Neasa doubles down on opposition to Employment Equity quotas
Image: Leon Lestrade/ Independent Newspapers
The National Employers' Association of South Africa (Neasa) on Tuesday upped its anti against Employment Equity sectoral numerical quotas and wrote an open letter to President Cyril Ramaphosa and the Minister of Employment and Labour Nomakhosazana Meth.
This comes hot on the heels of Neasa and Sakekuga earlier this month lodging an urgent legal challenge against the employment equity quotas and accompanying administrative regulations.
Neasa said although this challenge deals with both procedural and substantive defects relating to the new numerical sectoral quotas, another major obstacle, which has been amplified by the new quotas, stands in the way of employers even contemplating complying with these regulations.
It stated that the Employment Equity regulations and the unconstitutional obligation placed upon employers to classify employees by their race and disability is ethically untenable, impractical, and divisive.
Gerhard Papenfus the CEO of Neasa, raised the following points.
He said the purpose of the individually completed EEA1 form is to acquire data in order to create a workplace profile illustrating the current racial, gender, and disability composition of the employer's workforce. Therefore, by requesting employees to self-classify as to their race and disability, this form effectively expects them to firstly, navigate the complexities of race, gender and ethnicity in a policy and classification-criteria vacuum and, secondly, in perpetuity, set themselves up to be discriminated against based on a potentially uninformed decision. However, there is no legal obligation on employees to complete the form or to do so 'accurately'.
Neasa said it had already heard of employees refusing to complete the EEA1 form for reasons including personal convictions, fear of discrimination, being of a mixed ethnic background, etc. There are no guidelines for employees regarding the determination of race, and the guidelines regarding disability contain a myriad of contradictions.
However, it said this eventuality has, seemingly, also been anticipated in the regulations as can be deduced from the wording of the EEA12 form, which stipulates that: 'Where there is doubt in the self-identification process of an employee, existing and/or historical information may be used to assist to verify an employee's status'; and Regulation 8(2), which reads as follows: 'Where an employee refuses to complete the EEA1 form or provides inaccurate information, the employer may establish the designation of an employee by using reliable historical and existing data …'
Papenfus said, "Minister, these provisions place employers in a precarious and impossible position, particularly in the context of South Africa's history of state racial classification. The regulations expect employers to unilaterally and arbitrarily classify the race and disability of a particular employee who has elected not to self-identify by these criteria or whom, in the opinion of the employer, or an appointed human resource manager, or consultant, was inaccurate when self-declaring."
He said this decision must then be made by an employer to determine the race or disability of a particular employee. However, "it is not within the constitutional ambit of any employer, or any other person for that matter, to decide on these characteristics of another person."
Furthermore, although the government no longer has such authority, the Employment Equity regulations impose on employers the obligation to engage in just such classification of people, without any empowering provision to do so, and without providing any guidance on the methods or criteria to be implemented to reach just conclusions, within the framework of the Rule of Law, on the race and disability of a person.
Papenfus said this obligation imposed on employers, not only places them in an untenable ethical position, but is also legally impermissible and practically impossible to comply with.
Neasa said it could not allow for this unconstitutional obligation and unacceptable burden to be placed upon employers. It called on the state to stop forcing employers to carry out the government's desired racial classification and discrimination on its behalf.
"Mr President and Minister Meth, we are not willing to do your dirty work," Papenfus said.
