South Africa's DA party fights new racial targets for employers
JOHANNESBURG (Reuters) -South Africa's Democratic Alliance party is going to court to challenge a new employment law that sets racial targets for large employers in an attempt to address the economic inequality that is a persistent legacy of former racist white minority rule.
The Employment Equity Amendment Act, which came into effect in January, allows the labour minister to set targets per sector for the number of non-white people and women who should be in management-level and professionally qualified roles.
The DA, the second-biggest party in government, will argue in court on Tuesday that it is unconstitutional, party officials said on Monday, in a case that is causing further friction with its bigger coalition partner, the African National Congress.
The topic is especially heated since U.S. President Donald Trump condemned South Africa for alleged racial discrimination against its white population, and offered white South Africans refugee status.
"We opposed it from the beginning, for the key reason that it will continue to drive unemployment up (and) economic growth down," DA Federal Chairperson Helen Zille told a news briefing, saying this was because it would discourage companies from investing in South Africa.
The DA also says it discourages companies from growing because those with 50 or fewer employees are exempt. Firms larger than that need to obtain a compliance certificate or justify their failure to meet the targets in order to do business with the state.
Three decades after the end of white minority rule, racial divisions in South Africa remain stark. White people make up about 7% of the population but occupy 66% of top management level posts in the private sector, while Black people are more likely to be unemployed or in low-level jobs.
Last month, the government published five-year targets for 18 sectors include mining, manufacturing and agriculture. In mining, for example, it wants 57.5% of top management to be Black, Indian or "coloured" people, a term for South Africans of mixed race.
"This move is a clear attempt to reverse the progress made since 1994 and maintain the unfair status quo," the labour ministry said of the DA's court case.
South Africa has been trying to empower its Black population for years through a rewards system which previously allowed companies to set their own targets. But cheating is high and critics say it has mainly enriched a handful of politically connected businessmen.
(Writing by Nellie Peyton; Editing by Tim Cocks)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cracker Barrel shares nosedive following storm over logo change
By Suzanne McGee (Reuters) -An ongoing attempt by Cracker Barrel Old Country Store to revamp its brand triggered a backlash and unleashed a selloff that wiped out most of the dining chain's year-to-date stock price gains. The restaurant company on Tuesday unveiled a new logo that dispenses with the image of a seated, overall-clad man leaning against a barrel in favor of one that simply displays the chain's name against a barrel-shaped yellow silhouette. That prompted conservatives including Donald Trump Jr. as well as posters on Reddit and other social media sites to criticize the move. The stock has taken a hit, falling as much as 13% by midday on Thursday. Cracker Barrel's stock regained some ground later in the trading session, rising from an intraday low of $50.27 to close at $54.80, 7% lower on the day. Nearly four million Cracker Barrel shares changed hands on Thursday, compared to a daily average of about a million shares. "It's understandable that they would want to do something to refresh their image," said Steven Sosnick, market strategist at IBKR, who noted that, like many other casual dining chains, Cracker Barrel has struggled to regain customers and revenues since the pandemic. "But in today's social media-dominated world, when nothing can occur without being commented on, it obviously bothered some people who feel a sense of nostalgia." In June, Cracker Barrel reported a 0.5% increase in revenues for the third quarter of its fiscal year, along with a 1% increase in comparable store sales. Those irked by Cracker Barrel's logo change included Donald Trump Jr., who posted "WTF is wrong with @CrackerBarrel??!" on X on Wednesday. Representatives for Trump did not immediately respond to a request for comment. "This matters because tradition matters," opined Nate Morris, a Republican candidate for the U.S. Senate in Kentucky, also on X. "Our values haven't changed, and the heart and soul of Cracker Barrel haven't changed," the company said in a statement provided to Reuters. Market analysts said they think the selloff says more about the role that social media plays in today's financial markets than it does about Cracker Barrel itself. "Momentum rules, and social media can create a heck of a lot of both positive and negative momentum," said Sosnick. Others, though, wonder just why a storm of outrage is causing such a big decline in the share price. "To claim that Cracker Barrel is going down in price because it changed its logo leads me to believe maybe people don't really know why the stock is going down," said Sam Stovall, chief investment strategist at CFRA Research. "People go there for the food. They don't go there for the logo." Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ross Stores tops quarterly profit estimates as shoppers seek discount apparel
