FlySafair pilots to embark on two-week strike after deadlock in wage negotiations
The duration of strike, which was initially planned to take place over one day, was changed to 14 days after the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) agreed to the rules for the industrial action.
In a statement on Friday, the union said due to the company's unwillingness to meet the demands of the workers, they were left with no other option but to down their tools.
'In its reaction to the company's aggressive action, Solidarity decided to extend the one-day strike initially planned to 14 days.'
The more than 200 pilots are demanding a 10% salary increase and improved working conditions.
FlySafair's offer to workers of a 5.7% salary increase along with some additional adjustments to compensation was rejected by the vast majority of Solidarity's members.
The labour union accused the airline of issuing a seven-day lockout for pilots represented by Solidarity.
'This step indicates that the airline is deliberately opting for a prolonged and destabilising conflict, which could possibly be extended by another seven days should Solidarity and its members not comply with management's controversial demands. This means that no flights can be guaranteed for the next two weeks.'
The union claims the airline is in a good financial position as it recently made millions through the sale of shares.
'Ironically, this lockout was announced while, according to media reports, two of FlySafair's most senior management members, CEO Elmar Conradie and CFO Pieter Richards, have recently realised more than R90m by selling shares — possibly at the expense of FlySafair's licence conditions.'
TimesLIVE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Mail & Guardian
34 minutes ago
- Mail & Guardian
Beyond the balance sheet: Costs and benefits of broad-based BEE
Any discussion about black economic empowerment must weigh up its benefits, addressing historical injustices and the costs of not transforming the economy. Photo: File The current media debate around broad-based black economic empowerment (broad-based BEE) has brought fresh attention to the policy's effect on the economy — raising important questions about its effectiveness, costs and outcomes. As this conversation grows louder, it's worth taking a closer look at some of the arguments being made. An example from the debate is a recent study released by Solidarity and the Free Market Foundation (FMF), which arguably overlooks certain key economic implications of B-BBEE. Titled The Costs of B-BBEE Compliance, the report estimates that broad-based BEE may reduce South Africa's GDP growth by as much as 1.5 to 3% annually, potentially resulting in 96,000 to 192,000 fewer jobs each year. It further contends that the policy disproportionately benefits a narrow elite while imposing undue compliance costs on the broader economy. While such figures demand scrutiny, they also warrant a critical examination of the underlying assumptions, methodology and, crucially, the broader socio-economic context in which broad-based BEE operates. One of the most significant concerns with the report is its presentation of correlation as causation. The paper attributes specific percentages of GDP loss and job losses directly to broad-based BEE but does not demonstrate how these effects were isolated from South Africa's myriad economic problems. South Africa's macroeconomic environment remains deeply constrained by structural impediments such as: Chronic electricity and water shortages, including load shedding; Global economic headwinds; Endemic corruption; and Policy uncertainty and governance deficits. Attributing complex macroeconomic trends solely to broad-based BEE risks simplifies a nuanced reality and underestimates the multifactorial nature of South Africa's growth constraints. Equally important is the report's limited treatment of the potential benefits of broad-based BEE. Many of which manifest over the medium to long term and are difficult to quantify through conventional compliance cost frameworks alone. Equity equivalent programmes (EEPs) enable multinational corporations, constrained by global ownership structures, to achieve ownership points through local investments in enterprise development, skills transfer and innovation. Far from being passive mechanisms, EEPs represent substantial, targeted injections into the domestic economy. IBM, for example, committed R700 million over 10 years to enterprise development, research and education. This included support for 74 black-owned businesses and fully funded bursaries for dozens of students from disadvantaged backgrounds in critical fields of information and communication technology. Samsung also made a substantial commitment, launching a R280 million equity equivalent investment programme (EEIP) in May 2019, projected to contribute nearly R1 billion to the South African economy over its 10-year duration. This programme aimed for a measurable effect on job creation, specifically targeting the creation of 262 direct jobs and supporting 13 black-owned and women-owned businesses. A notable focus of Samsung's investment is on industrialisation by black people through e-Waste recycling and beneficiation research and development, including the establishment of the first black-owned and operated e-waste beneficiation plant in Africa. These company-specific statistics, alongside broader programmes such as JP Morgan's Abadali EEIP, which aims for an additional 1,000 permanent jobs and R2 billion in financing transactions, underscore the crucial role of EEPs in boosting small and medium enterprises (SMEs), particularly black-owned businesses, by providing essential funding, business support and mentorship. Furthermore, these programmes significantly advance skills development, with more than 2,500 beneficiaries receiving critical skills training, and facilitating technology transfer, aligning with South Africa's national development goals and fostering a more inclusive and skilled workforce. The YES programme directly targets South Africa's intractable youth unemployment crisis. Since its inception in 2018, YES has facilitated more than 186,000 quality work experiences for young people, injecting nearly R11 billion in salaries into the economy. About 45% of participants secure permanent employment after placement, and 17% establish their own businesses, multiplying the long-term economic benefit. The initiative also encourages private sector participation by offering measurable broad-based BEE recognition for companies that create these opportunities. Enterprise and supplier development (ESD) remains a cornerstone of the broad-based BEE framework, driving significant investment into the SMME sector. South African corporates reportedly channel R20 billion to R30 billion annually into ESD programmes, helping integrate black-owned businesses into supply chains and enabling sustainable growth. For instance, the Shoprite Group's CredX programme has provided R10 billion in working capital to suppliers, while its Next Capital initiative has invested R20 million to support new black-owned enterprises. Collectively, such interventions empower black entrepreneurs, expand the tax base and generate employment in communities historically excluded from meaningful economic participation. Why broad-based BEE still matters Perhaps the most profound omission in the Solidarity and FMF report is its decontextualised approach to broad-based BEE's rationale. Apartheid was not merely a political system; it was an economic design that systematically dispossessed black South Africans of land, capital, skills and opportunities. This entrenched economic disenfranchisement cannot be dismantled simply by repealing discriminatory laws. Broad-based BEE emerged as a policy instrument to facilitate redress, promote equitable economic participation and mitigate the persistent structural inequality that threatens social cohesion and long-term stability. Any analysis that fails to account for this historical imperative and the potential socio-economic cost of neglecting it, is incomplete. There is little doubt that broad-based BEE can and should be improved. Calls for greater transparency, genuine empowerment outcomes, and tighter controls to prevent fronting and inefficiency are well-founded. But presenting a one-sided narrative that focuses exclusively on compliance costs while disregarding significant economic and social returns undermines the opportunity for a more balanced, evidence-based debate. As South Africa grapples with the problems of inclusive growth, any meaningful conversation about the future of broad-based BEE must extend beyond a narrow cost-benefit calculus. It must weigh the policy's role in addressing historical injustices, its measurable and often intangible benefits, and the opportunity costs of not transforming the economy. A policy of this nature should not be romanticised or demonised without context. Instead, it demands honest, nuanced discussion, one that prioritises national development, social cohesion and sustainable, broad-based participation in the economy. The question should not be whether broad-based BEE has costs but rather whether we are collectively doing enough to ensure that its benefits are fully realised and that it continues to evolve to serve the South Africa we aspire to build. Safiyya Patel is a managing partner at Webber Wentzel.
Mail & Guardian
34 minutes ago
- Mail & Guardian
Can Africa trade without the dollar?
The Pan-African Payment and Settlement System seeks to liberate the continent from the dollar without waiting for a common currency – but there are hurdles to overcome. File photo As South Africa and its continental neighbours grapple with currency instability, downgraded credit ratings and fragile economies, a quiet financial revolution is taking shape, one that could determine the future of intra-African trade and the continent's financial autonomy. At the heart of this is the Pan-African Payment and Settlement System (PAPSS), a homegrown technical platform launched to allow African countries to trade in their own currencies without relying on the US dollar or the euro. But is Africa ready to trade with itself? PAPSS vs The dollar trap The PAPSS, developed by the African Export-Import Bank (Afreximbank) in partnership with the African Continental Free Trade Area (AfCFTA) Secretariat, promises to slash transaction costs and enable instant cross-border payments. The idea is politically attractive: let a South African importer pay in rands while a Kenyan exporter receives shillings all in real time, with no need to route funds through New York or Frankfurt. In theory, this could unlock vast economic potential. Africa currently settles more than 80% of its cross-border payments through external correspondent banks, often in the US or Europe. This reliance not only incurs high costs and delays but also exposes African trade to global shocks, compliance bottlenecks and foreign exchange constraints. The PAPSS aims to change that by enabling direct currency-to-currency transactions within the continent. Yet the challenges facing the PAPSS and its backers are formidable. Afreximbank, the system's main financier and strategic driver, is under pressure. A string of African sovereign downgrades by international credit agencies has heightened scrutiny of Afreximbank's loan book and its exposure to high-risk borrowers. Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria and Ethiopia have faced rating downgrades in the past two years, raising concerns about the quality of collateral and repayment capacity. This creates a credibility problem: can a regional institution with increasingly fragile clients underpin a pan-African payment infrastructure? Afreximbank's growing liabilities, if not offset by capital injections or improved repayment profiles, could stall the rollout of the PAPSS and erode confidence among participating states. A digital detour around a single currency Africa has long toyed with the dream of a single currency. The Abuja Treaty of 1991 set out a roadmap toward an African Monetary Union. But political differences, economic disparities, and the complexity of ceding monetary sovereignty have stalled the project for decades. Instead of a single currency, the PAPSS champions interoperability: the capacity for different financial systems, currencies and platforms to communicate and transact with each other seamlessly. In essence, it's a digital workaround. Rather than replace the rand, naira or cedi, the PAPSS enables these currencies to speak to each other in real time. This approach is technologically feasible, politically palatable and potentially transformative. But it demands more than just software. Interoperability requires legal