POLICY PERSPECTIVE by Theo Boshoff 

Of all the policy areas that we work with, transformation remains the most controversial and delicate. If done correctly, transformation can be a real asset to the agriculture sector as it unlocks the latent capabilities of those who may not otherwise get a chance in the mainstream economy. If done wrong, transformation can pose a serious challenge for companies and even those whom it seeks to advance. Employment equity is a specific subset of transformation that seeks to advance previously disadvantaged individuals in the formal employment sector so that they can compete on an equal basis with previously advantaged individuals. The concept is noble and deserves to be supported.

AMENDED LEGISLATION

Until recently, companies with a turnover that exceeded a certain threshold was required to formulate employment equity plans containing targets that each entity seeks to achieve over a five-year period. However, the pace of transformation at senior and top management levels in particular has been slower than expected. As a result, Parliament amended legislation to allow the Minister of Employment and Labour to identify sectors and set targets that companies must reach over a five-year period. In essence, the amendments allow the Minister to intervene and substitute a company's targets with a sector wide target. It also changed the threshold for these companies from a turnover-based figure to any company that employs more than 50 people When the concept of targets was first placed on the table, organised business did not oppose it, but requested that an agreement should be reached between the department and affected sectors. Business does, after all, support transformation in principle and there could be real merits in a frank and honest discussion between government and sectors of the economy about what can and cannot be done over a five-year period. In the parliamentary process, agreement gave way to consultation. A provision was also inserted allowing the Minister to publish regulations that set out grounds of justification; in other words, legitimate reasons that would excuse businesses who failed to reach the targets despite their best intentions to do so.

SAMPLE OF EQUITY PLANS

In anticipation of the consultation process, Agbiz put together a small group of HR experts from the agribusiness sector, and collected a representative sample of 12 employment equity plans from the sector and used this as a basis. The information showed that the sector could, at a push, reach previously disadvantaged individual representation of 25% and 20% at top and senior management level respectively, over a l0-year period; 25% representation amongst professionally qualified staff and 40% amongst technically skilled staff over a five-year period. These figures were not thumb-sucked but rather scientifically calculated using our current baseline and the employment equity plans of several agribusinesses. Employees at top and senior management level have a very low turnover rate; hence, longer time frames are proposed. Unfortunately, the consultation that took place was nothing short of a 'tick-the-box' exercise. In a single, hour long online meeting, government stuck to ambitious targets that companies are unlikely to be able to meet. In fact, based on current trends, not even government departments or agencies will be able to meet the targets. I am all for setting ambitious goals, but when these goals are this far divorced from reality, the department and companies are more likely to be occupied with disputes on why the targets could not be reached than actually advancing transformation in the workplace.

IMPRACTICAL TARGETS 

Agribusinesses, in particular, have reported challenges retaining staff as they are often required to relocate to remote areas where there are limited job opportunities for spouses or educational opportunities for children. It is also impractical to break down top and senior management targets into such detailed targets, including for male and female of each designated group, as there simply are not enough posts at this level. Most companies have between three and 10 staff employed at senior level, so a single employee represents at least 15% of the total make-up. Finally, the published targets apply equally to primary agriculture, secondary agriculture, forestry, and fishery. Readers will know that these industries differ vastly in composition between big and small companies, as well as the different job requirements (and hence levels) that are required. Unfortunately, none of these inputs were taken into consideration, and one cannot help but bemoan the missed opportunity at play. The process could have triggered an honest discussion and firm commitments to speed up transformation, but now it may well be seen as another compliance burden that is unlikely to be achieved. This does not help anyone. Agbiz and the broader business community have called on the Minister to recall the targets and restart the process with deep and meaningful consultation. 

Theo Boshoff- the CEO of Agbiz but writes  in his personal capacity.