Paul Janisch

Rob Davies - Act 1 Scene 1 - the demise of white monopoly capital. A play in one scene

[Enter Post Title Here]

The scene – a room in a prime office in Meintjies Street Pretoria.  A nondescript bearded man in a Mandela shirt is reading the news online whilst he fondles his made-to-scale replica of Marx’s gravestone.

Man (muttering) – who the hell is Alan Hirsch anyway?  What does he mean the president needs to bear in mind that “more certainty is needed about policies on mining, land and black economic empowerment to encourage new investment.” There’s plenty of certainty, we have conducted empirical research – there is absolute certainty that the white monopolistic capital will fall and the economy will be nationali…………

The phone rings

Man – Davies.

Secretary – Minister, I have Twusi Vala on the line for you.

Twusi – hello is that bolshie bob, I mean minister davies?

Bolshie bob, emphasising the uppercase – it’s Minister Davies to you Mr Vala (under his breath – if I ever get my hands on that blogger who gave me that name, I’ll……..)

Twusi – listen minister I have a problem.  I own 100% of my business.  I was born in Hammanskraal and I employ skilled white people and foreigners and I can’t get a BEE certificate because my turnover is over R50m.  My clients don’t want to know me.  I’m non-compliant.

Bolshie bob – you know that you could implement all the other elements in the scorecard and get a good score – your ownership and management etc look  good.

Twusi – listen minister, I didn’t join the struggle to be poor.  Those elements are just too hard to implement.  They cost too much money and take much time.  Anyway how I am supposed to train black people if I only employ whites and foreigners?

Bolshie bob – our intention was always to favour you but only up to a poi……………………

Twusi – I don’t care. This is not fair – fix it otherwise I will raise this at the highest levels of government, I mean the ANC

The man returns to the article he was reading.

Bolshie bob – doesn’t this Alan Hirsch know that the Chinese are breaking down the doors to invest here – what policy uncertainty is this?

The phone rings again

Bolshie bob – Davies.

Secretary – Minister, I have Rivian Veddy on the line from Durban.

Bolshie bob – Rivian, so good to speak to you again

Veddy – cut out the small talk comrade minister.  I didn’t join the struggle to be poor.  I’ve been subsidising the rural house of zoomer for years. All I want in exchange is all the lucrative contracts in KZN.  This fucking Nene is now putting the brakes on my supply chain connections.  I need a BEE certificate.  I turnover close to a billion (that SARS knows about).  How the hell am I going to get that level 1 that I faked, I mean declared up until now.  Now it’s about checking financials and shit like that.  Have you seen how your revised codes have marginalised Indians?  I have a family to support and they are worth shit on your new scorecard.  The monarch from the rural house of zoomer is now demanding more cash and I can’t get this out of the state contracts that I am entitled to.  Get me a certificate now or I’ll take it up with the highest echelons in government, I mean the ANC.

Phone goes dead. Davies starts looking through his red rolodex.  The phone rings again

Secretary – Minister, I have Tendai Preneur on the line for you.

Bolshie bob – Mr Preneur, we’ve not spoken since Malusi naturalised you. 

Tendai – naturalised at great expense minister.  There isn’t a single verification agency that will recognise me as black now – in the past it was an affidavit.  Now I go for a verification and they tell me I’m white.  White!! Me!! – the closest thing I ever came to white was when I took that farm in Mazoe.  Now that bob, is he a relation of yours – what with you having the same first name, has been booted out of government in Zim I need to make my fortune here.  This is unacceptable.  Malusi does not come cheap and I’m still white!!!

Rattled the bearded man scrolls through his rolodex and calls his secretary.

Bolshie bob – please get the awesome awdoz on the phone.

Secretary – I think you mean the Acting BEE Commissioner, Minister

Boshie bob – that blogger again! if I ever get my red claws on him.  Yes her – I wish to meet the Acting BEE Commissioner urgently.

Five minutes later a knock is heard on the door.

Bolshie bob – come in.

Awesome awdoz – Minister, you called for me.

