White man changes surname

[jontyB]

I suppose most people work in teams. Inorder for the team to achieve, every member must make a positive contribution. That's the support I was refering to. Nobody can succeed alone no matter how competent they are!

Whose problem is it if there are slackers in the team? The AA candidate or management?

 

[Nod]

I suppose most people work in teams. Inorder for the team to achieve, every member must make a positive contribution. That's the support I was refering to. Nobody can succeed alone no matter how competent they are!

Actually, in my work, everybody have their own part of the job to do. Some of it overlap, but not much. We are all specialists in what we do. If somebody don't pull their wight, everybody looks bad, and the project suffers for it. There is no time in a project to do other people's job as well. The time lines are strict enough, that mistakes can't be tolerated.

 

[mancombseepgood]

Here is out government's approach to AA:

http://www.dispatch.co.za/2006/06/20/Easterncape/aalead.html

Ironically, Balindlela’s spokesperson Masiza Mazizi said Mashalaba’s mercurial rise should serve as an inspiration to other youngsters.

Mazizi also thought it should be an eye-opener to unemployed youth in the province that “if one is determined to get to the top, he must take any job that is available”.

“Mashalaba has acquired so many skills while working in the MEC’s office as a messenger because he was willing to do any job,” he said.

“When he took that job we knew that he would take every opportunity available and develop. That is why we always encourage unemployed youth to do voluntary work to get exposure.”

Mashalaba, whose highest educational qualification is a matric, was very excited when the Daily Dispatch broke the news to him.

“When I took the job as the MEC’s messenger I knew there would be more chances coming my way and I will do whatever it takes to show how committed I am to youth development,” he said.

There's some good there and some not so good.

 

[kilo39]

//in no particular order//

Sipho, I'm sorry to tell you but apartheid does not equal to AA. Apartheid gave jobs to whites who were not even qualified (Telkom, PO). AA gives preference to blacks who are suitably qualified.

"@ Bageloo - AA is about as fair as the Indian cast system" I agree but we still need it.

"AA and BEE has resulted in people not qualified for their positions. Dead wood. " I totally disagree. I'm in the IT industry. There's plenty of AA adrvetisments on the net. The requirements are the same, a degree, certifcation and experience. Just because it's AA does not mean any black person can have it. Otherwise I should be the head of the division by now. 99.99999% of the senior managers in the company are white males. When one retires, should he be replaced with another white male? No, but there should have been a black/woman candidate nominated and groomed for succesion.

There is no doubt that all people can excel: that does not include "but there should have been a black/woman candidate nominated and groomed for succesion"
-
-

By "grooming" I actually mean "fast tracking" a potential incumbent. Many companies already use this stragety through mentorship and graduate programs. The result of which is not "dead wood" but people that have been trained by the very best in the industry.

(So because of their colour people are given preferential treatment, exactly like the apartheid regime?)

 

[kilo39]

ha!ha! very funny piece of writing! Anyone that gets the job does so through a rigourous selection process. And yes, they deserve it more than the others that did not get it.
Any AA candidate working alongside or under you will most definately leave. Because you'll always see them as just another AA case, despite the good work they might be doing for the company.
It is a myth that AA candidates get more salary increases. Companies doing that are shooting themselves in the foot because AA candidates leave anyway. The reason is rarely about money. It's ussually about the support they don't get, the diminished responsibilities which leads to inability to make any meaningful contribution and the desire for more recognition.

No company employs someone to do nothing (unless there is alternative motive.) So - the company is employing someone for headcount. Or "the rigorous selection process means they deserve it" verse "diminished responsibility." Make up your mind.

 

[kilo39]

Progressive comapanies realise the need to hire black candidates to management positions. Since there is a shortage of suitably qualified black candidates, they choose to develop their own. First the company gives you a bursary to acquire your degree and they hire you into a graduate program and then you get rotated throughout the organisation to learn as much as possible in as short a time as possible. then after 2 - 3 years you get promoted to replace that retiring old manager and continue to be mentored by one elected director or executive and then another four years down the line you get appointed director. To me this is "fast tracking". Under normal circumstances, you'd have had to spend 20 years before you could get there, right?

