future Leaders Challenge South Africa, held this week in Johannesburg. “Tourism plays a significant role in our economy and has the potential to create many more jobs,” de Lille told attendees, which comprised tourism entrepreneurs, students, and industry experts.  “But to truly unlock that potential, we need a skilled, adaptable workforce, especially among our youth,” the Minister said. De Lille believes a big part of the solution to youth unemployment lies in bridging the skills gap through targeted education and innovation. “We must develop and harness critical skills like digital literacy, AI-driven customer service, digital marketing, data analytics, and sustainability. These are no longer optional; they are essential,” she said. The event, which brought together rising stars from 18 tourism and hospitality schools, is part of the G20 Tourism Hackathon, aimed at finding creative, tech-forward solutions for the tourism industry. According to De Lille, initiatives like these are vital to preparing the next generation of tourism leaders. “We must empower our youth not just with skills, but with mentorship and real leadership opportunities. Let’s transform our young people into the job creators of tomorrow.” The Department of Tourism is currently reviewing training and development strategies in line with the National Tourism Sector Strategy and other national growth frameworks. A key focus is ensuring that education aligns with industry needs, particularly in a post-pandemic world where digital nomadism and remote work are reshaping global travel trends. “South Africa must learn from countries like the UAE, Brazil, Ethiopia, and India, who are embracing Digital Nomad Tourism. We need reliable infrastructure—think seamless mobility, fast internet, and remote work hubs. These are deal-breakers for modern travellers,” De Lille explained. She emphasized that this transformation cannot happen in isolation. “Public-private partnerships are vital. We need businesses, universities, and government to collaborate, invest in skills training, and create jobs. This isn’t just about tourism; it’s about our future.” With the rise of experiential travel and the global shift toward working while exploring, South Africa has a golden opportunity to position itself as a top destination for digital nomads and skilled young professionals alike. “The world is changing. Let’s ensure our youth are ready to lead that change,” said De Lille. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in thi s article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.sanews.gov.za/south-africa/tourism-key-youth-jobs-and-economic-growth

Boitumelo Kgobotlo | 8 May 2025 ActionSA leader Herman Mashaba has announced that his party will table a draft resolution in the National Assembly to scrap the broad-based black economic empowerment policy. Mashaba was speaking at the Apartheid Museum on Tuesday, alongside Michael Beaumont, Lerato Ngobeni, Nasiphi Moya and Kgosi Letlape. He said this resolution, in terms of Rule 119, will call for the creation of an ad hoc committee to look into economic transformation laws and suggest urgent reforms. “We embark on this effort to bridge partisan divides and build genuine consensus, establishing a dedicated and constitutionally empowered platform that will not merely culminate in rhetoric but in real legislative reforms that advance economic justice in South Africa,” said Mashaba. He touched on five key proposals to guide transformation, which he referred to as essential policy levers to bring real, measurable change. These are inclusive economic empowerment, social investment grants, housing and spatial justice, gender justice, and social cohesion. Mashaba is calling for “inclusive economic empowerment legislation, which he said will introduce an opportunity fund. This fund would be financed by a 5% levy on company profits and will replace the BBBEE framework, and invest in education, entrepreneurship, and infrastructure in disadvantaged communities. He explained that small businesses will be exempt from this levy, and the fund will be time-limited to 30 days. “ActionSA is not opposed to Black Economic Empowerment. On the contrary, we believe that economic justice is a historic imperative. But we are opposed to the narrow, corrupt, and politically manipulated fashion in which it has been implemented – an approach that has entrenched inequality rather than dismantled it,” said Mashaba. On social grants, he said ActionSA wants to protect people’s dignity while reducing dependency. The party plans to support youth development, mental health services, and safer communities to help people become active members of society. He also addressed immigration, emphasising that South Africa cannot fix its problems while dealing with those of other countries. He blamed corrupt border officials for allowing undocumented immigrants to compete with South Africans for jobs and services. He highlighted that even after apartheid ended, marginalisation continued through poor education, failed economic policies, corruption, and weak immigration control. Mashaba said that without proper reforms to replace apartheid-era laws, the goals of the Constitution would remain out of reach. He mentioned several apartheid laws, including the 1913 Natives Land Act, to the 1985 Coloured Persons Education Act, as evidence of the damage that still needs to be repaired. “Now, I’m citing these always not to spite or, as many like to claim, for the pleasure of dwelling in the past. I do so to remind you of the pervasiveness of the apartheid legacy that was meant to inform the work that post-apartheid administration had to do to undo the socio-economic ravages of many decades of apartheid, as envisaged in the Constitution,” said Mashaba. “What we have seen instead are successive ANC administrations that were expected to constitute ‘a government for the people by the people’ becoming one after another, ‘governments for the politically connected by their comrades’,” Mashaba added. He said that while laws such as the Employment Equity and Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE) were introduced with good intentions, they ended up helping only the small, connected elite. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://sundayworld.co.za/politics/8amherman-mashaba-unveils-plan-to-deal-bbeee-a-blow/

Thami Ngidi | 7 May 2025 Banks are losing confidence in the ability of small business to generate jobs, says Gideon Sam, the chairperson of Khula Enterprise Finance, one of two government institutions set up to promote small business. Khula reported last week that mismanagement, fraud and a lack of entrepreneurial skills were hampering the creation of jobs. Khula's job-creation and loan divisions performed dismally last year. Sam said in Khula's annual report, tabled in parliament last week, that the institution incurred losses of close to R26-million in the year ended March 2000 - after it had generated a surplus of R30-million in the previous period. The Khula report said the massive losses were attributable mainly to a lack of business and managerial skills among the people borrowing from Khula. In keeping with international trends in job creation, the government has since 1996 targeted the small, medium and micro-enterprise (SMME) sector as the engine room for the eradication of unemployment, which some estimates put as high as 40 percent. A combination of lack of skills and rampant corruption are undermining this drive. "What we have learned from our recent experience is that the country does not as yet have the critical mass of entrepreneurially inclined people that it needs," said Sam. Khula operates like a wholesaler and does not deal directly with the public. It does so via other retail institutions that it funds. It also provides collateral security for people who are regarded by traditional financiers as high risk. Sam said two collapsed retail financial institutions (RFIs) had resulted in Khula carrying a bad debt of R23 964 234, and having to create a contingency plan against further bad debts of R18 858 512. "Gross income is down from R67 734 759 in 1999 to R60 201 728. This was caused by lower interest rates earned on Khula's investments and the discounted rates charged to RFIs on loan capital." The collapse of the RFIs has been ascribed to fraud, among other things. Khula said it would take tough action against offenders this year, and would put the job-creation drive back on track. Established in 1996 by the department of trade and industry, Khula has been forced to examine its own systems and its responsibility in the failure of funded institutions. Sam said the "calamities have focused attention on key aspects of the SMME environment and have forced us to confront questions that previously were left unanswered in the interests of expediency". Khula itself, he said, was "well-managed and assiduously applies the principles of good governance". ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://iol.co.za/news/south-africa/2001-02-03-banks-losing-faith-in-small-business/#google_vignette

ENCA | 7 May 2025 JOHANNESBURG - The debate on whether to scrap or keep the Employment Equity Amendment Act rages on. The Act was introduced to address historical disparities and promote equitable representation in the workplace. This has been a contentious issue for years. In 1998, South Africa signed the Employment Equity Act into law and was later amended to the Employment Equity Amendment Act (EEAA) on 12 April 2023. Despite its intended purpose, many have questioned the implementation of the EEAA, with some accusing the governing party of prioritising a certain population group. This time, eNCA's social media platforms are buzzing following our viewers' question on the Democratic Alliance taking the EE Amendment Act to the High Court.  "Why are black-dominated government sectors failing? President Ramaphosa, in his SONA speech, said municipalities are failing because of a lack of technical skills. The ANC needs to fix the real skills problem, which is a skills deficit among the country’s black people. In many cities and towns across the country, roads are not maintained, water and electricity supply are often disrupted, refuse is not collected, and sewage runs in the streets. In part, this is because many municipalities lack the technical skills and resources required to meet people’s needs," says @ish18_e on X. @FireyFastFreddy believes the DA has done the right thing by challenging the Act in court. "It's legitimate. I think employing certain groups to make up the numbers is a dangerous ploy". Glynis Salzer on Facebook says, " Unemployment figures prove it hasn't worked, as does the lack of monetary growth, investment, etc". "The act is also useless because