Bolshie bob – yes Commissioner.  We have a problem here.  I have just taken three phone calls in five minute, black business is revolting because they can no longer comply with the BEE codes because they are too hard or too complicated……..

Awesome awdoz – or it just takes too long to get a BEE certificate?

Bolshie bob – Exactly.  When we put these revised codes in place we designed them to make it almost impossible for white companies to comply so that we could give black business a hand up.  I never expected that these black businesses would get so much business and then turn over more than R50m.  That wasn’t the plan, they aren’t supposed to be emulating these white monopolistic capitalists.

Awesome awdoz – these white businesses are devious.  Do you know that they have found a way to get around the 51% ownership rule using the modified flow through principle.  Try as I might to discourage this behaviour they have carried on regardless. 

Bolshie bob – have you seen that some of these companies are doing better under the new codes than they did under the old codes.  This is an untenable situation – we need to punish them more.  Do you have any ideas

Awesome awdoz – we must get rid of the modified flow through principle resulting in instant promotion to a level 2 immediately.  But we can't leave it at that.

Bolshie bob – what else did you have in mind?

Awesome awdoz – let’s just promote large black businesses that turnover more than R50m to a level 2 or 1 so that you can appease your constituents.

Bolshie bob – awesome idea awdoz, I mean Commissioner (if I get my hands on that blogger).  But let’s not make it too easy for the white monopoly capitalists to get to that 51% black ownership level through some nefarious scheme.

Awesome awdoz – we could remove the modified flow through principle and insist that large companies undergo an ownership verification.  There’ll be no modified flow through principle then.

Boshie bob – exactly.  But why should we stop there?  I see the president has launched the Youth Employment Service.  Let’s bring that into the scorecard. Hell, whilst we are at it I think we should also get white business to fund tertiary education.  We need to make it a little costly so that they rapidly become financially unviable.  Do you see it Commissioner – we’ll crush white businesses with paperwork and expense.

Awesome awdoz (pondering) – I’ve got an idea.  How about we split up the skills development spend into two sections.  Half to be spent on black staff and the rest on bursaries. 

Bolshie bob – awesome plan aw… I mean Commissioner.  Maybe we should sweeten the deal a little. Not split it halfway – perhaps 3.5% on black people and 2.5% on bursaries.  Do you see the brilliance in your plan?

Bolshie bob does not wait for an answer

Bolshie bob – the 3.5% of payroll figure can be made up of internal spend and salaries.  The bursaries are a raw cost – straight off the bottom line.  I’ve heard that this will cost Standard Bank about R400m a year.  They’ll have to raise their bank charges to make up this shortfall.  We’ll create a black bank that doesn’t need to worry about these expenses that will undercut the large institutions.  We will be rid of white monopoly capital in a short time.

Awesome awdoz – splendid idea, those concepts had been bobbing in my mind for a while.  You’ve banged the nail on the head there Minister.  But what about the Youth Employment Service.

Bolshie bob – yes, the YES.  Hmmm – those white monopoly capitalists have been very reluctant to hire the black youth, that’s why our universities are full of disgruntled students.  Can we not tie the YES into this in some way?

Awesome awdoz – how about this for an idea?  We incentivise the white monopoly capitalists to embrace certain YES targets and they might be promoted a level.  They’ll never get to the levels that black businesses are automatically promoted to anyway – I say let’s leave them to employ the youth and black business can continue doing business.

Bolshie bob – I like that idea.  But we can’t make it that easy.  We need to put in a few punitive caveats………….

Awesome awdoz (jumping off the couch) – they can only be promoted if they get all the points for the bursaries!!!!

Bolshie bob – by Stalin, you’ve got it.  And the promotion to an extra level will be very attractive to 51% black-owned businesses too should they ever want to get to a level one.  We'll be seen as very fair and reasonable.

Awesome awdoz – thank you minister I’ll get onto drawing up the amendments to the BEE codes.  I suppose under Cyril’s government we’ll have to send them out for comment.

Bolshie bob – I suspect that we’ll have to read and consider the comments too. Sometimes I miss the last president.  Now if I could just get my hands on that blogger – I’d send him off to Siberia for a winter holiday……

The curtains come down to no applause – the play started four hours late and the audience had long gone home before the performance started.