Why? If the market demanded it (as it surely does) then fine. If the candidate is qualified then fine. Fast tracking fine. But why is all this on the basis of colour? To redress the past? I say again: how does dictating conditions to companies benefit the economy? It doesn't. Because as you have posted so many times "the big companies find this advantageous" Yes, they can afford the dead wood and it is positive public image (at least in the eyes of the government.) Smaller companies would prefer not to be dictated to. Market economy. Government should create the conditions that are conducive to a positive market, not wrongly legislate (which is actually bad for business.)

This process does not have to be painful as most people tend to fear. In most big corporations, it is actually working very well.

sic

Agree, that experience and track record is acquired much quicker because your carreer was very much focused from the very start.

(to the detriment of some people who have been there for 20 years, as you so lightly put it.)

This works here. You just have to look at the big banks as an example. Every company must have a training budget no matter how small. Otherwise, how do you bump up the skills levels? Trainees are not only productive at some future date as they are actively participating in the daily operations of the company.

sic. Not.

Finaly, it looks like we might agree on something. There should be a distinction made between BEE and AA. BEE is more focused on ownership which does very little to uplift the poor. But instead creates black fat cats like Sakie Macozoma, Tokyo Sexwale, Cyril Ramaphosa, Mzi Khumalo etc. Whereas AA is meant to bring about transformation of the workforce. I believe BEE can be achieved through AA as it much harder to do it the other way round. Once the black fat cat sits on top he doesn't give a sh*t as to who does the work. One such BEE (Mboweni) openly stated that he prefers afrikaaners because they don't job hop like blacks do. Because he is now empowered he will alwys put his own interests first and also he is under no GVT pressure to transform his workforce as he is GVT company

Ja, AA, BEE, fast tracking is good.

 

[Bageloo]

Ja, Kilo39. You have such a one sided point of view of things such that arguing with you is like banging one's head against a rock. Do you know of an alternative to AA? If so, please outline it to me.

 

[mancombseepgood]

Bageloo - don't get me wrong, we do agree on some things, in fact i think we agree on alot of things but what tends to happen is that we push one side of the argument.

I say lets do this AA thing properly - pay white (example) or other people who end up as mentors what they are worth while they do the job - none of this "take a drop in salary and position while still doing the same job at the end of the day". By all means, change the job title to mentor... in fact mentoring should by now be a full time position in most firms or outsourcing industry.
and...
lets keep making noise about the poor government example set where people are just put in the hot seat for the sake of "aa".
Public service and tax money is not the resource to use as an experimental playground. And they should stop barking at the public sector while not setting the example themselves. How many people over the years take a government position only to be given the boot cos they make them look bad? I bet it's hard to say no to the money when the offer comes... but just when you think you were picked for your ability, they boot you cos they say you didn't perform (the real motive is because there was a public outcry). Of course you get those that seem to stick no matter what... no need to mention names.

 

[Nod]

Ja, Kilo39. You have such a one sided point of view of things such that arguing with you is like banging one's head against a rock. Do you know of an alternative to AA? If so, please outline it to me.

How about education and equal opportunities for all? Kids that went to school the first time, in 1994, is out of school now, starting their careers. They should be on equal footing if they worked hard. So AA should be redundant. But then government changes the education system every few years just to make sure nobody have a stable and reliable education.

 

[Bageloo]

How about education and equal opportunities for all?

Except that equal opportunities is not equitable at this point in time, maybe in years to come.

Kids that went to school the first time, in 1994, is out of school now, starting their careers. They should be on equal footing if they worked hard. So AA should be redundant.

A black kid born after '94 to a shack dweller can never have an equal education opportunity to a white kid born to a tycoon from Sandton. Majority of black people are poor. Majority of white people are well off. Although there are a minority of rich black kids that unduely get AA benefits, overall the majority are still very much deserving. Look at the income inequality statistics, whites have increased by 15%, blacks have decreased by 19% since the collapse of apartheid.

