Talk:Black Economic Empowerment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Neutrality and marketing
This article lacks neutrality and contains link that look suspicially like marketing. I will attempt to clean it up in the next few days, and provide information that is properly sourced and more comprehensive. As soon as more information is available on the page, I will also remove the commercial company links from this page, as the DTI and other South African Government websites has all the required information, and it is not acceptable for a verifcation agency to link from this page, especially not two of them! 196.30.245.149 15:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] AN APPLICATION PROBLEM
As with many well meant plans, it is the application thereof that can be its undoing. BEE relies on the Apartheid classification of different population groups. Thus entrenching racist division. In essence the discrimination against so called "white" and then in the second line "coloured" jobseekers makes the measure of ability or skill secondary to the discussion.
[edit] Black Economic Empowerment vesus Employment Equity
What exactly is the relationship between BEE and Employment Equity? There is stuff in the "Criticism" section of the article that is actually about Employment Equity (Affirmative Action), which appears to be governed by a seperate act (the Employment Equity Act [1]) and which has its own article.
If employment equity and BEE are different, then the parts in the "Criticism" section after the merge notice should be removed from this article and placed in the Employment Equity article.
168.209.98.35 17:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] BEE vs EE
Black Economic Empowerment has quite a big history and I think this article needs to be expanded. I will dedicate a day and get all the facts together and edit the whole page as it contains a lot of negative opinions. True
[edit] Black Economic Empowerment has two different catergories:
- Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE)
- Narrow-Based Black Economic Empowerment
The two are very different but it can be said that they both serve the same purpose- To empower black people.
Let me break it down for you to see the difference between BEE and Employment Equity or Affirmative Action employment.
[edit] Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment
This is empowerment using seven pillars/core elements of BEE.
- Black Ownership and Control
- Executive Management
- Employment Equity
- Skills Development
- Procurement from BEE Companies
- Enterprise Development
- Corporate Social Investment
Anyone who knows the history of the world in general will know that white people have always had the upper-hand and reaped a lot of benefits financially. America had slavery that surpressed black people hence enabling whites to spread the riches amongst themselves. South Africa had apartheid that prevented blacks from having skills that would enable them to grow. This system has always been controvesial for having taught blacks to be nothing but servants.
Now comes in BEE with these pillars which encourages the whole country, Black or White, to spread the riches and give skills to black people so they can participate in the country's economy. Secondly, it encourages companies to spend on training programmes, schools, bursaries, scholarships, community recreation programmes, etc (Corporate Social Investment) that would enable the previously disadvantaged to take part and balance the social divide that was created.
The core elements mentioned above are a reasonable way to address the problem.
[edit] Employment Equity
The arguement on the criticm part of this article it that a company would have to hire an unskilled worker instead of a qualified and well skilled one because of race. I find this to be a fallacy and inaccurate. Looking at the pillars of BEE, one can choose to groom these workers. Lets take an example:
1. Through CSI- one would invest in clinics, schools and social upliftment programmes that would enable the young black child to get a chance to be educated. This can be done through bursary schemes or scholarships for these scholars who in the previous government had limited access to finance to further their education, limited schools that gave them real value and no skills at all that they can use that would affect the community in which they live in.
2. After employment, the company employs a skills development strategy where they skill the worker.
3. Through Affirmative Procurement, the company would outsource services or source supplies from companies actively doing the same thing- Grooming future leaders and balancing the system.
4. Same worker can branch out and the company can support him/her through Enterprise Development.
The arrogance and fear in which people approach this issue is that the SA government is trying to take away jobs and impoverish white people.
Nobody is taking anyone's job or robbing anyone of their money. Its a system that works by choice and if one sees the need to help- they'll do so.
Please refer to documents such as the Treaty of Vereeniging which was signed in early 1900 (about 1902) which stated that a franchise can only be given to natives after the introduction of self-gorvenance.
To learn more about BEE- Please refer to the Black Economic Empowerment Act, BEE Codes of good practice and all industry charters.
For more details on all these documents or to download them- Visit [2] Goodlucca 14:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Revise
"Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is a program launched by the South African government to redress the inequalities of Apartheid by giving previously disadvantaged groups (black Africans, Coloureds and Indians) economic opportunuties previously not available to them. It includes measures such as Employment Equity, skills development, targets for ownership and management and preferential procurement." It states that Coloureds and Indians are also given opportunities, however that is not the case. Black economic empowerment focuses solely on the Black culture of South Africa. Would someone care to research this and confirm the fact/ arguement? Scotteh 12:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
Reading a recent article ont the matter seems to indicate that in practice, your assumption seems correct:
http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=13&art_id=qw1150981740137B241
[edit] Comment on BEE
While all the elements/pillars of BEE sounds rosy, it is not so in practice. For example, it is next to impossible for a white doctor to specialize in South Africa. White policemen don't get any advancement (i.e. one person I know stayed in the same salary post for 11 years.).
It is also extremely difficult for a white male to get any bursaries. Companies use bursaries as a tool to fix racial and empowerment quotas. (i.e. When you phone Siemens and the secretary tells you that if you are a white male, you shouldn't even bother to apply.)
In response to above: It states that Coloureds and Indians are also given opportunities, however that is not the case. Black economic empowerment focuses solely on the Black culture of South Africa.
A lot of Coloured people feel that, they were to black for apartheid and too white for BEE and the new south africa.
[edit] Impoverishment of White people
In response to the statements raised by the person above:
The arrogance and fear in which people approach this issue is that the SA government is trying to take away jobs and impoverish white people.
Nobody is taking anyone's job or robbing anyone of their money. Its a system that works by choice and if one sees the need to help- they'll do so.
I know that it is politically incorrect to be a white afrikaner in south africa, but I just want to raise a few comments to the statements above.
The person who wrote the statements above, have never been on the receiving end of BEE. Nobody is taking anyone's job A lot of white people lost their jobs to be replaced by black people. (some people even had to train their replacee's).
A lot of large companies and government institutions gives people "severance packages". It sounds nice, you get a lump sum of money and you lose your job. The packet is the person's pension contributions given in one lump sum. Most white males can't get another job (a lot of people start businesses with their packages, but most of them fail). In a few years, there is going to be a generation of elderly white people without any pension.
The largest increase in unemployment between 1996 and 2001 was under white people. It is a 200% increase. http://www.news24.com/Rapport/Standpunte/0,,752-823_1953214,00.html (article by Filp Buys leader of a trade union for afrikaners) The result, white people gets poorer.
Another two problems complicate the matter. 1. Afrikaners have no political power, as afrikaners are a minority. In the USA laws protect minorities, but BEE acts against minorities in SA. There will be no incentive for the government to stop BEE. The minister of Labour (Mdladlana) said that there would never be an end to affirmative action.
-
- I got to disagree a bit. Afrikaners may not have formal political power, but they do have some informal power. They are strong in some civil society organisations. I.e. Solidarity. This power could be very potent, if used correctly. One big power is Apathy, and of course the trauma of having been sold out by traitors in their own elite. This has to heal and a will to power needs to develope.
2. It is politically incorrect to be an afrikaner. Afrikaners is the scapegoat for all the thing that go wrong in south africa. Most people in other countries feel that afrikaners deserve affirmative action/BEE.
The only viable option for a lot of afrikaners is to emmigrate to other countries. (There is over a million south africans in England, most of them white).
[edit] BEE effects
BEE is probably one of the major causes of the South African “brain drain”. .......... What is a young white graduate to do? Or for that matter a qualified and experienced white person who wished to change his/her job. Employers in SA are bound to discriminate against them. So they seek work where they are welcome. Quite simple!
[edit] Effects of BEE
Quote from a BBC article:
“And their sons and daughters, many of whom were not even born when apartheid was in place, now cannot find jobs because affirmative action reserves them for blacks. A fifth of the white population has left in the past 10 years, taking their skills and much of their wealth with them. “
-
- That's the law of unintended(?) consequences. It must be added that while some of the Blacks are financially better of then 10years ago. Many more of the Blacks are worth of then previously. Similar features apply to Whites. Actually the bargaining power of the remaining skilled people has grown since the last years. One can see this also in the property market, more money means higher prices.
Title: South Africa's deepening malaise link: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/5385134.stm
It should be noted that this is pure opinion as black skilled people have also left the country, due to various debatable reasons. I suggest we edit the main article to be more neutral in keeping with wiki guidelines. 196.211.19.34 14:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Problems with Apartheid - BEE/Affirmative Action Logic
There are several problems with the Logic of BEE / affirmative action. In the first place the premises are somehow wrong. The Republic of South Africa under the NP. Did understand itself as a state for White people only. So actually Blacks were not excluded, but simply not included. The political future of Blacks was assigned to the homelands, which were to be extended, developed and finally released into independence. The lack of development in the homelands can not be blamed on White people, but is the Blacks own responsibility. Of course the NP-Bureaucrats made many mistakes in executing their policies - I sometimes get the impression that they didn't graps the essence of their own policiy of "separate development" (That's the scientifically correct name for "Apartheid"). So the premise was that Whites and the Non-Whites groups were seen as separate political entities. Those shouting "Apartheid was unfair" work with a wrong premise: That Whites and Blacks were one political entity. Since their premises are wrong, their conclusions have to be wrong by necessity as well.
Not all White people had that big "unfair Advantages" in the past. One can even see this from the economic data. Actually only those part of the powerful networks in the country, really could reap over the top. These networks by name are "Broederbond"(Afrikaners), Free Masons and their clubs (mainly English), the Jewish community. There were other networks of less importance as well. If you were not part of those networks, their was no "unfair advantage" for you at all. The rest of Whites had more or less first world avarage standards of living. Which would be typical for a country run by social democrats. The NP was essentially a social democratic Party for Whites, and also handled the Blacks in a state interventionist way. In a sense the ANC is continuing the policies of the NP. The racial classifications have been formally dropped. Ironically they just continue using those labels. But since their is no legal classification any more what standard do they apply for distinguishing between Blacks/Whites?! If their is no standard, a company can actually put anybody on its management and call him "Black".
Then of course their is the question whether their is really benefits from the whole BEE Scheme. Is the economy as a whole benefiting?! Certainly some individuals do benefit. But a company employing someone, that won't have got the position, if it wasn't for an interventionist policy, will probably make less money. This loss they will have to get somewhere. Guess what most probably they'll dismiss weaker employees or subcontractors! Let's assume that a manager costs the company a loss of R20.000 - They'll have to fire 10 other employees costing them R2000. So the company might shrink or not be able to grow sufficiently. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.241.137.133 (talk • contribs) 12:21, 3 December 2006 (UTC).
The ICERD (International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) defines racism as follows: “Any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise, on equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, or any other field of public life.” 196.46.70.95 06:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
