
DA challenges new employment equity targets in court, drawing ire from unions
The Democratic Alliance (DA) is preparing for a fresh legal battle with the Government of National Unity (GNU), of which it is a member, over the new employment equity targets set by the Employment Equity Amendment Act.
DA MP Michael Bagraim's announcement of the planned legal proceedings comes two weeks after the Department of Employment and Labour (DEL) gazetted two sets of employment equity regulations. The party's decision to go to court has been heavily criticised by workers' unions.
The new regulations introduce five-year numerical targets for the top four occupational levels (junior, middle, senior and top management) across 18 sectors, ranging from finance to manufacturing.
The DEL's 2024 employment equity report found that despite comprising just 7.3% of the population, white workers held 62.1% of all top management positions.
In a statement released on Tuesday, Bagraim said the DA had launched a constitutional challenge to section 15A of the amended Act, claiming that it introduced rigid race quotas in the workplace, which would 'destroy jobs, undermine the economy and violate the constitutional rights of all South Africans'.
Bagraim, the DA's spokesperson on employment and labour, added that section15A was an abuse of state power in that the powers it gives Employment and Labour Minister Nomakhosazana Meth were 'vague, unchecked and dangerously broad'.
Daily Maverick previously reported that Nadeem Mahomed, director of employment at the law firm Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, said the designated group the Act referred to included black people (Africans, coloured people and Indians), women and persons with disabilities, provided they are South African citizens by birth or descent.
However, Bagraim claimed that the final quotas would make it 'virtually impossible' for coloured people in the Western Cape and Indian workers in KwaZulu-Natal to find or keep employment.
The DA also claims:
Section 15A violates section 9 of the Constitution by enabling discrimination based on race.
The minister's discretion under Section 15A lacks clear legal standards, contravening the Dawood principle of administrative law.
The implementation of demographic targets disproportionately prejudices coloured and Indian communities in certain provinces, particularly the Western Cape and KwaZulu-Natal.
Exemptions for small businesses and the government's settlement in the Solidarity case suggest an acknowledgement of the potential economic harm of the quotas.
Read the DA's founding affidavit here.
'This case is not about resisting redress. It is about protecting people's rights under the Constitution, the rule of law, and the livelihoods of South Africans.
'The DA believes that real redress does not mean implementing policies that bring more division. We believe that true transformation can only be achieved by focusing on inclusive economic growth that creates opportunity for all,' said Bagraim.
In response to questions sent by Daily Maverick, DEL chief communications officer Teboho Thejane said: 'Let's let the legal process unfold. Citizens have the constitutional right to address issues in the way they see appropriate. The department follows relevant processes when it comes to legislative framework within its scope.'
Several workers' unions had stronger words about the DA's legal challenge.
'Spurious attack'
On Tuesday, the Congress of South African Trade Unions (Cosatu) released a strongly worded statement expressing its 'dismay' at the DA's 'spurious attack on employment equity.
'It is alarming that the DA court papers are premised upon fake news about the Act and its regulations. Nowhere in either does it provide for any worker, of any colour or gender, to lose their job. None. Any statement claiming they do should be taken as seriously as the flat-earth hysteria on social media.
'Employment equity and transformation remains an extremely emotive matter for all workers and should be handled with the necessary care and sensitivity and not used to score likes on social media,' said Cosatu parliamentary coordinator Matthew Parks.
Parks said the amendments to the Act sought to strike a fair balance between easing administrative burdens on SMMEs reflecting SA's demographic diversity and pushing employers to do better to ensure all employees had a 'fair chance to fulfil their full potential'.
'The regulations provide ample time, eg, five years, and modest targets, well below population demographics, for employers to work towards. As with all laws, exemptions are provided for employers who have tried, but, for a variety of reasons, cannot achieve their targets,' said Parks.
He added that the union was confident that the case would be dismissed as 'legal adventurism'.
General Industries Workers Union of South Africa (Giwusa) said the union strongly condemned the DA's litigation.
'Ultimately, it reflects the commitment within the DA to roll back the progress made with respect to transformation, and it also reveals the character of the DA. The fact that the DA is not concerned with the dominance of white people in the top echelons of the corporate ladder in many sectors of the industry of this country says a lot,' said Giwusa's Mametlwe Sebei.
Sebei said that employment equity had been instrumental in ensuring that all levels in organisations were reflective of SA's diverse demography. However, he noted that there was resistance, particularly in the private sector, where operational and top management were predominantly white.