harmonisation, institutional cooperation and robust digital infrastructure. For example, payment messages must conform to common standards such as ISO 20022; anti-money laundering procedures must be synchronised; and all actors must trust the system's settlement finality. As of mid-2025, the PAPSS is live in parts of West Africa and has integrated with 13 central banks and 28 commercial banks. It has signed partnerships with MFS Africa, one of the continent's largest digital payment networks, and the Arab Monetary Fund's BUNA system, extending its interoperability to the Middle East. Yet the system remains in pilot mode in many regions. South Africa, despite having one of the most advanced national payment systems on the continent, has not joined the PAPSS. The South African Reserve Bank has taken a cautious stance, citing the need for security, legal clarity, and risk mitigation. The credibility gap: Afreximbank under strain The credibility of Afreximbank is central to the PAPSS's success. The bank has earned praise for its role in facilitating trade finance and responding to crises, such as its $3 billion Covid-19 response facility. But its balance sheet is under strain. With several borrower countries facing liquidity crunches and International Monetary Fund bailouts, Afreximbank's ability to support the PAPSS in a sustained, scalable manner is uncertain. Global investors have taken note. Yields on Afreximbank bonds have risen, reflecting perceived risk. Meanwhile, Western partners have raised questions about the bank's exposure to politically unstable regimes and non-performing loans. These dynamics complicate Afreximbank's role as the financial bedrock of the PAPSS. This matters because credibility is currency in financial markets. Central banks, commercial banks, and fintech firms will only integrate into the PAPSS if they believe it is backed by a solvent, transparent, and technically robust institution. Any hint of fiscal fragility could deter adoption and send participants back to the familiarity of the dollar. Currency instability Currency volatility is perhaps the greatest threat to the PAPSS. In 2024 alone, the Ghanaian cedi fell 25% against the dollar, while the Nigerian naira lost more than 35% of its value. Inflation, budget deficits, and political instability continue to plague many African economies. This instability has real consequences. When currencies are volatile, businesses are reluctant to price goods in local money. Exporters demand hard currency, and importers hedge their bets. The PAPSS, by enabling local-currency settlement, assumes that market participants have confidence in the relative value of domestic currencies. But this is often not the case. Moreover, the legacy of hyperinflation, capital controls, and bank insolvencies in parts of Africa has left a deep scar. Trust in digital financial infrastructure cannot be separated from trust in national macroeconomic policy. If businesses doubt that today's kwacha will hold value tomorrow, they will bypass PAPSS regardless of its technical appeal. An ambivalent South Africa South Africa's ambivalence toward the PAPSS reflects a broader tension. On one hand, the country is committed to regional integration and expanding intra-African trade. On the other, its sophisticated financial ecosystem, anchored by the National Payment System, is wary of being linked to less stable regimes. The reserve bank has long promoted interoperability within its own borders and maintains strong oversight of domestic payment providers. But integrating with the PAPSS means embracing a shared digital infrastructure, with all the attendant risks: inconsistent regulatory enforcement, lower cybersecurity standards, and potential exposure to volatile currencies. Nevertheless, South Africa's participation could be a game-changer. As the continent's second-largest economy and a financial hub, its endorsement would lend credibility and accelerate adoption. The key may lie in phased integration, beginning with controlled corridors and bilateral settlements. The SME factor: Who benefits? One of the PAPSS's strongest arguments is its potential to empower small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). These businesses, which form the backbone of African economies, are often priced out of cross-border trade because of high banking fees, currency conversion costs and regulatory red tape. By simplifying payments, reducing costs, and enabling local currency use, the PAPSS could democratise trade. SMEs in Lesotho could source raw materials from Uganda without involving US-based banks. But this will only happen if the PAPSS becomes truly accessible. User interfaces, compliance processes and dispute resolution mechanisms must be tailored to small businesses, not just large corporates. The road ahead The PAPSS offers a tantalising glimpse of what an integrated African economy could look like: fast, frictionless and financially sovereign. But realising that vision requires more than technology. First, digital infrastructure must improve. Many African countries lack the bandwidth, cybersecurity protocols, and cloud services to support real-time payments at scale. Second, regulatory harmonisation must be accelerated. Disparate licensing regimes and data protection laws can obstruct cross-border fintech cooperation. Third, the issue of political will remains. The success of the PAPSS depends on the willingness of African governments and central banks to invest in a shared future. This includes difficult reforms: liberalising capital markets, building credible institutions, and curbing fiscal indiscipline. Finally, trust must be earned. The PAPSS must deliver consistent results, enforce its rules impartially, and protect users from fraud and abuse. Only then will businesses switch from legacy systems to a truly African financial network. The PAPSS seeks to liberate the continent from the dollar without waiting for a common currency. It bets on digital innovation as a substitute for monetary union. And it entrusts regional institutions like Afreximbank with a task usually reserved for global giants. Whether it succeeds will depend on how well Africa manages its contradictions: political instability vs. integration, sovereignty versus cooperation, ambition versus capacity. For now, the PAPSS remains a work in progress but one well worth watching. Rafia Akram is a lecturer in mercantile law.
