R515 million TERS audit sparks outrage among SA companies over alleged mismanagement by Labour Department
The TERS administered by the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), was implemented to assist employers in paying employees who were employed but not working because of the lockdown.
Image: File
Hundreds of companies are up in arms over a 'mismanaged' audit process, worth R515 million, launched by the Department of Labour and Employment (DEL) to probe potential theft of benefits provided to workers across South Africa during Covid-19.
The Temporary Employee Relief Scheme (TERS), administered by the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF), was implemented to assist employers to pay employees who were employed but not working because of the lockdown.
The TERS program, administered by UIF, paid out R57 billion to 13.4 million workers through 1.1 million companies during the pandemic, according to minutes from a November 2021 Standing Committee on Public Accounts Parliamentary Committee Meeting.
These benefits, research by UNU Wider states, saved at least two million jobs. However, Corruption Watch, summing up various investigations by law enforcement officials, stated in March this year that R351 million was siphoned off during the scheme's two-year run, with only R229 million recovered. Criminal investigations are set to conclude in December.
Among the fraudulent types of activities already uncovered included the use of fake ID documents, ID documents from dead people, claims for people who were temporarily employed, and benefits being claimed for 'former employees, whom the Special Investigating Unit found to have been incarcerated at the time,' said Corruption Watch.
The latest investigation – awarded to 26 private 'audit' companies at a cost of R515 million – aims to reclaim more funds but has sparked fury over chaotic execution, privacy breaches, and procedural failures.
The probe, initiated via tender UIF6/2023 published in February 2024, saw firms appointed in July last year. Seven months later, companies who had facilitated TERS benefits were abruptly ordered to submit 18 pieces of sensitive documentation – including employees' bank statements, and ID numbers – within three days.
'The sheer scale of this bureaucratic nightmare has left businesses scrambling to meet impossible deadlines, with intimidation tactics now seemingly standard practice,' the National Employers' Association of South Africa (NEASA) said in a March statement. It said that the 'unrealistic audit requests [are] followed almost immediately by threats of severe consequences for those who hesitate to comply'.
Within a week of the audit's launch, NEASA received over 350 complaints from employers.
Sanja Botha, Policy Advisor at NEASA, told IOL that, since auditors sent the requests for information 'we've seen a continuous influx of complaints and queries via email and telephone. The number of businesses being subjected to these audits is staggering and could be in the thousands.'
She added: 'The volume of complaints received from employers reflects serious mismanagement and procedural inconsistency on the part of the appointed auditing firms.'
Botha stated that 'some audit firms have demanded extensive and sensitive documentation, such as employees' personal bank statements, within unreasonably short timeframes, sometimes as little as 24 hours. This approach is not only impractical but adds insult to injury.'
What is more worrying is that there is no mechanism in place to safeguard the employees' private information. While the auditors signed a one-page confidentiality declaration under the Protection of Personal Information Act, the lack of 'clarity or security protocol for how this data is to be transferred or protected' is 'deeply concerning', said Botha.
Moreover, said Botha, 'many businesses are unsure whether the audits are even legitimate, as no formal verification mechanism exists to confirm the credentials of these auditors'.
Among the issues NEASA has identified include that audit letters are sent for entirely different companies, some, who never even applied for TERS, are being audited, while auditors also arrive on-site without prior notice or any proof of appointment. In multiple cases.
'Employer-appointed independent auditors have found significant errors in the UIF's audit assessments, raising serious questions about the credibility and integrity of the entire process,' said Botha.
NEASA has repeatedly raised concerns with the DEL and UIF since March, but 'we have received no responses from either the Minister of Employment and Labour or the UIF,' Botha said.
IOL sought comment from both entities on April 7. The UIF initially acknowledged receipt, stating the DEL would respond due to 'centralised communications.' Despite several follow-ups, neither provided answers as the time of writing.