'That is the reason that it is absolute hogwash for the DA to keep insisting that economic growth and the opening of education opportunities, all of which are important, on and by themselves would address this issue. If that were so, we would not have had the lack of representation and exclusion of black people from the management of industry and public service,' added Sebei.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

IOL News
2 hours ago
- IOL News
Constitution does not permit Ramaphosa to be undecided in Mchunu case, say MKP lawyers
The Constitutional Court has reserved judgment in the case brought by the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) against President Cyril Ramaphosa over his alleged protection of under fire police minister Senzo Mchunu. Image: Timothy Bernard / Independent Newspapers THE Constitution does not grant President Cyril Ramaphosa the power to suspend. He can only appoint or dismiss and there is nothing in between. That was the argument advanced by lawyers representing Jacob Zuma's uMkhonto weSizwe before the Constitutional Court on Wednesday. The party is challenging Ramaphosa's decision to place Police Minister Senzo Mchunu on leave of absence and the appointment of Firoz Cachalia in an acting position. Ramaphosa placed Mchunu on special leave after serious allegations by KwaZulu-Natal police commissioner Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi that he colluded with a criminal syndicate, accepted illicit payments, interfered in investigations and disbanded a specialised task force into political killings. The MKP wants Mchunu fired, while also contesting Cachalia's appointment as acting police minister. Central to the case are questions about the limits of presidential power, the legality of acting appointments and whether Ramaphosa acted rationally when he established a judicial commission of inquiry into serious allegations of criminal infiltration of law enforcement agencies. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Next Stay Close ✕ The Constitutional Court has reserved judgment in the case brought by the uMkhonto weSizwe Party (MKP) against President Cyril Ramaphosa over his alleged protection of under fire police minister Senzo Mchunu. Image: GCIS Lawyers representing the MKP argued that Ramaphosa has no right to appoint more than one minister of police at the same time. MKP legal counsel, Mpati Qofa-Lebakeng, argued that the country's ailing economy cannot afford to have more than one minister and two acting ministers at the same time. 'We have dealt with cost implications related to three ministers of police and two deputy ministers. We are saying in the context of an economy like ours, there is no rational decision that would warrant the President having three Ministers of Police in his Cabinet. The cost implication does not limit itself only to the Minister of police's portfolio. It also goes to the second leg of costs that are occasioned by the establishment of the Commission of Inquiry. We are saying, just on that point alone, there is no way that the cost would be justifiable when the President has taken the decision which has already been alluded to," she argued. Also, arguing on behalf of the MK Party, Dali Mpofu stated that no President could appoint a minister from outside those who are already in Cabinet. "We can agree that it is wrong," Mpofu said. Anton Katz, also on behalf of the MKP argued that Chapter 5 of the Constitution grants no power to suspend, only to appoint or dismiss, saying there was nothing in between. "There is no vacancy when it comes to ministers, and for this purpose, I want to refer you to Chapter 5 of the Constitution. This part of the Constitution, its wording, content, and purpose, tells us one thing and one thing only: that there is no power to suspend. It is to appoint, dismiss, and nothing in between," he stated. Arguing for Ramaphosa, Kate Hofmeyr said that the Constitutional Court was the last court of resort, arguing that the MKP had abused the process when it approached the apex court to challenge this matter on an urgent basis. The powers to assign and appoint ministers also lie with the President, who has done right by the Constitution in this regard, she maintained. "Former Chief Justice Mogoeng Mogoeng spoke out about the monopoly of this court. This court must be concerned about taking this matter. The President has both the powers and an obligation, and he has the right to exercise these powers subject to the strictures of the law," she argued. Advocate Griffiths Madonsela, arguing for Mchunu, said his client was 'ambushed' by Mkhwanazi's accusations. He said the MKP's response to these allegations was to 'draw their spears' and to 'crucify him'. Judgment was reserved. Cape Times


eNCA
2 hours ago
- eNCA
Clock ticks on US tariff hikes as Trump broadens blitz
US - Time is running short for governments to strike deals with Washington to avert tariff hikes that Donald Trump has vowed against dozens of economies - and the US president continues to expand his trade wars. As the clock ticked down on a Friday deadline for higher levies to take effect on goods from various trading partners, Trump announced a trade deal with South Korea and separate duties on Brazilian and Indian imports. He also signed an order Wednesday to impose previously-threatened 50 percent tariffs on certain copper products and end a tariff exemption for low-value shipments from abroad. The tariff hikes due Friday were initially announced in April as part of a package where Trump slapped a 10 percent levy on goods from almost all trading partners - citing unfair trade practices. This rate was set to rise to varying levels for dozens of economies like the European Union, Japan and others, but Washington twice postponed their implementation as financial markets gyrated. So far, Britain, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines, the EU and South Korea have reached initial deals with Washington