Skills training are coming – but how much of cost

The dti'S BROADEDING PARTICIPATION DIVISION have issued the attached notice. It's not very clear when the first certificates will be issued under the new codes because they write English as well as Hlaudi spokes it.

My friends at BEE Matrix reckon business will just get on with it and try and improve their score over time. I don't agree, the ridiculousness of the targets and the sheer cost of implementation will put companies off and then they just won't bother. Yes it'll take a few years but not that many years.

This table is an analysis of thumb sucked JSE listed companies (including the JSE) and the figures could be a bit out. It shows how much many SHOULD have been spent during the period that the Annual Report discusses. Some are 2013 others are earlier. At least we know that the figures will be higher when the new codes kick in. They make for fascinating reading. The larger corporates need to spend a huge amount of money on skills development. Mind you the JSE's target of 24m is not a shabby amount either. What must be borne in mind is that the target spend is DOUBLE (or as the DTI might write DUBBLE) what we're used to. To see this in perspective we need to look at Standard Bank's 2013 annual report. On page 40 it says the company spent R424m, which was 2.9% of payroll (which suggests that my figure of R887m is fairly accurate). Page 131 shows the complete income statement. The Net Profit Before Tax figure for that year was R13.124bn. If we now add on the tax deductible amount of R463.76m off that amount it comes to R12.660bn. That's a fair drop in profitability. This means less money is spent on tax, enterprise development and most importantly SED.

 

Target Race Group

Company

Salary bill

Target spend (6%)

AM

AF

CM

CF

IM

IF

Standard Bank

14 796 000 000

887 760 000

407 348 726

342 293 033

58 049 696

50 042 841

19 016 280

11 009 425

MTN

6 709 000 000

402 540 000

184 705 502

155 207 080

26 321 669

22 691 094

8 622 616

4 992 041

NASPERS

8 738 000 000

524 280 000

240 565 908

202 146 291

34 282 120

29 553 551

11 230 349

6 501 781

AECI

2 976 000 000

178 560 000

81 932 266

68 847 260

11 675 851

10 065 389

3 824 848

2 214 386

FirstRand

10 620 000 000

637 200 000

292 379 256

245 684 780

41 665 840

35 918 828

13 649 154

7 902 142

Telkom

9 861 000 000

591 660 000

271 483 224

228 125 953

38 688 027

33 351 747

12 673 664

7 337 384

Nampak

3 535 000 000

212 100 000

97 322 097

81 779 256

13 868 997

11 956 032

4 543 292

2 630 327

JSE

405 000 000

24 300 000

11 150 056

9 369 335

1 588 952

1 369 786

520 519

301 353

Nedbank

9 349 000 000

560 940 000

257 387 351

216 281 263

36 679 278

31 620 068

12 015 626

6 956 415

Oh yes you can take the money you don't spend and distribute it EAP-fashion amongst the poor for education purposes. I'm not aware of many investors that would go for this. Are you in the business of banking or handing large amounts of money out on bursaries?

And then there is the issue of productivity vs training. The skills development code appears (you can't say anything more than that with the revised codes, everything "appears"" and nothing is clear) to require companies to spend money on SAQA-aligned programmes. As a multinational you can't send your employees on training back at your parent unless you can show that it "meets SAQA's requirement for recognition". Using Nedbank as an example. Their annual report (page 21) gives a total staff complement of 28,748. Average annual spend per person needs to be R19,512.32. I don't know what the percentage of EAP staff there are but that trainng figure per person is going to be much higher. When are these people going to work?

Who stands to benefit here?

You can't spend R19.5 k on the training of a lowly messenger. You'll never see them at work. It was Anglo who pointed out in their comments of the codes that it just makes sense to throw huge and ugly amounts of skills spend on the educated and higher-up-the-hierarchy Africans. I wouldn't be surprised to see a number of connected people informing Nampak that if they pay for their kids' Michaelhouse school fees they'll get BEE points. Broad-based my foot!

And these codes are broad-based? Not likely and the South African public wants them, champing at the bit they are. At some stage something is going to give and I hope to hell that this realisation doesn't come too late. Every day more of our rights are eroded by poor legislating and we just take it.

As a postscript – we know the codes are truly trying to remove white people from the workplace – or only those white people that fit in with the EAP statistics may work in each organisation (white male 6.4% and white women 6.9%).  You still have an obligation as an employer to train your white staff as well.  This is over and above the 6%.   

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *