September has beautiful days too

Ref: Balop004

07 February 2012

It is always easier to be critical. Being critical is an action.  If we consider the aftermath, or the leftover feelings then we’ll find that to hold back on criticising can spare much. It is only later, much later, that one realises when criticism would have prolonged the culmination of a solution.   Criticism almost always causes an unnecessary leftover feeling. After the act of criticising, or when the matter is resolved, then the impact of the criticism continues to affect the relationship between people, viz. those who levelled and those who received criticism. How do we develop the ability to know when criticising is important and when to let it ride?

Issues require different approaches in order that they may be adequately addressed. In these opinion pieces the impact of Affirmative Action and Black Economic Empowerment, it is the New Apartheid, requires loud and persistent criticism. Failure to be persistently loud about the impact of these bizarre policies shall result in it lasting a lifetime.  Can we afford this? Can we afford not to consistently and persistently table the unfolding tragedy of Affirmative Action and its devastating potential consequence on South African life?  The challenge though has to be free from discrimination, one against another; free from racist thinking, sexist thinking and the criticism has to be non-accusatory in order for the better solution, the ”What is Right” solution to emerge.

Today it is only through being vocal about this unfolding tragedy of our South African lifetime that the different thoughts about the same experience will be tabled, listened to, processed and implemented.

Let’s pose the question - Will Affirmative Action go away in time if we choose to keep silent about the nasty effect it is having on our lives in South Africa? 

1.    This question is similar to asking whether men (mainly) would stop spousal assault and abuse if silence prevailed and if the law did not criminalise such acts.  Nonetheless, try calling the police to a scene of domestic violence and the retort shall in all probability include “we cannot intervene in domestic matters”

2.    What about rape? Will rape decrease if we sit back and refrain from speaking out; assume that instead we opt to  speak out amongst each other in whispered tones like those do who snigger and are not  supporters of this new apartheid, this affirmative action thing as applied? To decide not to speak out about something that is clearly and obviously an injustice is, at least, an act of hypocrisy – but like lemmings we jump at an opportunity to leap and leap over the cliff because it is too damn unpopular to say that the New Apartheid is amputating my country’s soul.  Why can we not, take a stand and proclaim what is wrong, and; then point to what is right? Instead, like the schoolboy, afraid of retribution, we prefer to mumble and grumble about what is right whilst the wrong continues to be celebrated.  Yes, to speak out is an act, the articulation of a divergent view and the leftover feeling of such stance is often UNPOPULARITY. Would you prefer being popular and continue to whisper when speaking about what is right? Choosing the latter is a choice to be benign and also a choice in favour of being a hypocrite.  After all, you now have the government that you deserve, so why bother?

3.    Painstakingly your government ensures that justice and fairness prevail whilst it manages the removal of an errant and lumpen gang of youth in its midst, but; does it do the same for job creation and the restoration of opportunities that can facilitate the earning of dignity among ordinary people?

This series I’ve written, to date, makes an attempt to map the history of the injustice, unfairness and evil that determines access to opportunities.  Without understanding where Affirmative Action discrimination stems from, what it sets out to achieve and evaluating it against what is right one is not able to cognitively examine empirical arguments to determine its levels of validity. Therefore, the opinions were somewhat indulging, and it is not yet done with.

This time the focus begins to shift and explores what alternatives could be considered.

Given the brief background alluded to above and expanded upon in the previous written pieces it may be contentious to state that South Africa has a need for affirmation.  The view is that all countries have a need to affirm citizens, why else is there a need for a government if we are not geared, through regulation, to affirm one another by providing access to information and opportunities in a regulated dignified manner with the State as the Regulator?  What is important though is that people be affirmed for the right reasons.  In South Africa this affirmation is informed by a past where skin colour was used to deny individuals access to opportunities.  The same principle, a repeated principle, is applied today to correct what is the biggest institutionalised wrong in the world, apartheid.  Is this what is right? Is it right that we encourage one group to discriminate against another? Whereas those at the receiving end of the new discrimination is mainly are mainly children of those who previous beneficiaries because of their fair skin-tones?

Today people with dark-skin tones are affirmed in South Africa. Previously people with fair skin-tones were affirmed. People with fair skins previously had access to all the better opportunities and facilities.  Today people with dark skins have access to all the better opportunities.

Previously we had lesser qualified fair skinned people appointed against positions for which they were not absolutely equipped.  The same happens today, but in favour of dark-skinned people. Today we have many dark-skinned people appointed against positions for which they are not yet ready. We could argue that the same prevailed in the past. Was it right then to appoint unqualified people against certain positions, and; was it in the interest of the business, organisation or the country?  If not, then why is it okay today to appoint persons who are not yet ready to assume the responsibility, but who have the favoured skin complexion and perhaps the necessary academic qualifications? Is it in the interest of the country to have unqualified and inexperienced people appointed against positions within companies, particularly companies where many thousands of people enjoy employment, rely on employment and; where growth leadership is expected to create jobs and provide sustainability for existing jobs?  

There is a need to speak about an alternative to this new apartheid. Education is important, but learning is fundamentally superior.  Over the years many people have graduated with respectable academic qualifications attained at reputable institutions. How do they fare when having to apply the knowledge represented by their qualifications? This brings one to the point about experience. One cannot learn experience at an institution of learning, only in practice. When placed in an environment where practice can occur the role of pupil should at least be alongside a person who is willing and able to provide guidance so that experience can be earned, and; thereby add to the foundation knowledge that people with various qualifications already have. 

What about a method of instructing pupils to take the task to a new improved level?  What is being done about this need; what are we doing to stimulate and encourage creativity and innovation in the world of work, or are we of the view that these things shall occur naturally? I am aware that, in South Africa, we refer to pupils as learners and teachers as educators. I wonder if these new terms bring bout improved value, or whether it, like affirmative action means apartheid, also is simply a new tongue exercise? In my opinion pupils get taught and teachers teach.

The mark of a good teacher, it is said, is one who produces people who are more skilled at the subject than s/he is. I know many such committed and passionate teachers. I shall forever be celebrating them because even I had the good fortune to be exposed to a few in my time.  Therefore, I cannot help but feel for the “learners” of the Eastern Cape, a province in South Africa, where many teachers choose to exercise their industrial rights at the expense of teaching time – even in the light of better methods to resolve disputes.

Meanwhile, companies employ dark-skin toned people mainly because they want the company’s black economic employment scorecard to look good and not because the company is particularly keen on correcting the past, even if such correction were possible. There are other reasons too why those who can, resist creating opportunities for others to earn experience. Examples of the latter include the need experienced people have to remain indispensable, posture in order to have their retirement postponed, or because they fear being overlooked for promotion in favour of the person whom they train. Natural attrition remains a reality.

The better approach is grounded in a number of related principles being put in place. These principles include how people are selected for appointment against certain positions.  Selection panels have to follow strict guidelines because the beginning is a good place to start. 

·         The guidelines should take cognisance of the demographic composition within the business and compare this statistic with the demographics of the region it draws employees from

·         If the demographics are not adequately reflected, which is always the case, then a constant attempt should be made to draw from demographic segments that  are under-represented across the company divide, but only on the proviso that the identified person is the most suited candidate – for this reason the appointment of a quorate selection panel is fundamental

o   Under representation will never be completely resolved, but if there is no concerted method in place then we shall never make progress in the right direction. For this reason the various tight (permanent) and loose (flexible) rules used to comprise a selection panel should constantly strive to come as close to the optimum level as is possible. Therefore we should consistently measure and evaluate the outcome of what is measured 

·         The Selection Panel itself should consist of relevantly skilled persons who reflect the required demographics, and; appointments via other processes should by law not be acceptable

·         The above criteria should be legislated and regulated by the State.

Once persons are appointed their reporting officer should be incentivised to build capacity by affording experience earning opportunities for the incumbents. This incentive could be financial and materialises when targets are reached. Included should be components where measuring instruments to determine how foundation qualified people are encouraged to become innovative and creative, and how they learn to apply the theoretical knowledge acquired at tertiary institutions. Therefore, targets should be the sum of all the measuring exercises with equal weight apportioned to each. Currently targets are financial and if financial targets are reached then bonuses are paid.  This opinion proposes to change this by introducing sustainability through capacitating the next generation as an equally important criterion in the determination of whether or not targets are reached. To only be measured against reaching financial targets is not sustainable. To measure in a more holistic manner is essentially much more sustainable because it ensures better future growth and builds history as well as tenacity used most when businesses face the inevitable trying times. Reporting officers who refuse, or consistently fail should be performance managed and if failings persist they should be removed from positions of responsibility. Harsh, but it is better to have a sustainable business than a bubble business consisting of a few easy riders who refuse to work in the interest of sustaining the business.

Clear guidelines should prevail for each of the above systems and the measuring instruments should jointly and severally test for application as well as outcome. These guidelines can encompass a series of development points.  Development points, in this context, refer to how people are encouraged to apply their knowledge, encourage innovation and creative ability to the improvement of the position against which they are appointed.  Through consistently measuring for this application the concept of repetition will be put to practice alongside the ability for newness. Where innovation / newness is not encouraged we will exacerbate the continuation of outdated practices, and; businesses will increasingly experience stunted growth.  If relevant growth is not encouraged and measured for then businesses will become uncompetitive and later insignificant – the creation of an unsustainable employment environment shall emerge, particularly if we continue to deliriously apply methods enshrined in coaching and mentoring techniques where we teach how things were done in order that it can be done. I argue that your supply chain is your business. In other words, client accessibility will increasingly determine the distribution of your product, so too, if we do not actively manage to unleash creativity and innovation then we are managing in favour of insignificance.

We live in a country where job creation is fundamental to our existence.  We cannot afford to employ people who are not geared to grow the position. The best person for the job is what is going to bring about growth.  The best person approach will put an end to the endemic increase in entitlement expectations and to disillusionment brought about by being over-looked when knowledge, skill and ability is evident. Using skin colour as criterion to determine who to appoint is draconian, discriminatory and unsustainable – what are we teaching young people? You see, we go around the world teaching people how to treat us, by the way we behave.

Companies will continue to appoint people for show - window dressing. The reason remains the “scorecard” and not the doing of what is right.  Spurious, is another way to describe this action, racist too, discriminatory and exploitative.  Twenty (20) years after the advent of equal opportunity employment strategies workplaces in South Africa continue not to reflect the demographics of the nation.  Standards in service delivery continue to decline, and; senior positions in the Civil Service remain vacant, or occupied by more persons appointed against positions defined as acting roles.

It is known that certain businesses opt for the payment of fines, or forfeit contracts in favour of employing people with ability and skill as opposed to being forced to employ persons because they reflect groups who were marginalised Twenty (20) years ago.

Business will not grow if the employees are not skilled. Skilled people have to be developed from a pool where foundation knowledge and passion is evident. This is how sustainable jobs will be created. I read that there is a campaign named “Each One Employ One”. Job creation is the flavour of the month. What about sustainable job creation?

In its mission statement South Africa claims to be a non-racist society. However, the South African employment legislation is race based.  We will not reach employment targets within Five (5) years, Ten (10) years or over Eighteen (18) years, the latter being 2030 as stated in the 450 page National Development Plan, a publication by the National Planning Commission. Such employment targets are only possible if fundamentals about how businesses are developed, measured, encouraged, and; how growth is managed on the back of hardworking best suited employees. Currently we are gearing to blame the global economic slump for the failure to create sustainable jobs. The real reason why our growth is plummeting is largely because of the insistence that we need correct the past.  We choose to do so by the application of the race when promulgating and applying Affirmative Action and Black Economic Empowerment legislation.

There is much detail in the above that is omitted.  Much of it is obvious, but in the pending discussion many points will become apparent. We live in an environment where management without effective measuring, deficient assumption of responsibility and accountability can only result in mismanagement.  The reality if proclaimed differently though.

Each one has to teach another, but the method of applied teaching should encourage newness, innovation and creativity. 

Our society is bereft with criminal activity.  South Africans tell of a time where people living next door to each other took a greater interest in the well-being of the neighbour and please, this phenomenon is not limited to those who lived in SOWETO. However, this collegial sense is sadly replaced by a sense of disrespect.  Perhaps it is the way of the world?

In some instances charity is alive in the home, but not as alive as it once was, seemingly.  The result is that lawlessness is increasing faster than it ever has. The police statistics do not agree with me. I live in South Africa and I can compare lawlessness today with decades ago.  I also remember that it was unthinkable to imagine my teacher gyrating on TV whilst violently gesturing with a placard, which placard contains spelling errors...

I was a boy in 1977 when Steve Biko was murdered.  My father took me along to a commemoration service held in the St. George’s Cathedral, Wale Street, Cape Town – my first real exposure to the South Africa I then did not know. It was a summer’s day. We were in the most beautiful city in the world and I was blissfully unaware. The liturgy included a commemoration pew leaflet.  I read the words and heard them spoke, and, my thoughts were that someday I too shall understand what all of this means. I memorised those words, “… we need hope when despair is most reasonable. Despair is seductive and rank; it pollutes the atmosphere… When are we going to say that the suppression of truth stops here…?”

