Committee report on performance of Department of Employment and Labour and its entities: first quarter 2021/22

This premium content has been made freely available

Employment and Labour

02 March 2022
Chairperson: Ms M Dunjwa (ANC)
Share this page:

Meeting Summary

Tabled Committee Report

In a virtual meeting, the Committee adopted outstanding minutes and, after including amendments, adopted its report on the performance of the Department of Employment and Labour and its entities in the first quarter of the 2021/22 financial year.

Members proposed various additions to the observations and recommendations sections.  An addition was inserted to the observation on the Compensation Fund about the long wait times. An addition to the recommendations section was inserted, instructing the Department to report to the Committee on the outcome of its engagements with the International Labour Organisation. An addition to the recommendation to the Unemployment Insurance Fund was inserted indicating that the Committee was still waiting for a report on the Fund’s external audit from the Auditor-General.

Some Members strongly argued that the report should reflect that the Council for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration was failing because of budget and operational constraints.

The report was adopted, with the Members representing the DA and FF+ registering their objection.

Meeting report

The Chairperson opened the meeting by noting the proposed National Labour Migration Policy (NLMP) and the Employment Services Amendment Bill, which had been published for comment in the Government Gazette earlier in the week. The Committee had a mammoth task ahead of it, working together with the relevant departments, especially the Department of Home Affairs but also the Department of Small Business Development, as well as organised labour. It was an emotive issue but Parliament had a responsibility to come up with laws and regulations that would assist the country. She looked forward to being able to discuss the issues in face-to-face meetings soon. It was a matter of serious national interest. In the end, the Committee’s task was to create a conducive environment for discussion. The changes being discussed were for the benefit of the country—it was about the workers who perished fighting for laws that govern the labour environment. Ensuring that youth, women and people with disabilities found employment needed to be balanced against making sure that they also empowered themselves to become part of the mainstream economy.

Consideration of outstanding minutes
Minutes of the Committee’s meetings on 8 December 2021 and 2, 9, 17, and 23 February 2022 were adopted.

Consideration of draft Committee report
Mr Zolani Sakasa, Committee Secretary, presented the Committee’s draft report on the performance of the Department of Employment and Labour and its entities for the first quarter of the 2021/22 financial year.  Members discussed the observations and recommendations sections.

Observations
Mr M Bagraim (DA) said it was almost laughable that the report observed the 100% performance achievement of Productivity South Africa (PSA) in paragraph 6.3.1, while at the same time South Africa was ranked at or near the very bottom of global productivity indices.

The Chairperson said that Mr Bagraim’s comment provoked intense reflection and invited other Members to respond to it.

Mr M Nontsele (ANC) said that the performance record of PSA should be recognised, and the improvement from 40% to 100% should be appreciated. He pointed out that it was PSA that had reported the country’s low productivity to the Committee. He hoped PSA would maintain its momentum.

Mr Bagraim said that the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) had been doing research into its fitness for purpose for three or four years but still had not presented its findings or recommendations to the Committee. Why was it keeping the Committee in the dark?

The Chairperson appreciated the comment but asked that members formulate general statements into precise recommendations when the Committee considered that part of the report.

Mr Bagraim agreed to do this but said that in the past, when the Committee had been discussing recommendations, the Chairperson had asked why he had not raised matters earlier when the Committee had been discussing observations. He also thought that observation 6.5.1 on the performance of the Compensation Fund (CF) was not sufficient: it needed to include the fact that people sometimes waited years for their claims to be processed.

Mr Nontsele argued that the observation, which reported Members’ concerns about long queue times at labour centres, already captured Mr Bagraim’s observation.

The Chairperson invited Mr Bagraim to formulate an addition if he thought it was necessary.

Mr Bagraim proposed the addition of a second observation on the CF, reading ‘Members raised a concern with regard to the lengthy wait for claims to be paid.’

Mr Nontsele suggested instead the addition of another sentence to paragraph 6.5.1: ‘This included long waits for claims to be processed.

Ms H Denner (FF+) argued in favour of a second observation, as the queuing and waiting times were distinct issues.