even if you are qualified, without connections, you won’t be employed. They are just bluffing us with the nice useless acts," says Bra Charlie on Facebook . However @Gabojust on X slammed the DA saying, "Race remains a highly charged topic in our country three decades after the end of white minority rule. The DA’s leadership and the party have a reputation for defending the interests of the white minority, which it denies.” @luckymaake4 on X says "A lot of things that the DA wants to achieve will come at the expense of the previously disadvantaged. Because of our history, whatever is implemented will disappoint the previously disadvantaged or the previously advantaged. It is difficult to satisfy everyone". Explaining his understading of the Act , Manix Sanga Muyala  on Facebook said , " To my own understanding, employment equity is a mechanism to try and bring a balance between those who were oppressed and the oppressors . Can anyone tell me what other system is in place to uplift those who were oppressed?" The DA is challenging the constitutionality of the new draft employment equity targets. The amendments are proposed in the recently gazetted Employment Equity Amendment Act. The party argues that the previous version of the EE Act struck an appropriate balance between fostering transformation and protecting the rights of undesignated groups. It says the previous EE Act was flexible, prohibited quotas, and empowered employers to set targets based on their specific circumstances. The DA says the draft law is tagged incorrectly and should be declared invalid. The Employment and Labour Department will present the State’s case defending the changes. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.enca.com/top-stories/it-time-scrap-equity-targets

Employment Equity  holds immense significance in the South African workplace as it plays a crucial role in promoting fairness, equality, and inclusivity. It aims to redress historical imbalances and to  ensure that all individuals have equal access to employment opportunities and fair treatment. In this article, we will explore the significance of Employment Equity in the South African workplace and the benefits it brings to organisations and society as a whole. Redressing Historical Injustices: Employment Equity seeks to rectify historical imbalances by actively promoting the representation and advancement of designated groups, such as Black people, women, people with disabilities, and other previously disadvantaged individuals. By providing equal opportunities, Employment Equity contributes to the social and economic transformation of the country. Promoting Diversity and Inclusion: Diversity and inclusion are essential for fostering innovation, creativity, and productivity in the workplace. Employment Equity ensures that organisations embrace diversity by creating an environment that values and respects individuals from different backgrounds, experiences, and perspectives. This leads to a richer and more dynamic workforce, enhancing problem-solving abilities and decision-making processes. Enhancing Organisational Performance: Employment Equity is not just a legal requirement; it also brings tangible benefits to organisations. Embracing diversity and inclusivity fosters a positive work culture, increases employee morale, and improves job satisfaction. When employees feel valued and included, they are more engaged, committed, and motivated to perform at their best. This, in turn, leads to increased productivity, higher retention rates, and improved organisational performance. Gaining Competitive Advantage: In today's globalised and interconnected world, organisations that prioritise Employment Equity initiatives gain a competitive advantage. Customers, clients, and investors increasingly seek out companies that demonstrate a commitment to diversity and social responsibility. By embracing Employment Equity, organisations enhance their reputation, attract a wider customer base, and access new business opportunities. Legal Compliance: Employment Equity  is not only a moral imperative but also a legal requirement in South Africa. The Employment Equity Act, as amended, mandates employers to eliminate unfair discrimination, promote equal opportunity, and report on their progress towards achieving Employment Equity goals. Non-compliance with the EEA can result in penalties, fines, and damage to an organisation's reputation. Building a Just and Equitable Society:  At its core, Employment Equity contributes to the building of a just and equitable society. By dismantling systemic barriers, it promotes social cohesion and strengthens the social fabric of the nation. It enables individuals from designated groups to participate fully in the economy, contribute to their communities, and improve their quality of life. Employment Equity aligns with the vision of a South Africa where opportunities are accessible to all, regardless of their background. Employment Equity holds significant importance in the South African workplace. It not only addresses historical injustices but also promotes diversity, inclusion, and organisational success. By embracing Employment Equity, organisations contribute to the creation of a fair and just society while reaping the benefits of a diverse and engaged workforce . It is an essential pillar of South Africa's journey towards social and economic transformation.