These words live in my head and as I grow older they become more and more meaningful. Society crumbles under the weight of greed, revenge, skin colour, entitlement, arrogance and I feel us become more and more blinded to the reality... 

The workplace has a role to play; people can learn respect, common courtesy and good manner; they can do this at work too.  Social responsibility does not have to end with sponsoring the poor soccer team in a township.

I want to live in a vibrant South Africa. I want people to care for each other, respect each other. There should be jobs for all and more encouragement to soar.  I want the best for South Africa and I do not think that my wish is unrealistic.  The New Apartheid must go. People do not need jobs, they need dignity. Through having a job I can earn dignity.

Being denied the chance to work because of a skin colour is an indictment to life itself.

Some days continue to be the most beautiful in the world…   

Bumped heads, sustainable jobs & film stars

The Bald Opinion!

Bumped heads, sustainable jobs & film stars

The Bald Opinion!

Ref: Balop003

20 January 2012

Welcome to the third in a series of six pieces, each which seek to table differing impact views about Affirmative Action / Black Economic Empowerment and its impact on the developing South African Society.

To start this opinion piece it is decided to discuss the following:

1.    Let’s assume that South Africa is geared to celebrate people who are prepared to work hard in order to learn skills, earn experience and help the country realise its potential;

2.    Most talented people are identified, rewarded and encouraged that others can swelter in the nobleness of their varied, collective and inspirational contributions, and;

3.    Labeling, blaming and the past is outdated; the consequences thereof is often negative stereotyping.

What would it be like to live in a South Africa as described above? Is it impossible, farfetched and utopian?  I think that we can make this a reality, but only if we want, and then only if we want badly enough. 

My mother, now Eighty Nine (89) years old, continues to be intimidated by people with fair skin-tones. Like other mothers of her generation my Ma worked as a cleaner, studied and raised us children whilst my father busied himself with naughtiness. Reasons for my Ma feeling intimidated are borne out of her status as a Saint Helena immigrant in South Africa; a third class citizen, raising a family in the plural setting with a back street address on the Cape Flats. Despite her magnificent academic qualifications, given the times and the slog it took to earn these, my Ma has never been able to shake off her inferiority.  So much so, that when she was forcibly removed from Fish Hook Beach while I there stole a swim she berated me, using our home language, a dialect of Afrikaans, she said “Boy, you know that we do not belong on this beach man, why do you bring me here ...?”  Today I am on the wrong side of 45, and when we speak, my Ma and I, then she says, “Boy, speak louder man, I can’t hear that well any longer – julle kinnes praat soe sag, tut…” (you children do not speak loudly enough)

No worries, for in the last piece of this series I shall tell more about that beach experience, particularly now that the coast is clear. We need to be mindful though, mindful that I tell one story, but it is not an isolated story.  All of us have a story to tell and there is always a story to listen to, read and think about. If we want then each of us can tell where and when we gave discrimination. Strange, but true, the same people can tell of a time when they received discrimination – you see, we’re like that, us people; we give and we take just as well as we give. The challenge though is to develop an understanding of this thing we label, discrimination. It is developing an understanding of discrimination that will help us develop good practice.  In South Africa we love to speak about when we are discriminated against.  We think that discrimination is a synonym for racism. We forget that racism is but one form of discrimination.  In my experience, those who cry the loudest about discrimination are often themselves guilty of practicing discrimination. Maybe they do not understand the concept and if so, what are we going to do about it?

With Black Economic Empowerment / The New Apartheid, we are developing a national segment of people who increasingly act in a manner indicative of entitlement. This entitlement vests in South Africa often as determined by being born with a dark skin-tone and not because the person worked in order to be entitled to a benefit – the case in most other countries. Therefore, being afforded opportunities determined primarily by that skin-tone and using the justifying argument, “the past...” is at least a practice of negative discrimination. How is doing unto others going to correct what you did not like when it was done to you?  

We are a humble people, a respectful people, a considerate people some are even altruists.  I read, it is alleged about the city of my soul, Cape Town, that my city is declared, by Mexican Researchers, to rank amongst the most violent in the world – the mother city of arguably one of the most violent countries in the world.

They, including these Mexican Researchers, never did a study to determine where the most gifted, skilled and hard-working people in the world are. Maybe it is not as important. Negative reinforcement is often part of the reason why we feel intimidated and then behave in the way of such description. The reverse too applies, but we must not hide the facts, just be balanced.