IOL
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
8 hours ago
- The Citizen
Basic Income Grant implementation postponed again
The department's target for the current financial year is to table the Basic Income Support policy to Cabinet for approval. The implementation of South Africa's Basic Income Grant has been delayed once again, with the Department of Social Development announcing that further consultations are required before the policy can be finalised. The department presented its progress report to the portfolio committee on social development on Wednesday, outlining the ongoing challenges and next steps in developing the Basic Income Support policy. Despite more than two decades of policy development, the Basic Income Grant remains elusive, with approximately 9.2 million people currently dependent on the Covid-19 Social Relief of Distress Grant and 19.2 million beneficiaries across the South African Social Security Agency's (Sassa) other programs. The department has been working to create opportunities for grant-dependent individuals while navigating concerns about affordability and sustainability. Latest Basic Income Grant policy developments The Department of Social Development has been actively working on the Basic Income Support policy, with the first draft presented to the social protection, community and human development cluster Cabinet committee on 26 November 2024. However, the committee directed that additional consultations be conducted with internal members, with a particular focus on the policy's affordability and its linkages to economic opportunities. Following this directive, an interdepartmental workshop was organised on 31 March 2025 to discuss the revised document. During this meeting, all members agreed on the necessity of identifying ways to connect the grant with employment and sustainable livelihood opportunities targeted at the economically active population. The meeting acknowledged that the labour market, especially public employment initiatives, would not be able to absorb all current Social Relief of Distress beneficiaries. Deputy director-general Brenda Sibeko informed members of parliament (MPs) that the policy has been revised again and could potentially be approved within a year. 'If the policy is approved in the current financial year, then it means that after that, we have to write the law that makes the basic income support to be a permanent income support policy like the other grants,' she explained. ALSO READ: Sassa CEO's multimillion-rand package revealed amid suspension and grant hikes Ongoing consultations and timeline A second interdepartmental workshop is planned for the end of June 2025, which will be followed by bilateral meetings with the Presidency, Department of Labour, and National Treasury. The department intends to approach the committee in the second quarter of the 2025/26 financial year to request Cabinet consideration of the revised draft Basic Income Support policy. 'Once the consultations are concluded, the department will approach the SPCHD Cabinet Committee again in the second quarter of the 2025/26 financial year, to request Cabinet to consider the revised policy, and if approved, publish it for public comments,' the department explained. ALSO READ: Sassa SRD grant to be 'converted' to basic income grant – Mbalula says [VIDEO] Parliamentary frustration mounts MPs expressed growing frustration with the prolonged delays in developing a comprehensive Basic Income Grant policy. EFF MP, Noluvuyo Tafeni, voiced this concern directly, asking: 'When was the Basic Income Grant policy proposal first made? It was about some 30 years back, and there is still no progress.' The Basic Income Grant has indeed been on the country's policy agenda for more than 20 years, with the first proposal dating back to 1998. A technical proposal was subsequently drafted in 2002, but it failed to gain Cabinet approval. Financial challenges and sustainability concerns National Treasury has expressed significant concerns about the affordability and sustainability of introducing a Basic Income Support policy, given the country's high unemployment rate and current fiscal position. The department is working with various stakeholders to identify alternative ways to strengthen the implementation of the current Social Relief of Distress grant while creating pathways for beneficiaries to transition to other economic opportunities. Despite these challenges, the committee heard that the department has received approval to extend the Social Relief of Distress provision until the end of March 2026, with a budget of R35 billion. The department has proposed that the Social Relief of Distress grant be made permanent, with a phased approach to increase benefits progressively. The proposed entry-level Basic Income Support grant would be set at the Lower Bound Poverty Line, with long-term plans to eliminate poverty at the Upper Bound Poverty Line. ALSO READ: Sassa problems and glitches this year, will we get a basic income grant in 2025? Basic income grant supporting infrastructure and pilot programs While policy development continues, the Department of Social Development is working on several parallel initiatives to support the eventual implementation of the Basic Income Support policy. The department said it was collaborating with stakeholders to assist the South African Social Security Agency in enhancing system interoperability to improve efficiency in data-sharing for both eligibility assessment and economic linkages. Additionally, the department, along with Sassa and partners, is piloting ways to link grant beneficiaries to employment activities. An interdepartmental task team, including key departments such as National Treasury, the Presidency, Higher Education and Training, and Public Works, is working on various pathways to improve access to training, employment, and entrepreneurship support to reduce reliance on social grants as the only pathway out of poverty. ALSO READ: Ramaphosa hints again at expanding SRD grant – and will Treasury go 'BIG' this time? Next steps and legislative process The department's target for the current financial year is to table the Basic Income Support policy to Cabinet for approval. Should such approval be granted, the department will need to amend the Social Assistance Act to introduce a new social grant category. While the formulation of the amendment can be done relatively quickly, the timing of the legislation and its passage will depend on how rapidly Cabinet approves the draft bill, which will then be tabled to Parliament for processing. During this legislative process, it will be necessary for the Social Relief of Distress grant to be extended beyond March 2026 to ensure the continuation of income support. 'In order to ensure stability during this consultation period, the department will consult National Treasury for the SRD provision to be extended until the legislative process is complete, to ensure that its beneficiaries are protected from extreme poverty and vulnerability,' the department stated. NOW READ: Household food basket shows food prices still increasing
TimesLIVE
8 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
‘R130m security training was waste of time': Parliament committee calls for suspension of PSiRA director and CFO
'They told us we'd be qualified for jobs in law enforcement and security, but when the programme ended, we didn't get certificates and the training providers vanished.' This is how Roxanne Hyster, a Cape Town resident, described her time spent in a controversial employment initiative managed by the Private Security Industry Regulatory Authority (PSiRA) and funded by the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) to the tune of R130m. She is one of 6,507 unemployed people who completed the training but never received certificates or accreditation. The UIF training project was meant to upskill unemployed individuals in the security-related field and with computer skills to improve their employability. 'It was a waste of my time. I spent two months practically playing with them,' the 35-year-old said. Hyster remains unemployed. On Wednesday parliament's portfolio committee on policy called for the suspension of the director and CFO of PSiRA after revelations of irregularities and possible fraud involving the R130m project.