(Reuters) -Ross Stores on Thursday topped quarterly profit estimates and reinstated its annual earnings forecast, betting on demand for discounted apparel and accessories as tariffs raise retail prices during the holiday season. The company's shares were up about 2% in extended trading after it also forecast strong holiday quarter profit. Discount stores are expected to attract budget-conscious customers as President Donald Trump's tariffs force companies to raise prices on products sourced from countries hit with steep duties. Ross Stores' comparable sales rose 2% in the second quarter, with improvement through the period, and strong demand in July, as shoppers looked for discounted back-to-school apparel and accessories. Excluding items, the company reported a profit of $1.56 per share for the three months ended August 2, topping estimates by 2 cents, according to data compiled by LSEG. It reinstated its outlook and expects annual earnings per share of $6.08 to $6.21, compared to estimates of $6.10. This includes a per-share tariff impact of 22 cents to 25 cents. Ross Stores withdrew its annual forecasts in May amid tariff uncertainty, and added that more than half of its goods it sells originate from China. The company said it was adjusting prices strategically, and diversifying sourcing to cushion the tariff impact. Ross Stores expects third-quarter profit of $1.31 to $1.37 per share, below estimates of $1.47, but it targets a profit of $1.74 to $1.81 per share for the key holiday quarter, which was above estimates of $1.69. "We are looking at the back half of the year with cautious optimism ... there's a lot going on in the macro environment," Conroy said. Rival and TJ Maxx parent TJX raised its annual profit target earlier this week, helped by strong demand for discounted apparel and home furnishings. Ross Stores targets comparable store sales growth of 2% to 3% for the third and fourth quarters. Analysts had expected growth of 2.59% and 2.14%, respectively. Second-quarter sales of $5.53 billion fell short of estimates of $5.57 billion. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Los Angeles Times
11 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Supreme Court says Trump may cancel DEI-related health research grants
WASHINGTON — A divided Supreme Court said Thursday the Trump administration may cancel hundreds of health research grants that involve diversity, equity and inclusion or gender identity. The justices granted an emergency appeal from President Trump's lawyers and set aside a Boston's judge order that blocked the canceling of $783 million in research grants. The justices split 5-4. Chief Justice John G. Roberts joined the court's three liberals in dissent and said the district judge had not overstepped his authority. The court's conservative majority has repeatedly sided with the administration and against federal judges in disputes over spending and staffing at federal agencies. In the latest case, the majority agreed that Trump and his appointees may decide on how to spend health research funds allocated by Congress. Upon taking office in January, Trump issued an executive order 'ending radical and wasteful government DEI programs and preferencing.' A few weeks later, the acting director of the National Institutes of Health said the agency would no longer fund 'low-value and off-mission research programs, including but not limited to studies based on diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) and gender identity.' More than 1,700 grants were canceled. Trump's lawyers told the court NIH had terminated grants to study 'Buddhism and HIV stigma in Thailand'; 'intersectional, multilevel and multidimensional structural racism for English- and Spanish-speaking populations'; and 'anti-racist healing in nature to protect telomeres of transitional age BIPOC [Black, Indigenous, and People of Color] for health equity.' California Atty. Gen. Rob Bonta and his counterparts from 15 Democratic-led states had sued to halt what they called an 'unprecedented disruption to ongoing research.' They were joined by groups of researchers and public health advocates. The state attorneys said their public universities were using grant money for 'projects investigating heart disease, HIV/AIDS, Alzheimer's disease, alcohol and substance abuse, mental-health issues, and countless other health conditions.' They said NIH had terminated a grant for a University of California study examining how inflammation, insulin resistance, and physical activity affect Alzheimer's disease in Black women, a group with higher rates and a more aggressive profile of the disease. Also terminated they said was a University of Hawaiʻi study that aimed to identify genetic and biological risk factors for colorectal cancer among Native Hawaiians, a population with increased incidence and mortality rates of that disease. In June, the Democratic state attorneys won a ruling from U.S. District Judge William G. Young, a Reagan appointee. He said the sudden halt to research grants violated a federal procedural law because it was 'arbitrary' and poorly explained. He said Trump had required agencies 'to focus on eradicating anything that it labels as Diversity, Equity and Inclusion ('DEI'), an undefined enemy.' He said he had tried and failed to get a clear definition of DEI and what it entailed. When the 1st Circuit Court refused to lift the judge's order, Trump's Solicitor Gen. D. John Sauer appealed to the Supreme Court in late July. He noted the justices in April had set aside a similar decision from a Boston-based judge who blocked the new administration's canceling of education grants. The solicitor general argued that Trump's order rescinded an executive order from President Biden in 2021 that mandated 'an ambitious whole-of-government equity agenda' and instructed federal agencies to 'allocate resources to address the historic failure to invest sufficiently, justly, and equally in underserved communities.' He said the new administration decided these DEI-related grants 'do nothing to expand our knowledge of living systems, provide low returns on investment, and ultimately do not enhance health, lengthen life, or reduce illness.'