These days I live in a place made famous by a movie star and a princess, and; infamous by a rodent chief of police and a constant supply of fresh mayors.  However, on a recent trip to the supermarket whilst walking down the aisle and minding my own business I bumped my bald head against a protruding shelf – my fault. “Oh! Sorry” “Sorry” and “Are you okay?” rang out from every direction.   On hearing the commotion, and seeing me clutch my head the cashier locked her register and with  loud stern sounding words she said to another woman, which words included those I could understand, viz. “… first aid box…” 

I am just a person and those people who came to help me were persons too.  I do not know the people who offered their sympathy; I do not know them still, but we smile knowingly at each other each time we share space in that shop. Sometimes I notice of the people glancing to see how my head has healed. After all, in the shop we are South Africans. Skin-tone matters not in the shop. The Shop South Africans instinctively care for each other, I think.  I think also that we are inherently a caring people and this damn New Apartheid, Affirmative Action, or whatever label you wish to use, this thing that we are inflicting upon each other; this thing is foreign to what our souls remember.  It is a thing that is increasingly turning us into an ugly people; an ugly people who will be left behind because the world requires of us to be skilled, passionate and determined in order to forge ahead, and; it matters not that Ekurhuleni is the only Aerotropolis on the continent of Africa and that the often new mayor looks good on a photo.

As I write, recalling is the memory of years back when the same happened; when I bumped my then balding head whilst shopping at Sainsbury’s, a supermarket chain in England.  The fellow shoppers, pushing their trolleys with inserted One Pound coins must have thought me terribly clumsy as they glared and moved on… Maybe I should wear a helmet, I thought!

You see, in time Affirmative Action Beneficiaries, who are actually deferred victims, shall, like the syndrome my mother suffers from, albeit differently applied, they too shall grow old, but their thinking will increasingly be one informed by entitlement because it is habit forming – How do I maximize what I take, receive and get whilst making the least effort?

Jackie Selebe, a onetime South African Commissioner of Police, is infamous for his inability to see something wrong in receiving gifts of money, shoes and clothes from a convicted criminal. Jackie is, therefore, but one example of what can result from an euphoric sense of entitlement.  We take things for nothing in return because we are entitled to. We will end with a small gang of “entitled” snobs; a small class of snobs wearing dark skin-tones, but what about the rest of us many of whom also have dark skin-tones? Dark skin-tones are stupid criteria.

These are nouveau snobs. Nouveau snobs created by affirmative action have little to no substance. They will have no substance because they would not have worked and earned the experience required before behaving in that entitled manner.

The very clever people sometimes write books about how children learn.  They call it pedagogical learning methods.  Others write books about how adults learn and, in turn, label it andragogical learning theory. Don’t worry, because it is Greek to me too – maybe because it is derived from the Greek word anere (adult) and agogus (the art of helping students learn). Nonetheless, the crux of andragogical learning is the ability we have to tap into previous experiences when called upon to take decisions. The contention is that we have the solution and that it will come to the fore if the right set of questions are asked; questions that will remind us of experiences where the same principle applied.

These clever people go on to explain that if we repeat certain practices, or live by certain norms then it will determine the way we behave.  Therefore and, among many other factors, if we do not challenge the rot, aftermath and leftover feelings we create through Affirmative Action, then what are we going to do with a horde of folk who have not earned sufficient experience to sustain positions of leadership in an ever increasing global community that we have no choice, but to competitively participate in?

Governments the world over are in place and yes, you do get the government that you deserve; but these structures are in place to regulate and not to be creators of work.  We live in a society that is beset by job creation – driven by government with its passionate embrace of Black Economic Empowerment policies.  It is known that small business is at the cusp of job creation. Entrepreneurship and an enabling environment should be regulated by the state. Is the South African State facilitating the creation of sustainable jobs through encouraging small business development via its regulatory practices?

When are we going to begin talks about the creation of sustainable jobs? It seems that we have taken the sustainability out of job creation.  The result is that as jobs are being created others are being done away with.  Business is often not successful because the people employed to lead are not sufficiently equipped, and then ordinary people suffer the loss of dignity through sweeping retrenchments, redundancies and other methods of shedding employees – and then we blame the economy.  I wish for the regulator to regulate the creation of sustainable jobs.  Let’s move away from hoisting the number of created jobs upon billboards as a show-off announcement when the same numbers are being retrenched elsewhere. Let’s build businesses that are sustainable so that when people are appointed against company owned positions, that such employment too is sustainable. 

In fact, we must demand from the regulator that created jobs are sustainable, and it has to do so by ensuring that the companies who own the jobs themselves are sustainable. Sustainable companies are built by people who have talent, ability, passion and who are prepared to commit to realising growth objectives, goals and targets.  You earn your salary and your bonus is earned only when the business is profitable. Sustainable companies are not created by people who feel entitled, because the feeling of entitlement, in this context, is tantamount to an empty vessel - noisy man; very noisy, but vacant.

We must demand the creation of sustainable jobs and; not create jobs only to reflect as fodder used by statisticians and politicians when they gloat. If this factor is not sufficiently challenged then we are participating in a plan that will find people enjoying employment for short periods before again being retrenched – stripped of their dignity, and it will become a habit, a habit of rejection and failure – a sick debilitating habit, just like divorce and single parent families are fast becoming a habit, the new norm – it is a self-deprecating shame on us. So too we can speak about this being a violent place…

I conclude this article with thanks to all the folk out there who comment privately and in writing.  Thank you to those who disagree and who have taken time to articulate their disagreement.  Each one has to teach another and I am thankful for being taught, particularly by those who disagree with my views; I too am just a person, I remember that.

I think though that we need to defend ourselves against the bad habits we form, both as adults and as children of adults. 

An elder brother was placed in foster care. When things did not work out he was returned to the orphanage from whence he came. The norm was established when this practice was repeated over and over again.  In time his protective reaction was never to allow a feeling of settlement to occur. This, because each time settlement dawned something happened and he was returned to the orphanage.  A new set of parents and again he was the fostered one.  Happiness at last and he decided to feel settled, safe, cared for and protected. After several years, it was an evening in September, Dad announced at the dinner table that the family was moving to a smaller house because he had been retrenched. On hearing this and after his post-dinner chores André left the other siblings, went to his room and began to pack the suitcase. When Mom came upstairs and asked, “Why are you packing?” “So that I do not waste time when you have to take me back to the orphanage…”

If we learn like adults then we also have to think and behave like leaders.  This is possibly the only way that we can break the cycle of negative habits informing our norms.

Sustainable jobs are created by people with passion, commitment, talent skill and entrepreneurial flair. None of these qualities include skin-tones because skin-tones are irrelevant. The future is built as determined by the effort of the present...

The Importance of Experience in building competitive businesses and; the destructive impact of Affirmative Action on the world of work in S. Africa

Ref: Balop002

07 January 2012

How does one teach experience in the workplace; is this teaching done by relevant exposure to the tasks at hand and; if so, how is teaching done without it resulting in repetition, sometimes of the same old and without application, or cognisance of the new age, technology and the need for constant improvement? How do we, through being taught, become inspired with a need to bring about constant improvement first with ourselves and then transferred to the jobs we do?

Please consider excusing me. You see, my training and one of my passions is employment law. This informs my interest in the world of work. Over time I have developed an understanding that there exists a huge chasm between what is fair and what is just. Justice and fairness are two very different concepts. I strive to be passionate about fairness. Recently I learned that it is more important to determine what is right, as opposed to whom is right. Therefore, my concern and indeed, unlikely hobbyhorse, is Affirmative Action and Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment, which is, not unlike Apartheid, the epitome of unfairness. Many have indicated, after attending the lecture, or after having read Balop001, that Affirmative Action is not only applied in South Africa, but also in Malaysia, a country where the people did not experience institutionalised discrimination as was visited upon the people of South Africa for nearly Seven (7) decades. All South Africans experienced Apartheid. 

I know persons who bemoan the application of this bizarre practice in Malaysia, and I am familiar with the arguments raised by those who opposed the now failed Affirmative Action Policies applied in the USA. However, I prefer not to confuse the issues and conflate unrelated arguments with the devastation that the result of Affirmative Action is bringing to the world of work in South Africa. Currently 38% of people who can work are unemployed in our country. The various media reports and certain government departments set this figure at 25% / 25.7% respectively and, almost in small print it is stated that the published figure reflect only the formal employment sector. What about those who have given up looking for work? You see of them at the traffic lights, begging. To give up is often the only alternative, or the aftermath of repeated rejection! The scourge of losing dignity is tantamount to tampering with humanity. Go to your traffic light in South Africa and see for yourself what I mean. How does it make you feel, or are you numb too in your make-believe “I do not see them” face mask? 

Today the need in South Africa has reached a critical state; dignity remains less important than the need for sustainable employment. In other words, we do not need dignity as much as we need sustainable jobs. Jobs will afford people opportunity to earn dignity and regain humanity. Sustainable jobs will not be created by employing people as determined by the skin tone that fate has dealt them, but development of ability will. 

People who are appointed more because of skin colour and less because of their ability will result in sustainable employment becoming unsustainable. This is what affirmative action as applied in South Africa today is resulting in, unsustainable employment, entitlement and an exposure to the trappings of quasi-successful dignified lives – it will be short-lived in most instances and the incumbents will not fulfill their potential because there is no short-cut to success and Affirmative Action is a get there quickly scenario. How many of us remember the State of Emergency and the “Kitskonstabels” (Instant Policemen) of the 1980’s? The principle applied with Affirmative Action appointees is the same as was the case with “Kitskonstabels” – appointees with a handicap.  I am informed that the latter term "handicap" applies in the game, golf. The “Kitskonstabels” were an embarrassing and colossal disaster. The main reason for this is because they were not sufficiently prepared to execute the role before being let loose on, amongst others, placard wielding factory workers. The results were often disastrous, images that will forever be etched in my memory. My contention is that Affirmative Action is the bearer of equally devastating results.

At schools and at tertiary institutions we need to learn the process of thought and how to work. Before assuming a position in the world of work it is important to understand how the job is done. Only then should we be appointed against a position and be charged with having to account for the concomitant responsibility. The more senior the position, the more stringent the preparation need be. Am I being ridiculous; perhaps more ridiculous than Affirmative Action and if so then hey, remember, I am due a handicap too, so go easy on me when you respond!

Part of our preparation should focus on how we are to unleash inherent potential and; then, on how we use our potential in order to grow the position we are appointed against through constantly improving our ability. Is Affirmative Action and Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment facilitating this personal and resultant job growth? However, Charity still lives at home, or words to that effect.

Is Affirmative Action resulting in a distinct flair for entitlement and as a result, are we encouraging the development of a class consisting of snobs who have no substance? Where is this going leave South Africa and; remember, we need to develop sustainable employment so that ordinary people, no matter their skin tone, can have jobs. Even people who wear fair skin tones have the right to dignity in the world of work.

Let’s mention two facets of affirmative action as applied in South Africa: (Bear in mind that there are many, but I limit my focus here to the Public Sector) 

1.    How many Affirmative Appointees account, or can account effectively for their responsibility and why is this the case;

2.    How many very senior Affirmative Action appointees are suspended for months together with full remuneration conditions, all because of some or other bungle they facilitated – recent examples include, the CEO of the South African Post Office, Ms. Motshoanetsi Lefoka and the Police Commissioner, General Bheki Cele – ironically both these bungles have to do with letting / leasing of property? (other occurrences include the CEO’s of Telkom, Eskom, SAA, many Government Departments, Government Ministers, Para-statal Institutions, and even Universities)

Remember, affirmative action is the elder sibling of the Black Economic Empowerment Act, a statutory law in South Africa. Apartheid was also a statutory law in South Africa and it was an amendment to the Police Act that brought about "Kitskonstabels".  The term "kits" in Afrikaans, which is one of the 11 official languages spoken in South Africa, means instant, as in instant coffee.  The term "Konstabel" was a police rank used to describe junior policemen.  My point is, when the devastation of the Affirmative Action Policies are realised, or when denial sets in, then who is going to account? When are people going to be taught to do the job before they are appointed against the position, particularly senior positions?

How many young people are at the receiving end of this discrimination? Is it because they have fair skin tones? Some argue that it is because their parents were beneficiaries during the Apartheid era and by implication it is now the turn of the dark skinned to be beneficiaries. Almost like Orwell's Animal Farm, not so? Yet, when President Mandela delivered his inaugural speech, he said “Never, never and never again shall it be that this beautiful land will again experience the oppression of one by another and suffer the indignity of being the skunk of the world.” Was President Mandela telling a lie when he made this statement? I think not.