The 2025 EE workshops  will be held under the theme: “Bridging the Equity Gap Through Diversity & Inclusion". These will be held during the month of May and June 2025 across all nine provinces.   This year's workshops will focus on:   How to implement the EE Amendments contained in the EE Amendment Act, 2022 and its EE Regulations? Five-year Sector EE targets for 18 economic sectors; Practical demonstration of how to utilise the EE system online facilities to capture EE reports and request EE Certificate of Compliance; and Presentation on discrimination disputes referred to the CCMA and the various Courts, in particular, harassment cases, including dispute resolution mechanisms in terms of the EEA.    Employment Equity Services   are also available to assist Members understanding the new requirements.

Lerato Mutsila | 6 May 2025 The DA’s case against Labour Minister Nomakhosazana Meth and the Employment Equity Amendment Act is under way in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, with the DA opening the door for the entire bill to be declared invalid. “Leave good enough alone.” This was the Democratic Alliance’s (DA) argument in the Gauteng Division of the High Court on Tuesday, 6 May 2025, as the party challenged the constitutionality of the new draft employment equity targets proposed in the recently gazetted Employment Equity Amendment Act. The courtroom was filled with members of the public, including prominent individuals like DA MP Willie Aucamp and Cosatu Secretary-General Solly Phetoe. The DA’s legal representative, Ismail Jamie, told the court that the previous iteration of the Employment Equity Act struck an appropriate balance between fostering transformation and protecting the rights of undesignated groups in that it was flexible, prohibited quotas, and gave employers the power to set their own targets based on their specific circumstances. Jamie argued that the amended act violated Section 9 of the Constitution  because it “replaces a nuanced, flexible system with one that is blunt and rigid”. In April, the Department of Employment and Labour gazetted the amendment act, which introduced five-year numerical targets for the top four occupational levels (junior, middle, senior and top management) across 18 sectors, ranging from finance to manufacturing. ‘Rights violated’ While the party’s main argument was that Section 15a of the amended act violated the rights of coloureds, Indians and white people, another key argument was that the draft law was tagged incorrectly, therefore making it invalid. Jamie argued that the amendment bill was passed under Section 75 (which excluded provinces) of the Constitution instead of Section 76 (which governs legislation on a national level). Section 76 governs how bills affecting provinces must be passed, and its focus was to ensure that provincial interests were considered. The party’s representative maintained that if the court found that Section 15A of the amended act was indeed invalid because it had been tagged incorrectly, then a natural consequence of the finding would be that the entire amended act be deemed invalid on a technicality. The DA also claims that: Section 15A violates Section 9 of the Constitution by enabling discrimination based on race. The minister’s discretion under Section 15a lacks clear legal standards, contravening the Dawood principle of administrative law. The implementation of demographic targets disproportionately prejudices coloured and Indian communities in certain provinces, particularly the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal. Exemptions for small businesses and the government’s settlement in the Solidarity case suggest an acknowledgement of the potential economic harm of the quotas. Drama unfolds   While the proceedings were relatively calm, they were unceremoniously interrupted by two unidentified individuals, who said that they were aggrieved parties who deserved to submit to the court. In a dramatic turn, the men told the judge that they would consider the case a mistrial if the judge refused to hear them, as Parliament had ignored their interests when drafting a law that worked against their interests. The judge refused to hear them and summarily dismissed the pair. The case is ongoing with the Department of Employment and Labour’s representatives presenting the State’s argument. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/article/2025-05-06-high-court-hears-das-case-against-employment-equity-amendment-in-critical-examination-of-transformation/