Here we have a dominant political party with absolutely no clue how to retain its dominance

This is a short post but it will be followed up by a longer one.  bolshie bob published this document for comment.   

A few features

1. No more modified flow through for enhanced recognition as a QSE or EME.  This was to be expected.
2. Large enterprises (turning over more than R50m) who are more than 51% black owned using the flow through principle are now level 2 - and 100% level 1
3. They have added in  feature with benefits for making use of the youth employment service.  Don't mind that so much
4. They've split skills development up where companies can spend 2.5% of their payroll on bursaries for black people at higher education institutions.

There are a few other things but 2 and 4 take the cake.  Let's start with 2.  Black economic empowerment initiatives are now NO LONGER a black problem.  This a white issue.  Skills development etc - please, that's for the bourgeois whites. Black businesses don't need to worry about any of that stuff.  Why have they done this - simple the anc (back to lowercase) government need to get the eff off their backs by demonstrating that they too can be racists but perhaps in a more institutional fashion.  I ask the question - how is this country ever going to get over itself if it doesn't learn this everyone is responsible for it.  

And 4 - how much more blatant could you be?  They have no idea how to pay for university fees so they award BEE points for it.  Oh don't forget that black large businesses don't have to worry about this.  No! the education of the black youth who come out of a school system that has largely failed them, is not a black issue.  I probably wouldn't take such exception if it wasn't for the fact that the target is 2.5% of payroll - for Standard Bank with would be about R400m.  

We have sixty days to comment.  We need to stick together here - this is inequitable.  We've been run roughshod in the past because we didn't stick together.  If Cyril (clinging onto uppercase) wants to get us out of the hole that zuma put us into - he'd better come up with a better plan, this is not going to solve it

Send your comments here.  And don't not comment - corporate apathy has got us into this hole and there's not much ground left to dig a deeper hole

E-mail: [email protected]
Or
Attention: Jacques Manus
The dti Campus
77 Meintjies street
Sunnyside, Pretoria
0002
c/o BEE Unit
Private Bag X 84
Pretoria
0002
Enquiries: 012 394 5469

 

 

bobby the brave, the bolshevik remains

What to do?  My last post which was published on Biznews this morning.  In this article I reverted back to type and poured out my usual anti-davies vitriol, all of which hoped that Rob Davies (uppercase because of search engines) would have declined the post of minster of trade and industry. This was based on his declining a position on the ANC's NEC's in December.   But there was wishful thinking here.  I have made no secret of the fact that I think he was useless at the job.  His policies are not designed to build an inclusive economy - they were designed to redistribute, not to build.  I was initially very optimistic about him.  Here's the post I wrote when he was appointed minister

With the Zumocracy (hopefully not a zoomocracy) comes a new cabinet and new minister of trade and industry.  A notice from the Presidency's website contains the list of new ministers and their deputies.  The one we BEE-types are most concerned about is the new minister and his deputies.  

Rob my man - you have a hell of a job on your hands.  I am only aware of the mess that is BEE, but I am almost willing to bet that the rest of the department is in a similar state.   I was sent an SMS on Thursday informing me that the outgoing (and apparently pissed-off) minister had gazetted the construction sector charter under section 9.  The sender remarked that said (now ex) minister was trying to push a series of things through to make his successor's life a misery.

 

I gave our bolshie a go.  But it became very clear in a very short time that he was out of his league.  There was the business registration proposal that said every business, from the broom seller through to the major conglomerate, had to register with the local municipality and acquire a licence (something along these lines).  That seems to have fallen by the wayside, but it's one of many hamfisted programmes that he and his ministry launched in a half-baked fashion.

Yet he is still the minister.  The optimist in me wants to think that everything he did was under the aegis of the wannabe fascist zuma and that we might see a change in his myopia.  Perhaps this quote is an indication of a more realistic approach towards the empowerment process

Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies said equity equivalents was a facility available under the Broad-based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) Act, and they could apply.

“We are not unrealistic about what we expect in terms of the B-BBEE scorecards. We want to see a progression and incremental progress.