There are those amongst us who unwittingly give this discrimination to others in order that they may be beneficiaries, all as a result of our dark skin tones and because of a past, which incidentally we, all of us, are not able to do anything about. Yet we insist to deny others who have at least equal skills to ours the right to work. We enact this denial because of the past when fair skinned people denied dark skinned people access to certain jobs. Who is right, or is it better to ask "what is right"? Is it better to try the impossibility of correcting what transpired over Seventy (70) years, or is it more important to harness  the potential and existing skills we have in South Africa in a determined venture to build the country today for tomorrow that we owe to ourselves? We seemingly choose to focus on that which we can do nothing about at the expense of a future, which future’s prosperity we can determine, but only if we do what is right. Sadly, I notice from the responses received after the first lecture and my blog entry on this subject that the persons who have no recollection of the tyranny which we refer to as Apartheid are the most vocal supporters of Black Economic Empowerment, the New Apartheid. These persons prefer not to respond on the blog. Yet, I think that it is logical to assume that an eye for an eye will at the end leave all of us half blind.

What about the affirmative debate

I am South African. I refuse to be appointed as determined by the colour skin I was born with and which, like the past, I can do nothing about!

Black Economic Empowerment and its older sibling, Affirmative Action, are singularly and collectively bringing a new prejudice to South Africa.

 

Over the past 18 years the ANC leadership has carefully crafted these policies, which it draws from various failed applications that they found mainly in the United States.

 

Will a failed American principle be successful in South Africa and if so, why / how?

South Africa is the only country in the world where the majority, after having political power for almost 20 years, increasingly updates its affirmative action policies. This is all in order to give a greater handicap in favour of the already majority class.  The objective is to correct the past iniquities which resulted in the majority class being denied access to many opportunities and facilities.

The applied method is geared to replace representatives of arguably 9% of the population with those representing 91% of the same citizenry. This is despite the majority group having full political control.  Maybe I am missing something and that in South Africa an eye for an eye shall not leave all people half blind?

My contention is that Black Economic Empowerment and Affirmative Action is the new Apartheid and, that the ANC Leadership is like a National Party on steroids…, or is it Viagra; or maybe President and the Sports Minister are exempt from having to practice restraint?

What is the difference between the ANC and the previous ruling party?

The ANC is seemingly much better at applying many of the previous repressive and divisive policies when compared to the Nationalist Party. The commonly referred to Secrecy Bill, which seeks to curtail press freedom, particularly when reporting about the atrocious and corrupt behaviour of Politicians is an example of the ANC being repressive.

The mark of a good teacher is when the pupils surpass the teacher. Was the Nationalist Government a good teacher to the ANC? 

Senior government positions are reserved almost exclusively for black people. This is no different, just much bigger than job reservation, a policy that also stems from the National Party era.

Previously it was legislated that only people with fair skins could be appointed against certain jobs.  Today “Affirmative Appointments” is the current nom de plume for the appointment of persons with dark skins.  Are all of us going to be half blind in time, I wonder?

The biggest employer in the country, the State, is the most fervent proponent of this blatant discrimination. Is this a new, better repression and if so, why are you so silent about it? 

Silent, particularly given that you saw the disastrous consequences that emerged when Affirmative Action was still referred to by its original name, Apartheid.

How is a determination to appoint dark skinned people against most every senior government position going to fix the legislated tyranny that impacted the majority of South Africans over at least the past 50 years?

Would it not be in the public interest to concentrate on ability rather than skin colour and; by so doing have South Africans experience an all-round better public service?

Clearly it is not possible to wipe away what happened in the past by replacing people who wear one skin complexion with people who wear another; will this, replacing of one by another, bring about a better standard of service delivery and; will it correct the unfairness of the past?

Why are we not more determined to legislate, incentivize and remunerate for a form of skills transfer before we make these race based appointment?

Our education system results mainly in regurgitation of information. When are we going to construct learning techniques that teach people to think and not only regurgitate what others have thought of and written down for them to learn?

Surely we need technical ability and self-determination to realise our potential. Surely what we should not do is exclude groups which may consist of persons with talents to help attain on our South African achievement trajectory?

Germany and Japan were devastated after the 2nd world war. Today, 65 years later, these two countries are leading the world in many fields and have already done so for a number of decades since the war. Their reconstruction success was not achieved on the back of one group of countrymen being prejudicial against another.  Their success came as a result of a collective effort, hard work, discipline and mutual respect. Why can we, in South Africa, not also work hard, as a collective, in a disciplined manner, with mutual respect one for another and free of this skin colour albatross that permeates every aspect of the South African life?

How are we in South Africa to practice greater discipline, self-respect and earn our dignity so that we too can contribute to the world like in the example set by Germany and Japan?

Are we to achieve this through the application of the discriminatory Affirmative Action policies, the new Apartheid?

I am South African. I refuse to be appointed as determined by the colour skin I was born with and which, like the past, I can do nothing about.