But then government changes the education system every few years just to make sure nobody have a stable and reliable education.

The education system of the past was no good and was heavily influenced by apartheid. It was mostly christian nurture and very dogmatic. Does not really gel very well with a secular state that we have today. First attempt was OBE, then curriculum 2004, these are all efforts of fine tuning the system. You can't have the perfect evolution the first time, you got to keep evolving to suit the current demands.

 

[Bageloo]

I say lets do this AA thing properly - pay white (example) or other people who end up as mentors what they are worth while they do the job - none of this "take a drop in salary and position while still doing the same job at the end of the day". By all means, change the job title to mentor... in fact mentoring should by now be a full time position in most firms or outsourcing industry.

Anyone going about this any other way is responsible for the consequenses, not the candidate. Companies have time and money to plan and implement this things properly. But what happens is becaue the people at the top do not agree with AA in principle, they drag their feet about it. Only when the government starts to come down hard on them do they start hiring the AA candidate sometimes without suitable experience (tokenism and window dressing).

 

[Nod]

Except that equal opportunities is not equitable at this point in time, maybe in years to come.

And who decides when everybody is equal? Because nobody is equal to anybody else. That is a fact of life.

A black kid born after '94 to a shack dweller can never have an equal education opportunity to a white kid born to a tycoon from Sandton.

The same argument works in reverse. There is a lot of poor white kids, that do their best, and still get somewhere, because they can't use the excuse of previously disadvantaged to get a job. They succeed in spite of AA, not because of it.

Majority of black people are poor. Majority of white people are well off. Although there are a minority of rich black kids that unduely get AA benefits, overall the majority are still very much deserving. Look at the income inequality statistics, whites have increased by 15%, blacks have decreased by 19% since the collapse of apartheid.

I wouldn't trust stats like these. I would like to know what the criteria where for these studies? Where did the data come from. How could the income of blacks have decreased? They have more opportunities now than ever before, the market is in their favour. It doesn't make sense. Maybe you can explain how that stats make any kind of sense?

The education system of the past was no good and was heavily influenced by apartheid. It was mostly christian nurture and very dogmatic. Does not really gel very well with a secular state that we have today. First attempt was OBE, then curriculum 2004, these are all efforts of fine tuning the system. You can't have the perfect evolution the first time, you got to keep evolving to suit the current demands.

So they couldn't just take out the religion, they had to change everything to such a level that Universities doesn't accept your metric certificate as proof that you are able enough to attend?

 

[Nod]

Companies have time and money to plan and implement this things properly.

Actually, companies don't have time and money. If you have proof that companies in general is rolling in the money, then please share your source. I know of companies that just get by as it is, they don't have money to groom anybody. Either you can do the work or you can't.

To have a BEE rating you must have a certain percentage of AA candidates.
To get a contract, you must have a certain BEE rating, if it's not high enough, then its too bad. So the company lost the contract. Your BEE rating goes up as well, if you use other BEE companies as suppliers. The higher their BEE rating is, the higher yours get. Correct me if I'm wrong, but this is my understanding of how BEE works.

 

[Leitmotif]

Except that equal opportunities is not equitable at this point in time, maybe in years to come.

Rubbish.

A black kid born after '94 to a shack dweller can never have an equal education opportunity to a white kid born to a tycoon from Sandton. Majority of black people are poor. Majority of white people are well off.

Good lord, it annoys me to hear this. I worked my ass off for bursaries to go to school. My parents couldn't afford the school fees. My parents couldn't even afford *rent* for our flat most of the time, and I spent most of my school career without electricity. Somehow doubt you've ever experienced the acute embarrasment of a teacher asking why there are candle wax stains on your homework.

After studying it took me almost a year to find a job in my chosen field. Thank you, AA, for screwing up my job search. But eventually I made my own opening, after trying my ass off once again.

There are more than enough poor whites. Guess what, you can work your way out of poverty, if you're willing to try. And trying means not having the outlook that you should automatically get a job because of what happened 12 years ago.

I made it out. Many others didn't. Dirt-poor white neighbourhoods are well known to me. Funny how you never see them on the news.

Although there are a minority of rich black kids that unduely get AA benefits, overall the majority are still very much deserving. Look at the income inequality statistics, whites have increased by 15%, blacks have decreased by 19% since the collapse of apartheid.

The disillusioned less-wealthy whites who have less invested in the country have packed up and left for greener pastures. Blacks are suffering because their leaders prey on them, and the struggle mentality has blinded them to their leaders' rapacious tendencies. The rich minority sees the poor majority as a resource, nothing more.

 

[Leitmotif]

Companies have time and money to plan and implement this things properly. But what happens is becaue the people at the top do not agree with AA in principle, they drag their feet about it. Only when the government starts to come down hard on them do they start hiring the AA candidate sometimes without suitable experience (tokenism and window dressing).

Oh yes, companies have infinite resources. </sarcasm>

A lot of companies, especially in the IT sector, are pretty much walking a knife's edge. There is no time or cash for mentoring etc. You learn to do the work, or you don't.

Government comes down on them, and suddenly they have to find something to keep them in business without losing existing productivity and costing way too much. Qualified blacks charge insane amounts for salaries. No manager is going to want to approve someone a salary better than his for a position lower than his, merely based on the skin colour of the candidate. It's exploitation of the system.

 

[mancombseepgood]

I disagree

Anyone going about this any other way is responsible for the consequenses, not the candidate. Companies have time and money to plan and implement this things properly. But what happens is becaue the people at the top do not agree with AA in principle, they drag their feet about it. Only when the government starts to come down hard on them do they start hiring the AA candidate sometimes without suitable experience (tokenism and window dressing).

To generalise and say that companies have time and money to plan and implement AA is crazy talk... it's like asking me to take a dip in my investment in the firm over the next few years - not an easy call. Especially since many firms have retrenched and those retrenched have become entrepeneurs themselves - often floating a company on a shoestring budget. It costs real money.
Bageloo - have you owned a firm? Have you been able to agree with all parties regarding AA policies? How much of YOUR money have you invested in AA?

Which brings me back to Telkom, Eskom and govt...
Eskom is not singled out per se, but gvt's attitude to supplying electricity leaves alot to be desired. Opportunities down the drain.

 

[Bageloo]

To generalise and say that companies have time and money to plan and implement AA is crazy talk... it's like asking me to take a dip in my investment in the firm over the next few years - not an easy call.

What about the companies that anounce crazy profits year after year? What about the crazy bonuses being payed to CEOs. Ussually where there is a will there is a way. Small companies are exempt from BEE according to the latest guidline. The criteria has been relaxed based on the company's turnover. A company that does not qualify for exeption must comply. There is enough small companies that don't have to comply and therefore non-AA candidates should look there for opportunities.

 

[Xarog]

The only companies I know of that are announcing ridiculous profits are ex-state owned companies that have been privatised, and are now price-gouging the average consumer.

Additionally, AA will never create equality. This country does not currently have the resources for everyone to be well off without actually going off and disposessing the wealthy across the board, and let me tell you that the new black elite will never allow that to happen.

The only means of giving everyone an equal footing in this country is by forcing the govt. to actually start spending in education, and spending enough to give everyone a good education, regardless of their financial situation or racial background.

 

[jontyB]

What about the companies that anounce crazy profits year after year? What about the crazy bonuses being payed to CEOs. Ussually where there is a will there is a way. Small companies are exempt from BEE according to the latest guidline. The criteria has been relaxed based on the company's turnover. A company that does not qualify for exeption must comply. There is enough small companies that don't have to comply and therefore non-AA candidates should look there for opportunities.

Who are these companies? Telkom? Sanlam? The four Banks? Can you spell monopoly?

Edit: Small companies are only exempt as long as they don't deal with bigger companies requiring high BEE/AA scores. Not to mention, government tenders are only open to BEE/AA companies, irrespective of size.

 

[Bageloo]

Profits are being declared across the board irrespective of sector. Do the research and don't speculate. If the companies are struggling why do we see this outcry about CEO's bonuses?