Nomvula Mabuza | 6 May 2025 Africa faces a stark paradox. With youth unemployment soaring—50% in South Africa alone—and a population projected to double to 2.5 billion by 2050, the continent teeters on the edge of crisis or transformation. Can black-owned enterprises, long stifled by systemic exclusion, ignite an industrial revolution that marries growth with equity? The evidence says yes. From Nigeria’s fintech pioneers to South Africa’s green energy innovators, black entrepreneurs are forging a path defined by local ingenuity and sustainable impact. Yet, their potential remains throttled by structural barriers. This piece dissects the problem, uncovers root causes and charts a pragmatic course forward—because Africa’s future demands nothing less. “Africa’s future lies in the hands of its entrepreneurs, who turn challenges into opportunities for inclusive growth,” says Akinwumi Adesina, President of the African Development Bank. That vision is unfolding now. Black-owned businesses are not waiting for permission to reshape Africa’s economy. They’re driving it: Nigeria: Paystack and Flutterwave, black-founded fintechs, process over $10 billion annually, digitizing commerce for millions. • Kenya: Twiga Foods links 100,000 smallholder farmers to markets, slashing food waste by 30% and lifting incomes. • Ghana: PEG Africa’s 100,000+ solar installations by 2022 have electrified rural homes, creating 1,000 jobs. • South Africa: Kiara Health, a 100% black-owned pharmaceutical firm, employs 200+ and produces affordable medicines, tackling healthcare gaps. In South Africa, black industrialists generated R80 billion in 2023, yet their footprint is dwarfed by opportunity: black ownership in manufacturing and energy languishes at 8.5%. Continent-wide, SMEs—many black-led— fuel 80% of jobs but just 20% of GDP. This mismatch screams inefficiency. Scaling these enterprises could turbocharge growth, but only if we address the chokeholds. The barriers are not accidents—they’re legacies. In South Africa, Black Economic Empowerment policies limp along, with black ownership in key sectors stuck below 10%. Capital is a choke point: black entrepreneurs secure just 15% of venture funding compared to white peers, with Ghanaian SMEs 30% less likely to get loans and Nigerian firms crippled by 20% interest rates. Infrastructure is another shackle. Rural Kenyan firms spend 15% of revenue on generators due to erratic power. In South Africa, shoddy transport networks strand township businesses. A 2022 study pegs infrastructure deficits as slashing SME productivity by 40% across sub-Saharan Africa. These burdens hit black entrepreneurs hardest. Africa’s industrial lag mirrors past upheavals. Britain’s Industrial Revolution churned out wealth but starved workers until cooperatives and reforms—like the 1844 Rochdale Pioneers—shared the gains. Japan’s postwar boom hinged on inclusive policies—small business support and rural investment—that turned scarcity into strength. Contrast this with Africa’s extractive colonial model, where resources flowed out and locals were left sidelined. Today’s black-owned firms flip that script. South Africa’s Bio2Watt biogas plant, black-led, powers 4.5 MW and funnels 20% of profits into local schools. Kenya’s Lake Turkana Wind project ties community benefits to its 310 MW output. Globally, Chile’s indigenous mining co-ops channel wealth locally. These aren’t anomalies—they’re principles: inclusion drives resilience. Africa’s industrial leap must embed this lesson, or risk repeating history’s mistakes. Black entrepreneurs wield technology as a battering ram. Nigeria’s fintech duo, Paystack and Flutterwave, globalize SMEs. Twiga Foods’ digital platform cuts agricultural losses by 25%. PEG Africa’s solar grid lights up Ghana’s fringes. In South Africa, Bio2Watt’s green energy model hints at a 2-million-job renewable sector by 2030. Take Thandiwe Nkosi of Kiara Health. With a modest loan, she launched a pharmaceutical firm in 2010. Against funding rejections and regulatory mazes, she built a 200-strong team producing vital medicines—proof of what’s possible when talent meets tenacity. Her story isn’t unique; it’s a signal. Dreams need scaffolding. Here’s how to build it: • Capital: Launch a pan-African VC fund for black-owned SMEs, backed by equity guarantees to de-risk investment. • Skills: Seed township incubators for tech and green industry training. • Zones: Supercharge SEZs with tax breaks for black-led firms in pharma and renewables. • Ownership: Mandate 51% black stakes in strategic sectors—wealth must stay local. • Trade: Use AfCFTA to catapult black firms into regional supply chains. Picture this: by 2040, township micro-factories churn out solar panels, owned by the workers who run them. A KwaZulu-Natal steel co-op funds roads; a Ghanaian textile hub thrives on artisan equity. Black-led innovation doesn’t just grow GDP—it redefines it, cutting urban sprawl and positioning Africa as the world’s ethical production hub. In a world grappling with inequality and climate crises, Africa’s inclusive model could light the way—not just for the continent, but for all. But physics needs force. Africa’s governments, banks and citizens must dismantle the barriers—capital scarcity, skills gaps, infrastructure rot—that choke this future. Black entrepreneurs have lit the spark. Policymakers, investors, citizens—will you fan it into a blaze or let it flicker out? Nomvula Mabuza is a Risk Governance and Compliance Specialist with extensive experience in strategic risk and industrial operations. She is an MBA candidate at Henley Business School, South Africa. ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://iol.co.za/business-report/opinion/2025-05-05-black-entrepreneurs-powering-africas-equitable-industrial-revolution/

Talita Laubscher and Melissa Cogger | 5 May 2025 To ensure compliance with their affirmative action obligations under the Employment Equity Act, 1998 (EEA) and the newly enacted Employment Equity Regulations, 2025 (General Administrative EE Regulations), designated employers must first conduct a workplace analysis as required by section 19 of the EEA.  In terms of section 19, a designated employer is required to collect information relating to its employment policies, practices, procedures and the working environment in order to identify employment barriers that adversely affect people from designated groups. What this entails is more fully explained in the explanatory paragraphs contained in the EEA12 form in the General Administrative EE Regulations, which largely reflect what is also set out in the Code of Good Practice on the Preparation, Implementation and Monitoring of the Employment Equity Plan (Code), which Code remains applicable. According to the EEA12 form, barriers may contribute to the under-representation of employees from designated groups, or the lack of affirmation of diversity in the workplace. The analysis is also intended to identify practices or factors that positively promote employment equity and diversity in the workplace, including reasonable accommodation. The analysis includes a ‘critical examination’ of, among other things: recruitment, selection, pre-employment testing , promotion, retention, succession planning, training opportunities, and so on. A full list of policies, practices and conditions that are required to form part of the analysis are set out in the EEA12 form, however, this is not a closed list, and the Code provides that further columns and rows may be added by a designated employer. A workforce profile analysis This analysis must include a workforce profile in order to determine the degree of under-representation of people from designated groups in the various occupational levels in the workplace, as compared to the economically active population (EAP) and the five-year sector targets. Which EAP to use The EEA8 form in the General Administrative EE Regulations, read with the EEA12 form, provides a guide for designated employers when it comes to the applicable EAP. According to these forms, employers are required to refer to the Statistics South Africa Quarterly Labour Force Survey of the third quarter when determining the EAP and conducting the analysis. This information can also be found in the Commission for Employment Equity Annual Report. If the employer operates in more than one province, it must consider the nature and geographical area of its operations and adopt either (i) the national EAP, (ii) the provincial EAP for each of the provinces in which it operates, or (iii) the provincial EAP of the province where the largest part of its operations is conducted. Once the applicable EAP has been chosen, it must be used when preparing the employment equity plan (EE Plan) and reporting to the Department of Employment and Labour in terms of section 21, and it must be utilised for the full duration of the EE Plan. That said, if the national EAP or the provincial EAP in which the largest part of the operations is conducted is used, the employer must nevertheless have regard to the variations between the EAPs of different provinces when setting numerical targets. In addition to the EAP, the employer must use the five-year sector targets when conducting the analysis to determine the degree of under-representation. How to record the analysis Employers will need to use the updated EEA1 form to collect the information necessary for the workforce profile, i.e., information relating to an employee’s race, gender, disability status and whether they are a foreign national. This form will need to be completed by all employees (both permanent and temporary) and assists the employer in determining which employees are from ‘designated groups’ for purposes of the EEA. The contents of this form must remain confidential and be used only for purposes of compliance with an employer’s obligations under the EEA. Should employees refuse to complete the form, designated employers can rely on reliable historical and existing data, noting that persons with disabilities have a right not to declare their disabilities. Among other changes that have been made to the form, the EEA1 form now reflects the expanded definition of ‘people with disabilities’, being ‘people who have a long-term or recurring physical, mental, intellectual or sensory impairment, which in interaction with various barriers, may substantially limit their prospects of entry into, or advancement, in employment’. It also provides space for people with disabilities to indicate whether they require reasonable accommodation and if so, to specify what that accommodation might look like. The data from these EEA1 forms will then need to be reflected on the EEA12 form, where employers will capture the workforce profile figures and the over-representation or under-representation of particular groups (designated or non-designated) in each occupational level, with reference to the applicable EAP and sector targets. Completion of the EEA12 form is required in order to comply with section 19 of the EEA. The EEA12 form will also be used to capture the information relating to any barriers identified in the employer’s policies, practices or procedures and the affirmative action measures that are proposed to respond to such barriers. These will inform the non-numerical goals outlined in the EE Plan.  Timing For purposes of the workplace profile, a snapshot of the employee distribution in the various occupational levels in terms of race, gender and disability must be taken on a particular date. The EEA12 form contemplates that this date will be the last day of a month. Whilst the General Administrative EE Regulations do not prescribe the month in which the snapshot should be taken, the timelines are tight, considering that all designated employers’ EE Plans will need to be finalised by 1 September 2025 (being the prescribed start date for all EE Plans, in line with the five-year sector targets), and that employers are required to consult on both the analysis and EE Plan. Given these timeframes, it would be advisable for employers to use 31 May 2025 as the snapshot date. If this date is used, the EEA1 forms could then be collected during the month of May. Employers would then prepare the draft barrier analysis by early June 2025 and use the month of June to consult with employee representatives on the contents of the analysis. The analysis would then be finalised at the end of June 2025. In parallel, the employer should prepare its new EE plan and have a draft ready for consultation by early July 2025.  Written by Talita Laubscher and Melissa Cogger, Partners and Chloë Loubser, Knowledge and Learning Lawyer, Bowmans South Africa ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.polity.org.za/article/south-africa-considerations-for-designated-employers-when-conducting-their-workplace-analysis-2025-05-05

Ihsaan Bassier and Leila Gautham | 5 May 2025 New research shows the company you work for makes the biggest difference. Why do women earn less than men? The usual suspects – occupation, hours, experience – explain some of it. However, a powerful, often overlooked reason is simply this: where women work. The companies that hire them play a huge role in shaping their lifetime earnings. South Africa has a severe gender pay gap, much of which is unexplained by worker characteristics such as occupation, skills, or experience. In our new study published in the Journal of Development Economics, using tax data on the universe of formal workers in South Africa, we uncover a striking fact: nearly half of the gender pay gap in South Africa is explained by women working at lower-paying companies than men. That is, more women tend to work at companies that pay all workers less. In addition, this phenomenon evolves dramatically over a woman’s life. We tracked millions of workers between 2010 and 2018 using tax data. We wanted to figure out how much money different companies paid, relative to each other, regardless of the type of worker. To do this, we compared what two companies pay the same worker. We looked at workers who switched companies and compared how their pay changed when they moved to a new company. By doing this for many workers and companies, we can see how much more or less companies tend to pay people with the same kind of background or job. In the formal sector in South Africa, women, on average, get paid 12% less than men. We find that about 45% of this gap – 5.5 percentage points – is due to women being concentrated in firms that pay less overall (to both women and men). This isn’t because women are paid less within the same company – that kind of direct discrimination plays a much smaller role. Instead, it’s largely about sorting: women and men end up at different companies, and those pay differently. Women disproportionately enter lower-paying sectors such as education, retail, or personal care, while men are over-represented in high-premium sectors like construction, mining, and manufacturing. As labour and development economists , we argue that reducing the gender pay gap takes more than putting women into male-dominated jobs or promoting equal pay for equal work. It means tackling the invisible structures that steer women into lower-paying companies. A gender gap that grows, then shrinks What’s particularly revealing is how the firm-pay gap changes across the life cycle. For workers in their early 20s, this gap is almost nonexistent. But from the mid-20s to the mid-40s – roughly the child-rearing years – the gap widens significantly. Why does this happen? First, women who remain continuously employed through their 30s tend to move to worse-paying firms than men, even though they switch jobs at similar rates. Second, women entering or re-entering formal work (after a spell of unemployment or informal work) tend to start at lower-paying firms than men. This disadvantage when re-entering contributes to the overall gap, but is more constant over the life cycle. Interestingly, churn (moving in and out of employment) is common, but men and women do it at similar rates. The key difference is what type of firm they land in when they return. Nearly half the gap among entrants is explained by industry sorting – women disproportionately enter lower-paying sectors such as education, retail, or personal care, while men are overrepresented in high-premium sectors like construction, mining, and manufacturing. This isn’t because women have fewer (or different) skills. That might be another contributor to the overall gender gap in pay, but it’s not what we looked at. This is the pay disadvantage women face from being at firms that pay less for the same job or skill. The firms that women join tend to be in lower-paying industries, have fewer resources, and are less likely to be covered by collective bargaining agreements (union-negotiated industry wages) that boost pay. Just like men, women leave or re-enter formal jobs at the same rates as men, and are, in fact, just as likely to switch jobs when employed. The problem then is that their job switches are less likely to lead to upward moves in the pay hierarchy, possibly due to employer discrimination or a need to prioritise non-pay job characteristics (like flexibility). Then something remarkable happens. As women age into their late 40s and 50s, the gender gap begins to close. They start making more advantageous moves than men. This is likely because they have been sorted into lower-paying firms earlier in their careers and have more room to climb. And with child-related constraints easing later in life, they finally can. Firms in developing countries Our finding – that women ending up in lower-paying companies accounts for nearly half of the pay gap – is higher than estimates from high-income countries like Portugal or Italy , where it explains around 20%-25% . However, in developing countries like Brazil and Chile, the contribution is similar to what we find . Why do firms matter more in places like South Africa? Labour markets are more “monopsonistic” – firms have more power to set wages due to high unemployment and few outside options for workers . So because formal jobs are scarce, entering or moving up within the formal sector is harder, especially for women. In fact, we show that in regions of South Africa with lower levels of formality, the gender gap in firm pay is wider. Policy takeaways One instructive exception is the public sector, where the state has actively pursued gender equity in hiring. Public administration employs a much higher share of women than men and offers relatively high pay premiums. In developing countries especially, where formality is limited and transitions into good jobs are harder, policy can focus on easing women’s access to high-paying companies. This can mean policies that support childcare, promote flexibility without penalising pay, or reduce discrimination in hiring. Otherwise, sorting into low-paying firms will keep reproducing the gender pay gap, one job move at a time. Ihsaan Bassier , researcher in economics, University of Surrey and Leila Gautham , lecturer in economics, University of Leeds This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article . ‘Disclaimer - The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the BEE CHAMBER’. https://www.moneyweb.co.za/moneyweb-opinion/soapbox/why-are-women-paid-less-than-men-in-sa/#:~:text=Instead%2C%20it's%20largely%20about%20sorting,construction%2C%20mining%2C%20and%20manufacturing .