Daily Maverick
a day ago
- Daily Maverick
‘Painful to witness' — behind the jobs bloodbath at the Mail & Guardian
In May, staff at the Mail & Guardian were served with Section 189 notices informing them that the publication was initiating a process of retrenchment. The figures are stark. Out of a newsroom that employs just 25 permanent staff, approximately half now face losing their jobs. A total of 24 positions across editorial, administration and IT were identified as affected, with 12 redundancies anticipated. The reasons provided in the notices were familiar to an industry under siege. 'The Covid-19 pandemic, power shortages, rising inflation and an already strained South African economy' were listed, alongside 'rising costs for print materials and ink, alongside a marked reduction in advertising budgets, as advertisers increasingly turn to digital platforms to reach their audiences.' Mail & Guardian owner Hoosain Karjieker told Daily Maverick this week: 'It is clear from the entire sector that we operate in, that the traditional print media business model has become a failed business model that requires a more dramatic intervention for the M&G to sustain itself in the future'. But behind the cold language of economic pressure lies a possibly deeper malaise. 'There's been a difficult climate for all media, but Mail & Guardian has been particularly poorly handled in recent years,' the newspaper's co-founder, Anton Harber, told Daily Maverick. 'It's been extremely painful to witness.' Insiders who spoke to Daily Maverick this week on condition of anonymity because of the rapidly-diminishing size of a grudge-prone industry, painted the picture of a media operation that has been inching towards collapse for years. M&G boasts a proud history The Mail & Guardian has often seemed like a publication with nine lives. Its lineage stretches back to 1985 when it launched as the Weekly Mail, established by a group of journalists retrenched from anti-apartheid publications — mainly the Rand Daily Mail. With Harber and Irwin Manoim as its first editors, the paper quickly became known for its tenacity, its independence, and its investigations. In 1995 it became the Mail & Guardian after British publisher The Guardian bought a majority stake, which it held until 2017. Over the years, it established a reputation as one of South Africa's most fearless investigative print titles, breaking major stories almost week on week, but with an unusual corresponding depth in fields like coverage of the arts. It also led the continent in digital media innovation. At one point, the Mail & Guardian ran the first and biggest news website in Africa. But that early advantage was slowly and then swiftly eroded. One insider remarked this week: 'How that lead was squandered needs to be studied.' The outlet's digital strategy has been inconsistent, marked by the erection of a paywall that was later removed, and a growing reliance on sponsored content, both online and in print. Print circulation figures tell their own story: just 4,904 copies sold, according to the most recent figures, a collapse from the publication's peak of 50,000 to 60,000 under one of its former editors, Ferial Haffajee. More than the numbers, the human toll has become impossible to ignore. Staff morale was depleted by longstanding concerns about late or missed payments to freelancers and suppliers, something that has earned the publication a reputation for unreliability within media circles for at least a decade, and which has made it very difficult for the newspaper to hold on to talented collaborators. Claims of a lack of transparency when it came to the true state of Mail & Guardian's finances have also swirled — something Karjieker adamantly disputes. 'I am not aware of these claims,' he told Daily Maverick. 'More importantly, we have always been very transparent with staff with regard to our budgets, business plans and business strategy.' In recent years, editors came and went relatively quickly, struggling to turn the ship around amid dwindling resources and inconsistent leadership. The Mail & Guardian's loss of its publishing partnership with amaBhungane in 2016 was another body blow. The relationship had guaranteed a stream of high-impact investigative work. When it ended, so too did a crucial source of circulation-boosting journalism. The departure of the cartoonist Zapiro shortly afterwards symbolised a further loss of the paper's cultural and editorial heft. If the paper's steady decline has felt at times like death by a thousand cuts, the departure of its longtime financial backer last year may prove the final wound. In October 2024, the Media Development Investment Fund (MDIF), which had been the Mail & Guardian's majority shareholder for 22 years, exited. The reasons behind its departure are unclear; Karjieker referred Daily Maverick this week to a press statement from the MDIF at the time that does not greatly elucidate the matter. 'Though sad to be exiting such an iconic media company, we are pleased that ownership of the Mail & Guardian is passing into South African hands and that the transaction will bring new capital into the company to fuel development,' MDIF head Harlan Mandel was quoted as saying at the time. Its shares were sold to former CEO Karjieker and director Thembisa Fakude. Staff have reported concerns about the retrenchment process to come, with unease over whether settlements will be fully honoured given the paper's questionable track record on payments. The beginning of the end — or not the end at all? Karjieker is adamant that it's not over for the Mail & Guardian. 'Our vision will always be for the M&G to be a platform for high-quality, independent and credible journalism that underwrites the strength of our brand,' he says. 'The changes under way are designed to ensure its continuance for many more years to come.' Asked if it was possible that Mail & Guardian would shutter its print operation and move fully digital, as a number of Media24 titles, including City Press, have recently done, Karjieker said it was possible, but not foreseen for 2025. As journalists across South Africa absorb the latest grim news, there is little appetite for finger-pointing or schadenfreude. Almost every South African media house has endured rounds of retrenchments or restructuring in recent years. 'We operate in a failed market and it's very easy to be a casualty, while it's harder to invest in the things that will help us get out of it,' said Daily Maverick CEO Styli Charalambous. 'This is another example of why we need a new model to ensure the sustainability of media in South Africa. There has to be funding for media as a public good.' DM