The Chairperson ruled that Mr Nontsele’s proposed addition to 6.5.1 would be included.

Mr Bagraim thought that the observation on the Council for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) was not comprehensive. It should also be observed that the underfunding of the CCMA was affecting service delivery and that the reason for the lower number of referrals, especially from vulnerable sectors, was that people had been unable to visit the Council’s offices in person during lockdown.

The Chairperson regarded Mr Bagraim’s submission as part of a debate or as a declaration, rather than an observation.

Mr Nontsele argued that it was just a comment. The Committee did not need to act on it. The point was that the country had been completely locked down due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The Committee was obviously concerned about the funding of the CCMA.

Recommendations
Dr M Cardo (DA) thought that paragraph 7.1 on the Department itself was overly concerned with minor details. The country was sitting with an unemployment rate of 46.6% and the Committee’s recommendations were about the procurement of printers, office supplies and furniture. This was an incorrect focus. He recalled the Department’s report that it had been in consultations with the International Labour Organisation (ILO), which had provided advice from government departments involved in job creation in other countries. The Committee should recommend that the Department report regularly on the implementation of its extended mandate [to create jobs].

The Chairperson agreed that this was an important point. She asked Dr Cardo to draft a general recommendation to this effect to be included at the end of the section.

Dr Cardo suggested the following addition, which was accepted by the Committee: ‘The Committee recommends that the Department provide regular updates on how its expanded mandate is being institutionalised in the structures and programmes of the Department; and secondly, that the Department reports back to the Committee on the recommendations by the International Labour Organisation insofar as international comparisons with other similar such government departments around the world are concerned.’

The Chairperson said that recommendation 7.2.1 should read that the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) ‘must,’ not ‘should,’ implement the recommendations of its internal auditors.

Mr Bagraim suggested that the UIF should also be instructed to implement the external audit and look at how it could tighten up its systems overall, in light of how it had collapsed during the pandemic.

The Chairperson said that the Committee had not yet received the external audit report from the Auditor-General.

Mr Bagraim replied that then the recommendation should reflect this fact.

An addition to 7.2.1 was made reflecting the fact that the Committee was still awaiting a report from the Auditor-General on the external audit.

Mr Bagraim supported recommendation 7.3.1, which instructed PSA to consider raising its performance targets. He suggested that PSA should also re-look at its entire function, given the failures of productivity in the country.

Mr Nontsele said that Mr Bagraim was conflating the performance of PSA with the productivity of the country. He agreed that the country’s productivity needed urgent attention, but the paragraph under consideration concerned the performance of the entity.

Ms C Mkhonto (EFF) understood that the role of PSA was to enable the country to be productive, and if it was not productive then it should report this. She also recalled that PSA had undertaken to look at what could be learned from other countries. Had they done this, and was it included in the report?

The Chairperson did not recall discussing this topic and said it was outside the scope of the report. This did not however mean that the Committee could not follow up on it.

Mr Bagraim said that the recommendation to the CF was too narrow. Much like the observation in 6.5.1, the recommendation should not just be about labour centres but about the ability of the fund as a whole to process claims. People sometimes waited as long as 21 years for a pay-out.

The Chairperson said she did not think Mr Bagraim’s comment was fair and asked him not to exaggerate.

Mr Bagraim noted the CCMA’s outreach activities mentioned in recommendation 7.6.1 but maintained that its core activities were failing because of budget constraints. He also observed that all the other entities in the Department were now open to the public. Why couldn’t the Committee recommend that the CCMA also open its doors?

The Chairperson reiterated that the whole world had been challenged by the pandemic. Weaknesses should be reflected, but the impact of the pandemic could not be ignored. The comment was unfair to the Department.

The report was adopted. The Members representing the DA and FF+ registered their objection.

The meeting was adjourned.


 

Documents

No related documents

Download as PDF

You can download this page as a PDF using your browser's print functionality. Click on the "Print" button below and select the "PDF" option under destinations/printers.

See detailed instructions for your browser here.

Share this page: