‘Beyond the issues with UIF payouts, we are facing other massive problems caused by employers. The non-payment of UIF to the Receiver of Revenue has become rampant.’ Picture: Supplied
We are living in a time in South Africa where dismissed workers, who had contributed to the UIF, are now on the brink of starvation. In my efforts to assist these individuals, I find myself growing more and more despondent.
Despite sitting on the Portfolio Committee of Employment and Labour, I am reaching the end of my tether. I am sure that over three hundred thousand claimants feel the same frustration.
Something must give, and I believe that if it’s not addressed sooner rather than later, the workers of South Africa might take matters into their own hands. We must avoid this desperate situation, and we need to act now.
The Minister can intervene and make urgent changes. Please, Minister, do this now.
Beyond the issues with UIF payouts, we are facing other massive problems caused by employers. The non-payment of UIF to the Receiver of Revenue has become rampant.
I receive daily calls from employees who have attempted to claim their UIF but are told that their employers either didn’t register them or failed to keep up with payments to the Department of Employment and Labour.
When this is followed up, the Department seems to take no action against these employers. I fully understand that the UIF is broken and incompetent, but the non-payment of deducted UIF amounts to a crime. It is the duty of the UIF and its inspectors to at least act on these non-payments.
Employees spend months trying to resolve the issue of unpaid UIF before they can even begin claiming their rightful payments. We need greater cooperation between UIF inspectors and the Department of Justice. Employers must be prosecuted, and action taken.
Three years ago, I approached the South African Police Services with proof that a political party had not paid over UIF deductions from its staff. Despite following up with a case number, neither the Department of Employment and Labour nor the police took action.
One would expect the trade unions, as defenders of employee rights, to challenge this practice vocally. Yet, it appears the trade unions are silent.
This practice often extends to other illegal actions, such as withholding income tax deductions or failing to register staff with the Compensation Fund, and these transgressions frequently go unpunished.
The lack of consequences emboldens employers to continue ignoring other labour laws, such as health and safety regulations and many sections of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act.
We have recently witnessed how South Africa can descend into chaos due to administrative failures. It is time for the Department of Employment and Labour—particularly the UIF and Compensation Fund—to pursue non-compliant employers and enforce consequence management.
Breaches of South Africa’s labour laws have reached near-epidemic levels. The message seems to be that with so few inspectors, the chances of getting caught are slim to none.
The Department of Employment and Labour requires a larger budget to hire more inspectors and facilitate proper, widespread inspections. Currently, most inspections are reactive rather than proactive, focusing on specific areas or industries.
With only two thousand inspectors in South Africa, it is understandable that they are forced to be reactive until the Department is properly capacitated.
Inspectors need updated laptops, transportation, and access to administrative support.
Due to the lack of oversight, thousands of businesses feel complacent and flout our labour laws. It is futile to have strict regulations and ironclad laws if they are not implemented or enforced by a large proportion of employers in South Africa.
* Michael Bagraim is a veteran labour lawyer.
** The views expressed here are not necessarily those of Independent Media.
Do you have something on your mind; or want to comment on the big stories of the day? We would love to hear from you. Please send your letters to arglet@inl.co.za.
All letters to be considered for publication, must contain full names, addresses and contact details (not for publication)
Related Topics: