Buthelezi slams affirmative action

Anomaly in the Matrix!

My believe, is that issues such as BEE are necessary and need to be implemented, but, I also acknowledge that the implementation has not been what it should be. May be the best solution is to highlight anomalies were they occur and seek that they be resolved.
I guess I am one of those anomalies then. I am not black, coloured, indian or white. According to the old regime I was coloured. Now I am nothing :(

As for the ITC it would be funny if it was not soooo inconvenient as most banks use lending scorecards that use their faulty data, thus depriving some people of much needed credit.
Or just as bad, u get credit at a sh1tty rate!
 
Last edited:
no respect for chain of command. It has to be dealt with swiftly, otherwise it will just multiply. What is happening in the military is a worrying trend that is evident in most other government departments. Minimal competent leadership. There was very little if any mentorship which is coming back to bite.

at extermi - what did the general do?

That's the problem, air, he did nothing, greeted the men, and carried on walked on through, didn't even mention anything to the OC, who returned later from the airport, but officers in the Air Force also complain that you can't tell a junior, or even guys doing basics, to do anything.

It should be made clear that when you join an armed force you follow the chain of command.
 
I am saying they are trying, my personal opinion, put a police station, albeit a mobile one, in every suburb and form alliances with the predominant security company in the area to do patrols, even charge people a nominal amount for it if necessary, I know there will be problems with this, but it's a start

also the Military can be used far more effectively, besides the guys doing duty beyond our borders, the pilots for the President et al , and groundcrews, there are many members not doing anything, deploy them to our streets, we need visible policing, and it might even solve the problem of discipline in the military

Sounds like a good start. The problem also seems to be when the security companies catch people and hand them over to the police they're often released. I'm not saying its the police's fault but whatever the problem is it should be addressed, after all the hardest part of catching the person has already been achieved. I think deploying the army might not be such a bad idea, not to take over the job of the police as far as investigation etc. is concerned but just to put more people on the ground, put a soldier on every corner and it should improve things a lot.
 
no, not ex-military, just doing my job that's all, can't divulge the details at this point in time

Sounds interesting. ;)

Btw, how well are things run up there generally? Just wondering because I saw an article talking about massive civil lawsuits stemming from some of those operations, can't find a link now.
 
xtermin8tor said:
Originally Posted by xtermin8or View Post
Much of what the military is doing in countries like the DRC and Burundi is either cargo handling for the UN, or basic policing, meaning they have been trained to do police work ( not detective or specialised work ) but they can do patrols and such, while there are many doing peace-keeping work, there are many more here who can be used

On a side note - There is a serious problem with discipline in the Military, I accompanied the former Chief of the SANDF, General Siphiwe Nyanda, on a trip to our bases in the DRC, from Goma to Kinshasa, when he walked into the barracks, some of the guys were lying on their bunks without their shirts on and they never bothered to stand up and greet the man, never mind standing at attention and saluting. One would expect that when the OC or even a Sgt major walked in they would snap to attention, but they didn't even do it for the highest ranking General in the Defence Force

It all happened after apartheid was abolished...
before you jump down my throat, I'm not pointing fingers, just the facts... after I left SAS Saldanha, I returned some years later to see it had been turned into a hotel with tv's in every dorm. This was a basic training base!
While I was there, we ate from a galley that had been condemned 15 years earlier, we all had food poisoning at some stage, we did 80km route "marches" and if we were the last platoon in for the day, there would be no supper. While I don't think torture is the answer, there was a very different atmosphere when it came to authority... unfortunately with freedom came an eggageration of human rights. Everyone crows about themselves and no'one wants to do anything for anyone else's good anymore. For some time now the SANDF has had a reputation abroad for dirty deeds.... but I understand you cant tar everyone with the same brush.
 
While I was there, we ate from a galley that had been condemned 15 years earlier, we all had food poisoning at some stage, we did 80km route "marches" and if we were the last platoon in for the day, there would be no supper.

Is this really a good thing?
 
Is this really a good thing?

I don't think so, but there should be some middle ground between what it was and where it is now, you dont want to torture the guys, but you also don't want them having no discipline at all
 
I don't think so, but there should be some middle ground between what it was and where it is now, you dont want to torture the guys, but you also don't want them having no discipline at all

I agree, I'm just not sure if depriving them ensures discipline.
 
who would feel confident going into battle with undisciplined troops? not me for one. Gives a whole new meaning to the term "friendly fire" 0:( Possibly warrants the danger pay.
 
That's the problem, air, he did nothing, greeted the men, and carried on walked on through, didn't even mention anything to the OC, who returned later from the airport, but officers in the Air Force also complain that you can't tell a junior, or even guys doing basics, to do anything.

It should be made clear that when you join an armed force you follow the chain of command.
This is not news. The former head of the navy said the same recently. You cannot discipline the junior soldiers because they would start toy-toying and raise ruckus. Few joined to further their careers - rather they just wanted a job where they could get away with doing f-all and get paid for it. The army also quickly retrenched all the people who could impose discipline because they were white (a proven fact) and the ANC cadres wanted their positions.