to secure less punishing conditions. While the United States and China earlier slapped escalating tariffs on each other's products, both sides are working to further a truce maintaining duties at lower levels. - 'Big day' - But Trump has been pushing ahead in his efforts to reshape global trade. The US leader insisted Wednesday that the August 1 deadline "will not be extended" any further. In a Truth Social post, he vowed that this would be "a big day for America." Although Trump has promised a surge in government revenues from his duties, economists warn that higher tariffs can fuel an uptick in inflation and weigh on economic growth. This could change consumption patterns. Already, consumers face an overall average effective tariff rate that is the highest since the 1930s, according to a recent analysis by The Budget Lab at Yale University. The effect on consumer prices has been limited so far. But analysts cautioned this could become more pronounced as businesses run down on existing inventory and pass on more costs to buyers. - Tariff blitz, delays - Among Trump's latest announcements were a 25 percent duty on Indian goods to begin Friday -- slightly lower than previously threatened - after talks between Washington and New Delhi failed to bring about a trade pact. India would face an unspecified "penalty" over purchases of Russian weapons and energy as well, Trump said. He also unveiled a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian goods, saying its government's policies and actions threaten US national security. But he delayed its implementation from Friday to August 6 and crucially exempted many products from the prohibitive levy, including orange juice, civil aircraft, iron ore and some energy products. Trump inked an order too for a 50 percent tariff to kick in Friday on goods like copper pipes and wiring, making good on an earlier vow to impose these duties. But the levy, which came after a Commerce Department probe on national security grounds, was less sweeping than anticipated. It left out products like copper ores, concentrates and cathodes, bringing some relief to industry. Meanwhile, Seoul landed a deal with Trump in which South Korean products would face a 15 percent tariff when entering the United States - significantly below a 25 percent level threatened. By Beiyi Seow

IOL News
3 hours ago
- IOL News
Clock ticks on US tariff hikes as Trump broadens blitz
The US leader insisted Wednesday that the August 1 deadline "will not be extended" any further. Image: AFP Time is running short for governments to strike deals with Washington to avert tariff hikes that Donald Trump has vowed against dozens of economies -- and the US president continues to expand his trade wars. As the clock ticked down on a Friday deadline for higher levies to take effect on goods from various trading partners, Trump announced a trade deal with South Korea and separate duties on Brazilian and Indian imports. He also signed an order Wednesday to impose previously-threatened 50 percent tariffs on certain copper products and end a tariff exemption for low-value shipments from abroad. The tariff hikes due Friday were initially announced in April as part of a package where Trump slapped a 10 percent levy on goods from almost all trading partners -- citing unfair trade practices. This rate was set to rise to varying levels for dozens of economies like the European Union, Japan and others, but Washington twice postponed their implementation as financial markets gyrated. So far, Britain, Vietnam, Japan, Indonesia, the Philippines, the EU and South Korea have reached initial deals with Washington to secure less punishing conditions. While the United States and China earlier slapped escalating tariffs on each other's products, both sides are working to further a truce maintaining duties at lower levels. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading 'Big day' But Trump has been pushing ahead in his efforts to reshape global trade. The US leader insisted Wednesday that the August 1 deadline "will not be extended" any further. In a Truth Social post, he vowed that this would be "a big day for America." Although Trump has promised a surge in government revenues from his duties, economists warn that higher tariffs can fuel an uptick in inflation and weigh on economic growth. This could change consumption patterns. Already, consumers face an overall average effective tariff rate that is the highest since the 1930s, according to a recent analysis by The Budget Lab at Yale University. The effect on consumer prices has been limited so far. But analysts cautioned this could become more pronounced as businesses run down on existing inventory and pass on more costs to buyers. Tariff blitz, delays Among Trump's latest announcements were a 25 percent duty on Indian goods to begin Friday -- slightly lower than previously threatened -- after talks between Washington and New Delhi failed to bring about a trade pact. India would face an unspecified "penalty" over purchases of Russian weapons and energy as well, Trump said. He also unveiled a 50 percent tariff on Brazilian goods, saying its government's policies and actions threaten US national security. But he delayed its implementation from Friday to August 6 and crucially exempted many products from the prohibitive levy, including orange juice, civil aircraft, iron ore and some energy products. Trump inked an order too for a 50 percent tariff to kick in Friday on goods like copper pipes and wiring, making good on an earlier vow to impose these duties. But the levy, which came after a Commerce Department probe on national security grounds, was less sweeping than anticipated. It left out products like copper ores, concentrates and cathodes, bringing some relief to industry. Meanwhile, Seoul landed a deal with Trump in which South Korean products would face a 15 percent tariff when entering the United States -- significantly below a 25 percent level threatened. AFP