“We are not going to be asking for something ridiculous and the moon,” he said on the sidelines of the official launch of Isuzu Motors South Africa in Port Elizabeth last week.

The underlined quote is important.  As I wrote last week - how are you going to see an improvement if you won't allow companies to get on the scorecard in the first place?  He's right here - the revised codes were implemented because people like me found ways to get around them and scores were fantastic.  bolshie took one look at this and under very one-sided advice  concluded that transformation is lagging behind.  What do you do?  You do exactly what Brigadier Jakes Swart did on Christmas day 1986, you force transformation on the people.  This is what the revised codes were about - they were an attempt to get companies to make a better plan at transforming.  The idea is noble, even if the targets  were completely off the mark.  The problem lay in the fact that the SOEs and the larger corporates were not going to tolerate a drop in score because it impacts (in the case of the private sector) on their BEE score.  I can understand why the bee commissioner (awesome awdoz) is getting pissed off with bigger companies hitting ridiculously high scores at the outset - great score but where's the change?

This is a risk we face here - if we shoot out the lights with these codes they are just going to change them again and make them even harder.  This is a strategy that a communist understands well.

Back to bolshie - I'm hoping I'm right. I'm hoping that his quote above is an indication of his long term attitude and strategy. If I am then his name will change on this blog.

Related articles

Cyril Ramaphosa Sworn in As The New President of South Africa - ClassicalPromo

Where does our favourite empowerment system fit in with Cyril's economy rebuilding programme?

Where does our favourite empowerment system fit in with Cyril's economy rebuilding programme?

Disclaimer: please excuse the uppercase usage for zuma, gigaba (abagig to this blog), davies (should be bolshie bob) and dud miyeni (in the land of sheer incompetence this one truly stands out, we are talking mkhwebane incompetent).

It’s been almost a week since Cyril’s SONA and our initial euphoria has been tempered by Gigaba’s reality biting budget speech.  It’s now patently clear that Zuma’s gallant attempt at destroying the economy was remarkably successful. That might be a little too lenient on the erstwhile statesmen. His lack of leadership has left the fiscus, the economy, the government and the country in complete turmoil. No amount of litigation and Zuma/Gupta dock-sitting is going to make this pain any more bearable. Cyril also has to live with the fact that the last nine years have created a massive trust deficit between the public and the government. Cyril’s words at the SONA were comforting and probably lulled us all into a temporary false sense of security.  But reality bites hard and we are unlikely to take his word at face value.  We want action. Zuma made all sorts of promises in his SONAs but it was only those that served the interests of his kleptocracy that were honoured.  Think about procurement set-asides that Dud Miyeni illegally imposed at SAA.

In spite of my cynicism I do recognize the importance of resuscitating the economy.  We can’t run away from this.  The imperative to create employment cannot be overstated. Social interventions like black economic empowerment (BEE) have to play a greater role in this process than they ever have before.  But they cannot deliver on this imperative in their current guise. If you consider the Gigaba has raised taxes and reduced the disposable income of most corporates, and taxpayers, there is now less money for extravagant BEE programmes.  Davies’ Marxist-inspired altruistic BEE codes are in severe danger of collapsing in on themselves. 

It’s been 3 and a half years since Davies gazetted his latest set of BEE codes. In that time he has also overseen the gazetting of numerous industry specific charters, culminating in the financial sector code in December 2017. This must have felt like a coup to him because he got it done in three years, three times faster than the previous one took to gazette. Over the last three years I have seen a number of companies simply falling off the BEE radar. Of the 100-odd qualifying small enterprises (QSEs – turnover between R10m and R50m) that I have assisted in the past decade, only one has attempted to be rated under the new codes.  The balance have either opted for non-compliance or simply restructured their shareholding to appear to be 51%black owned. The sole compliance company has gone to great expense and has come out in a far worse position than the effort was worth. A number of larger companies (turnover in excess of R50m) have simply requested their verification agency to give them a non-compliant BEE certificate. Not your average non-compliance certificate, one with five zeros on it. The reasoning behind this is simple, under Davies deluded regime if you have 54.99 points or zero you are still non-compliant. Why go to the extraordinary effort and expense to get to 54.99 points when the result is exactly the same as zero. I can only assume that the market is accepting these BEE certificates because I’ve heard of very little pushback.

These companies have fallen off the BEE map and with it their enterprise and supplier development as well as socio economic contributions. They are still skilling up their staff because being in business requires it and they are still attempting to meet their employment equity commitments. There is no incentive to go back onto the BEE map because they have chosen to exercise their constitutional right to retain 100% ownership of their businesses – something that would be regarded as racist…… Because of this simple omission they will make no contribution to emerging black businesses or charities. I’m sure Davies and his cabal of Marxist and militant employees are hatching all sorts of plans to punish these companies even further because of this. But this will be to no avail. They are lost to the system and it will be nigh on impossible to get them back.

What we need now are friendlier policies that encourage compliance, not policies that presume that all corporates are inherently racist and anti-transformation.  These policies need to encourage and reward transformation, unlike the current system that punishes. Most importantly it needs to embrace every company that is able to contribute, Davies’ head-in-the-clouds system exempts companies who are more than 51% black owned and turn over less than R50m from even bothering to contribute to the empowerment process.

What if Cyril took a different approach.  What if he appointed a minister of trade and industry who saw black economic empowerment in its correct context; a context which recognises BEE’s contribution to nation building and restoring the economy. He wouldn’t have to do too much here. He cannot change the BEE codes wholesale because it will show that ANC policies are not workable.  The business community would be hard pressed to swallow another change in the ANC’s transformation policy. All Cyril would need to do is remove the priority elements requirement.  These are the elements, like ownership,  that must be complied with.  A failure to do so results in the company dropping a level.  He should also reduce the points levels to those of the earlier versions of the BEE codes.  It would also help if SANAS were told to drop their ridiculous levels of compliance checking and start giving companies the benefit of the doubt. But this might be too tall an ask for now.  This gesture would be a small step in rebuilding the trust that the zuma years have categorically destroyed and would bring those companies that have fallen off the radar back into the fold.

Business wants this country to succeed and is willing to play a significant role in this process, but it also needs to be shown that its efforts are making that contribution and that it is being acknowledged. Awarding BEE points for efforts that achieve these goals will make a major difference to the corporate lives of those contributing to employment and growth.

Trainee Tracking Tool - here's one I created

How SANAS loves its paperwork.  This is a spinoff from bolshie bob's desire to create paperwork and red tape.  How this is going to result in transformation resides only in his red mind.  

The internet was trawled for a trainee tracking tool.  There are some third party systems you can use.  Unfortunately the bee commission doesn't help either - they merely state that every company should develop their own.  This is what I would put in a trainee tracking tool.  Just headings - you can fill in the detail as you go along.  Understand that this is for verification - so you should pad it with lots of documents. ID books, payslips, test results, psycho-analyses, spinal taps and the results of the most recent pencil test.

Trainee Tracking Tool

1. Learner name, ID number, race gender
2. Type of learnership/internship/apprenticeship (name)
3. Ultimate qualification
4. Duration of learnership
5. Date started and anticipated completion date

6. Was the learner employed by the company before the learnership commenced.

7. Progress report (quarterly)
8. Examinations written (date and whether the learner passed)
9. Moderator/assessor’s report on the progress in that quarter

10. Other interventions required to assist the learner (courses, internal training etc)

Signed by moderator/assessor

Date

Good luck using it, tell SANAS I sent you.  And as usual, if you like the tool please send me a mail. In fact I would really appreciate one that has been completed.

Exactly what percentage ownership do you need so as not to be fired

Whilst we wait for Cyril to do something about this abomination known as the BEE codes  I might as well provide my loyal readership with a short tutorial on ownership.

Before I start I need to stress that ownership is not the answer to South Africa's problems.  Well in excess of 95% of all the businesses (whether they be formal or informal) have no intrinsic value.  Their value lies in the person who started that business's energy and effort.  When that person dies, retires or emigrates the chances are that that business will close down.  There might be some value in stock or assets but without that person running it it won't survive.  I can almost see what bolshie bob is spoiling at here. He would say "I am the most useless communist and the scourge of South African business, you are speaking the truth my white monopoly capitalist wannabe.  But if you do a proper handover of ownership and involve black people in the running of the business then it will survive." Too true my Bolshevik brother - but human nature isn't like that.  And no amount of EAPing is going to change it.  You keep on dreaming whilst you enjoy your very generous pension after you have walked away from the mayhem you have caused.

Exactly how much ownership do need so that you don't get fired a level.  The short answer is 10.03%.  Please look at the calculation below.  We know that you need 3.2 points for net value in order not to drop a level.  My rudimentary Excel skills tell me that under perfect circumstances you can get to 3.2 points under formula A with 1% ownership (Acts.co.za is now a subscription site I can't refer you to the formulas).  But you won't get the 3.2 points under formula B and the rule is that the lesser result of A and B becomes the net value answer.  In order to get 3.2 points under formula B you need 10.03% ownership.  Obviously you will need to pay attention to the requirement under formula A to keep it at at 3.2 points.

Ownership level	1.0%
Deemed value
Value of shares in black hands on date of measurement	2.00
Value of outstanding debt	1.00
Value of company on date of measurement	100.00
Deemed value result	1.00%
The net value formula to use is the one that is lower of the two
Net value formula 1
Year 1	10%
Year 2	20%
Years 3-4	40%
Years 5-6	60%
Years 7-9	80%
Year 9-10	100%
Net Value	3.20
Net value formula 2
Percentage black economic interest	5%
Target for ownership	25.10%
Net value formula B	1.59
Subminimum	3.2
Minimum ownership levels	Net Value levels for Formula B
1.00%	0.32
2.00%	0.64
3.00%	0.96
4.00%	1.27
5.00%	1.59
6.00%	1.91
7.00%	2.23
8.00%	2.55
9.00%	2.87
10.00%	3.19
10.03%	3.20
10.10%	3.22
11.00%	3.51

 

 

Apparently the new FSC has been gazetted

And there I was thinking that this awesome government would have kept it under wraps so as not to tip the economy over.  As abagig says - "transformaysheein uber alles".

This is going to be a nasty document - specifically under skills.  I have a blog post that I want to write about possible anti-competitive behaviour from the larger listed entities (banks, insurance companies etc).  My story won't be empirical but I find it interesting that you can put these targets under skills development. This is not about skills spend on external people, this is about internal skills development at different levels of management.  The only reason why those large companies would have agreed to this is because they can achieve the targets.  If anyone can send me an EEA4 from one of those organisations I can write a story to that effect.  I can assure you the institution in question won't be mentioned. 

Description			Points	Target
2.1	Senior management		2
	2.1.1	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black senior and executive managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	1	2.00%
	2.1.2	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black women senior and executive managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	0.5	1.00%
	2.1.3	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for African senior and executive managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	0.5	EAP%
2.2	Middle management		2
	2.2.1	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black middle managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	1	3.00%
	2.2.2	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black women middle managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	0.5	1.50%
	2.2.3	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for African middle managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	0.5	EAP%
2.3	Junior management		3
	2.3.1	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black junior managers as a percentage of leviable amount applicable to this level	1	5.00%
	2.3.2	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black women junior managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	1	2.50%
	2.3.3	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for African junior managers as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	1	EAP%
2.4	Non-management staff		4
	2.4.1	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black non-management staff as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	2	8.00%
	2.4.2	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black women non-management staff as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	1	4.00%
	2.4.3	Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for African non-management staff as a percentage of the leviable amount applicable to this level	1	EAP%
2.5		Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black unemployed people as a percentage of the leviable amount	4	1.5%
2.6		Skills development expenditure on learning programmes specified in the learning programme matrix for black people with disabilities as a percentage of the leviable amount	1	0.30%
2.7		Number of black people, (employed or unemployed) participating in learnerships, apprenticeships, internships or Category B, C or D programmes as a percentage of total employees	4	5.00%
		Total	20
2.8		Bonus Points: Number of previously unemployed black people Absorbed by the measured entity/industry at the end of the learnerships, apprenticeships, internships, or Category B, C or D programmes.	3	100%

 

 

 

 

 

Assuming it's permissable for people to examine a listed entity's EEA2 and EEA4

If anyone is able to send me the EEA4 (most recent if possible) for any large listed company operating in the financial sector.  A large bank or insurance company would be acceptable.  I need this for a blog post on the FSC that apparently is about to be gazetted.  What better time to put out a transformation charter after your economy (run into the ground by abagig and cronies) has been downgraded by S&P.  You can just imagine that smug grin thinking that he's now really doing the country a favour.  Do us a bigger favour by fucking off.

Now that we don't have an economy - let's transform it.  If someone has it please send it to me - if it is in fact company confidential then perhaps not.  I can assure the sender that the blog post will not mention the company whose EEA4 I used nor will it mention who sent it me - whether it's legal or not.

 

A letter sent to a client (and there are many in their position)

This analysis is not spot on but it’s not far off.  The score comes out at 24 points – but it’s assumed that the enterprise/supplier development/socio-economic development points have been bought to get to this score.   This is non-compliant.  You need 40 points to get onto the scorecard and if you meet the subminima of the three priority elements you drop a maximum of one level.  Without ownership you will always drop a level.  This means that we need to get 55 points to get you up to a level 8.

A few things.

1. I used the procurement info we used last year.  It's obvious that your client is happy with the imported goods that you supply. However because you use an importing agent and this makes up 80% of your total expenditure your procurement score is going to suffer. 
2. The skills development calculations are there to show you how ridiculous the targets are.  Your target (based on Nov to Oct 2017’s figures) for skills development spend is over R500k.  This doesn’t need to be spent on your staff – you can spend the money to train other black people but it must be based on the economically active population (EAP) targets.  There is a way to get around this using the employee tax incentive (ETI).  In fact if you make use of the ETI and donate a smallish amount (way less than R500k) to a disabled school – then you’ll get the full number of points
3. A similar plan can be made for enterprise and supplier development.

However – having noted all that. I’m not sure that you will get to 55 points if your procurement isn’t in order so you’ll probably end up being non-compliant anyway.  The question is “Is it worth it to go through this exercise and the expense when the result is negative anyway?”

I’ve added a letter that should buy you some time.  I’ll write a new one every four months.

I’m sorry that this system is not designed to help you at all.  I am hoping that should Cyril come in he will start relaxing rules to make compliance a little more achievable. He’d go a long way in removing the priority elements.

Paul

Solidarity and the Constitution - BEE's big test starts today

There is a court case being heard by the Constitutional Court today.  

The Constitutional Court is on Thursday expected to hear a case brought by trade union Solidarity and the South African Restructuring and Insolvency Practitioners' Association (Saripa) challenging the constitutionality of BEE and affirmative action. The court case relates to the abolition of the Department of Justice's appointment policy insofar as liquidators are concerned, according to a statement issued by both Solidarity and Saripa

I have mixed views on this.  If the ConCourt finds that BEE is not constitutional then I am without a job.  But I recognise that this kind of challenge is very overdue.  I have written about BEE and the constitution before and I am quite sure that there are strong arguments that the policy itself is not constitutional. It seems very obvious to me that the drafters knew that as well - that's why they state in the codes that these codes are mandatory for all organs of state and public entities (paragraph 3 of  statement 000).  It then spreads its reach saying that if you want to produce a scorecard because you do business with those entities or entities that do business with those state entities then this is the way to go.

In effect this clause makes the process voluntary.  However I think the problem isn't so much that the policy exists - the problem lies in the unreasonability of the codes and the way they are being foisted upon us.  SOE's are extraordinarily arbitrary when it comes to what they want.  We know that there has been major looting in the name of BEE.  dud miyeni (perhaps deadduck miyeni would be a better name) was more than happy to steal from SAA in the name of transformation, Eskom did the same with trillian and the atpugs.

I don't think that the country would survive without the policy but the policy will not survive with these codes and the idiots at the dti who write them.