How things have changed ...!!!
 
BEE on the JSE - Not for a white oke.

My question to the members on this forum is where is the biggest money sitting in this country if it is not on the JSE.
In other words shares in companies.
In the decade or so post apartheid BEE has creamed it on that front.
One just has to look at all the big mining houses and who the major shareholders are and who most of the Directors are.
BEE has made a lot of black people very rich on that front.

Mining Houses cannot get permits to mine new areas unless they have large BEE incentives and share ownership schemes and are BEE compliant.
Large Share incentives at major discounts have been awarded to BEE partners on all fronts worth tens of Billions of Rands.

Let me tell you something for nothing, never once in my life has anyone offered me shares in a listed company unless I went out and bought them at market value. BEE has made a lot of Black people wealthy, but not White, Coloured, Indian or any other colour.
Perhaps the people that have not felt the wealth of the New South Africa should go and ask for a share in one of these BEE Incentive Schemes.

I am not saying what has happened is wrong, but where is the fairness in all of these BEE Schemes. Under Apartheid nobody handed me anything on a platter and I had to work for it. Under the new regime the same story.
 
I am one of the staunchest proponents of AA in this forum. I believe it is still needed despite all the bull**** that Mr Buthelezi is trying to make us believe. Firstly, it is not fact that south africans leaving are doing so because of AA. Most do so because of the safety and security issues. Another reason is the earning potential that UK and US provides (applies to both black and white). The implementation of affirmative action is clearly defined in the E.E.Act and provided it is done accordingly, there is no issue of discrimination. AA is applied where it is needed - places where there is no equal representation for designated groups. Companies have to plan ahead for this to avoid having to hire and fire unjustly just to fill in the position with a token appointment. Most companies don't plan for this. In fact most just choose to ignore an AA requirement and hope that it will go away. According to the EE implementation guide
Employers must draw up an employment equity plan, setting out the steps they intend taking to achieve employment equity, over the next one to five years
Five years is a long time for one to achieve the targets, provided the plan is executed to the T.

And for those who think AA is meant to just replace competent whites with blacks, you got to read this
Why is Affirmative Action Necessary?
Affirmative action makes sure that qualified designated groups (black people, women and people with disabilities) have equal opportunities to get a job.

They must also be equally represented in all job categories and levels of the workplace.
I don't see anywhere where it says replace your white staff with unqualified blacks, nor does it condone inequality in the workplace.

You might think this is all very well in theory but does not happen in practice. Well here is how employers should go about with the implementation.

Employers must –
find and remove things that badly affect designated groups;
support diversity through equal dignity and respect to all people;
make changes to ensure designated groups have equal chances;
ensure equal representation of designated groups in all job categories and levels in the workplace; and
retain and develop designated groups.
Most employers are white (talking from experinece of never been interviewed/hired by a black person in my career). This begs the question as to who is responsible for the screw up in the implementation???
 
Last edited:
Explain then positions advertised as AA, where whites are not considered at all? If I look through any paper I'll find a few, and if I call up an agent and ask to apply for an AA position I'll be told that I can't but could I come in so that I can go on their database of unemployable white males...
 
Explain then positions advertised as AA, where whites are not considered at all?...
It is simple really. It does not help for a company that has white majority in their workforce to employ even more whites. Part of their long term plan should be to create all new positions for AA until such time that their workforce is equally representative of the designated groups. Once that target is achieved, they are under no obligation to create anymore AA positions. The plan would then be focused on retaining the AA employees already on their payroll.

The number of AA positions in the job market is a true reflection of the inequality that exists within companies. But not all companies have a duty to comply with AA. Those companies that are exempted ( including those that have met their targets) do provide for non AA positions. Unemployment amongst whites has not given signs that it is worsening. The figure remains at around 5% for whites compared to the countries 26% average unemployment rate.

Leitmotif, whenever you find yourself not being considered for a job because you are white, it's because there are more than enough white people who have been considered already. It sounds unfair to the white person who is looking for a job but believe me, the white person who's got the job is not complaining. In other words, instead of having one pool of candidates, the candidates are split according to their designated groups. They still have to compete within the designated groups. Which rules out the perception that people are hired based on skin colour alone and not on merit. If you are good enough for the job you have an equal chance of getting the slot allocated to your group.
It's sort of like in boxing where the flyweight does not box with a super-heavyweight. That does not mean that the flyweight champion is less deserving of his crown because there's a heavyweight somewhere that could have kicked his ass on the ring had they been allowed to box each other.
I know this is amuch simplified analogy, but I sincerely hope it makes my point clearer.
 
Stupidity. Hire the best person for the job. Race is meaningless and should be treated as such. The constant re-enforcement of racial differences will eventually doom this country to failure.
 
They still have to compete within the designated groups. Which rules out the perception that people are hired based on skin colour alone and not on merit. If you are good enough for the job you have an equal chance of getting the slot allocated to your group.
Defending racist regulations and policies. Isn't that just the most diabolical thing.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X