BUSINESS REPORT
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Maverick
an hour ago
- Daily Maverick
Southern African Liberation Movements Summit tries to revive its members' declining fortunes
The annual summit of the six southern African liberation movements reveals why they haven't evolved. The 2025 Liberation Movements Summit provided insights into why the six southern African movements governing or co-governing their countries have struggled to evolve into normal, democratic political parties. From 25 to 28 July, leaders gathered in Johannesburg for solidarity, introspection and mutual learning under the theme 'Defending the Liberation Gains, Advancing Integrated Socio-Economic Development, Strengthening Solidarity for a Better Africa'. The six movements are South Africa's ANC, the Zimbabwe African National Union-Patriotic Front (Zanu-PF), Tanzania's Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM), the Mozambique Liberation Front (Frelimo), the People's Movement for the Liberation of Angola (MPLA), and Namibia's South West Africa People's Organisation (Swapo). The summit's announcement by the host party, the ANC, said: 'This critical gathering reaffirms the ideological foundations of the six southern African liberation movements… and their historical role in securing independence, dignity and development across the region. It also seeks to reassert the relevance of these movements in a rapidly shifting global order.' The movements defeated colonial rule and apartheid and 'implemented landmark policies on land reform, education, housing, infrastructure and social protection', it said. 'However, these gains now face erosion due to renewed imperial pressures, economic crises and attempts at neocolonial interference. The [summit] provides a united platform to confront these threats and consolidate progressive regional responses.' Renewal is a good thing. But is this club the right vehicle for renewal and transformation? So the downturns of the six parties in government were entirely attributed to external forces, with no mention of internal causes. However, during the conference itself, some leaders did acknowledge internal ills. ANC secretary-general Fikile Mbalula said the movements' strategic imperatives now included defending the gains of liberation, which were 'under threat from internal erosion and external manipulation and interference', and confronting the reassertion of imperialism and geopolitical subversion. South African President Cyril Ramaphosa elaborated, saying the liberation movements had to 'contend with declining electoral support, shifting demographics, frustrated young people in our various countries, economic inequality and foreign interference'. He acknowledged a 'disconnect between our founding narratives and the lived realities of a new generation of young people' and admitted that 'many of the threats we face are internal', including corruption, patronage and the competition for public positions and resources. As a remedy, Ramaphosa said: 'We must institutionalise mechanisms for mutual accountability amongst our movements. We must find and hold each other to higher standards.' Namibian President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah echoed that sentiment, saying 'we must hold each other accountable as sister parties' to fight corruption. As far as one could tell, none of the other parties echoed such introspection. Renewal is a good thing. But is this club the right vehicle for renewal and transformation? Lack of democracy, for example, cannot be blamed on outsiders. Only two of the six countries governed by these parties, South Africa and Namibia, can be considered truly democratic. Tanzania's CCM-led regime has imprisoned leading opposition leader, Tundu Lissu, on spurious grounds. Under Frelimo, Mozambique violently suppressed opposition at last year's election and last week charged the main opposition presidential candidate, Venâncio Mondlane, with 'incitement to terrorism' for leading protests against those presidential polls. In general, most of these liberation movements' refusal to allow full democracy is the main reason they have not evolved into real political parties. In Zimbabwe, Zanu-PF has systematically suppressed and dismantled any opposition since independence in 1980. Angola's ruling MPLA has also systematically stifled any opposition. Largely because of such manoeuvres, those four liberation movements have remained in power since independence or liberation. Under strong regional pressure, Zanu-PF briefly admitted the opposition Movement for Democratic Change into a coalition government from 2009 to 2013. But it conceded no real power and, in 2013, won another dubious election outright. It has ruled solo since then. Even in South Africa – one of the movement's two genuine democracies – the ANC fell to under 40% of the vote in national elections in 2024 and had to form a government of national unity with the liberal DA as its main partner. In general, most of these liberation movements' refusal to allow full democracy is the main reason they have not evolved into real political parties. For some of the six, the liberation ideology this summit was designed to revive appears to include an attempt to maintain state control over as much of the economy as possible. That has been one of the main causes of economic failure, as public infrastructure such as railways and ports crumbles. For the six movements themselves, there may indeed have been benefits from the summit, not least in picking up tips on how to stay in power despite the odds, and assurances of mutual political support. But for the populations of the six countries, it is hard to see much benefit. It seems unlikely that Ramaphosa's proposed peer review mechanism will see the light of day. And if it does, even less chance it will hold any of the movements accountable – especially for suppressing political opposition. It would appear that the democratic deficit wasn't even mentioned at the summit. Rather ironically, Ramaphosa observed: 'History demands that we don't allow our legacies to be buried under the rubble of revolutionary nostalgia.' Indeed, that is a real danger. And it was revealing that this was billed as a summit of liberation movements – not 'former' liberation movements, as they have described themselves up to now. That change may suggest that these movements, facing growing opposition to their rules, need to assert their continued relevance. The liberation struggle deserves an honourable place in Africa's history. In the present, we need to move on. The struggle – for democracy, prosperity and equality – should indeed continue, but not through this vehicle. Its members mostly can't offer each other good examples of how to achieve that. Zimbabwean President Emmerson Mnangagwa told the summit: 'We have a sacred duty and responsibility to retain power for the purpose of advancing the people's agenda. We should never allow ourselves to lose power.' That captured what appears to be the real purpose of this club – collaborating to stay in power. DM