Mail & Guardian
an hour ago
- Mail & Guardian
Understanding the intersection between estate planning and family legacy
Transferring wealth successfully across generations is one of the most complex challenges facing wealthy families. Research shows that about 70% of wealth transfers fail, not due to poor planning, but because of inadequate communication and lack of preparation. Often, heirs are simply unprepared for the responsibility that comes with sudden wealth. Protecting and passing on assets for high-net-worth families are only part of the solution. What's truly needed is a comprehensive estate or legacy plan, one that includes not only the financial aspects, but also prioritises family values, decision-making and long-term purpose. This requires more than a once-off estate plan; it demands ongoing planning, governance, and active heir involvement. It all starts with specialist In South Africa, discretionary trusts hold a variety of assets, including business interests, immovable properties, and investable assets. Trusts can be structured to ensure heirs' financial needs are met with access to capital when they are able to manage wealth, thereby supporting future generations as intended. A well-structured trust can also protect assets from external risks, such as creditors or divorce settlements, while maintaining long-term alignment with family goals. However, even with robust trust structures, wealth transfers can still fail due to lack of family clarity and cohesion. Family governance helps prevent this. Though often seen as a corporate tool, family governance is key for family wealth as it defines roles, decisions, and expectations. Family governance usually comes in the form of a charter or constitution. It outlines how decisions are made, who's involved, and what values guide the strategy. It may also include formal succession policies or protocols for conflict resolution. Crucially, family governance encourages open, regular communication. Structured meetings and informal check-ins keep everyone informed and able to raise concerns early. This sense of transparency and shared responsibility builds trust and reduces the risk of misunderstandings or resentment. A critical component of well-considered estate planning is a valid and executable will. This should be done once all wealth structures are in place to deal with any remaining personally owned wealth. Wealth transfers often fail because the will is not executable. Ensuring the executability of a will requires a full review of all the costs of dying (estate duty, executor fees, capital gain tax, etc.) to ensure sufficient liquidity to cover these costs without the need to sell or liquidate assets intended as bequests to heirs. Another major reason wealth transfers fail is unprepared heirs, leading to poor choices, conflict, or disengagement. Preparing the next generation goes beyond financial literacy. It means helping them understand the family's history and purpose, and the responsibility of family wealth. Ideally, this education should start early, through frank conversations and exposure to business or philanthropic initiatives, gradually increasing the responsibility of young members. Families might involve younger members in investment decisions or charitable efforts to build their confidence and reinforce stewardship. A philanthropic strategy, whether through a foundation, donor fund, or giving programme, enables families to define their shared values through action, strengthening family bonds and building a lasting legacy. Larger or more complex estates may benefit from a family office or dedicated adviser to coordinate legal, tax, investment, and governance needs, making it easier to align planning with long-term goals. Today, this structured approach is more important than ever. Blended families and families spread geographically are becoming the norm. Environmental, social and governance (ESG) investing is becoming more popular, particularly among younger generations who want portfolios to reflect social or environmental values. Meanwhile, digital assets like cryptocurrencies, online content, and intellectual property are creating new complexities for estate planning, especially in terms of access and regulation. In this evolving landscape, a clearly written family wealth charter can help avoid confusion and guide decision-making, even as the family structure or nature of its wealth changes over time. While it may seem complex, it doesn't have to be. With the support of a trusted wealth adviser, families can ensure their estate plans are clear, technically sound, legally compliant, and sensitive to family dynamics. With the right support, families can move beyond mere wealth preservation and transfer wealth to build legacies grounded in clarity and shared purpose.