The Citizen
18 hours ago
- The Citizen
Government announces when Aarto demerit system will start
The national implementation of the Aarto Act has been confirmed with government rolling out regulations in phases Clauses relating to the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences (Aarto) demerit system will come into effect next year. In a bulk gazette that contained 16 notices and proclamations, national government on Friday declared the commencement dates for certain sections of the Aarto Act and its subsequent amendment. Implementation of the act will be done in phases, beginning in December for some municipalities. The Aarto Act was passed in 1998, with the amendment containing the demerit system signed by President Cyril Ramaphosa in 2019. Friday's gazette stated that the whole of the 1998 Act, with the exception of Section 29(g), will come into effect for 69 municipalities in 1 December. Sections 17 to 20, section 23 and sections 29 to 35 of the 2019 amendment will also come into effect for those 69 municipalities on 1 December. These municipalities include Johannesburg, Tshwane, Ekurhuleni, Mangaung, eThekwini and Cape Town. Five months later, 144 municipalities receive the same stipulations on 1 April 2026. These include the Knysna, Drakenstein, Bela-Bela, Umvoti and 140 other local municipalities. Section 24, which covers the demerit system, as well as sections 25 to 28 will come in effect for all municipalities from 1 September 2026. Constitutional court case The Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa) challenged the amendments and took the matter all the way to Constitutional Court. The civil society group asserted that the amendments did not adequately deal with road traffic safety and that it hampered municipalities' ability to regulate their own affairs. 'Outa is of the opinion that the Aarto practical challenges are largely due to poor enforcement, a lack of administrative discipline when it comes to traffic infringement management, and a variety of problems in the management of vehicle and driver licencing,' the organisation stated at the time. In July 2023, the court ruled against Outa, with then Chief Justice Raymond Zondo's judgment declaring that the amendments were constitutional. Employee implications Section 17 of the Act deals with the responsibilities of those who employ drivers. 'Aarto will make employers potentially face administrative and financial burdens for their employees' non-compliance where their driving falls within the employees' key duties and responsibilities,' Weber Wentzel advised previously. The Act requires a company to appoint a proxy to represent company vehicles but the firm state that the proxy will not accumulate demerit points on the drivers' behalf. 'However, the proxy must ensure that the demerit points are allocated to the correct driver.' 'Should the proxy not do so, the employer will be liable to pay the fine at three times the value applicable to ordinary license holders,' WeberWentzel stated. NOW READ: Aarto implementation could result in municipal traffic services 'shutting down'
The Herald
a day ago
- The Herald
Government announces start date for driving licence demerits
The government has confirmed that the Administrative Adjudication of Road Traffic Offences Amendment Act (Aarto) will be rolled out across the country in phases, starting on December 1. The national implementation of the long-delayed system was gazetted on Friday when President Cyril Ramaphosa signed the proclamation. The first phase will be rolled out on December 1 in 69 municipalities, with the remaining 144 municipalities to follow on April 1 2026. The demerit points system comes into effect countrywide on September 1 2026. The points demerit system is not operational yet anywhere in the country, including in Johannesburg and Tshwane where Aarto has been piloted for more than 12 years. Aarto is the government's plan to replace the existing criminal system with an administrative one. With Aarto, drivers will lose points for offences and face suspension or cancellation of their licences if they lose too many, in addition to any fine. The controversial act, originally passed into law in 1998, has been delayed numerous times and affected by legal disputes. In July 2023 the Constitutional Court ruled in favour of the government's plan to introduce a demerit system for traffic offenders, overturning an earlier high court ruling that had declared Aarto unconstitutional and invalid. The challenge was brought by the Organisation Undoing Tax Abuse (Outa), an outspoken critic of Aarto which said the new system, rather than improving road safety, would impose an undue burden on motorists, especially those who rely on driving for their livelihoods. Outa and the AA both argued that the new law would make it easier for authorities to make money from traffic fines but won't rid the roads of dangerous drivers without proper enforcement, an area where traffic authorities have failed given the country's appalling road safety record. South Africa's road deaths average more than 10,000 a year and the cost of road crashes to the economy topped R1-trillion over the past seven years. The government maintains Aarto will be a vital tool in strengthening laws for road traffic compliance and making roads safer. It replaces the country's fragmented traffic enforcement, with different municipalities having their own bylaws. The core of Aarto is a demerit system where points are allocated for infringements, which will lead to driver's licence suspension or cancellation if too many points are accumulated. The act aims to streamline the process for adjudicating road traffic infringements by replacing courts with the Road Traffic Infringement Authority (RTIA), which is now responsible for managing the process. Aarto also allows for electronic service of notices and documents, establishing an appeals tribunal to hear appeals against decisions of the RTIA and removes the option of electing to be tried in court for an infringement. RTIA spokesperson Monde Mkalipi said: 'Aarto looks at promoting a culture of voluntary compliance, [where drivers] are ... mindful there will be consequences if they fail to change their behaviour. And these consequences are going to happen faster in that your licence will be suspended or taken away, and you'll not be able to drive.'
