Comrades, Law is a very interesting field because it applies to us in our everyday activities. I have followed the debates that ensued in Thamsanqa's workplace and summarily found that it is about Nepotism. If I am correct, the issue is that certain individuals were hand-picked by the devious Natasha to act in certain positions. Nepotism is an enemy of all of us because it benefits those who subscribe to politics of patronage and in most instances it is informed by greed and jealous. What is happening in Thami's workplace is but a microcosm of what is happening in South African workplaces where those who deserve to rise are suppressed by their managers. Those who do not deserve to rise fight for their way up without capacity and experience but through befriending managers and gossiping about hard workers. In short, they become permanent spies for the manager conniving against deserving individuals. The general and abstract positions in legal frameworks give advantages to those who find it necessary to pick such weaknesses and use them for their narrow, selfish interests. They deliberately bring or employ undeserving people who have no interests in reading, speaking, let alone working. Their responsibility is to thumb-suck manager's views even those that perpetuates exploitation. To put content, all these actions are located in the law of negation of negation. The employer negates the freedom of the employee vice-versa. The employer will then use his/her power to surround himself with yes-men and yes-women (nepotism) which in turn will create a division within the employees themselves. When these employees are divided, the employer will then know through his/her spies that a certain issue is burning and prepare before hand to divide the workers further. The law of negation of negation will only apply where two mutual opposite objects unite for different interests. The unity of opposites is practicable in the workplace where the employer in mutually opposed to the employee. Their unity is informed by two different interests - the employer's interest is to maximise profit while the employee's interest is to make ends meet. These interests will always be at loggerheads with each other until the employees take over management. Capitalism has always been on stay away since the advent of our democracy. It has stolen the orientations of many of our comrades and its citizens. Where a company provide services, management always looks at economic viability, size of staff and freezing of posts. As a result, managers prefer casualisation and temporal employment as a progressive means of silencing employees. This happens even in government where interns will be employed year-in and year-out to fill various posts that to develop individuals. We have many interns who could not be absorbed by industries but the work they were doing during internship was for a permanent post that has been vacant for some time. We need to rise against this malady or else we will celebrate the victory of the ANC while capital continues to haunt our people. The victory of the movement should find expression through our unlimited efforts to strive for better working conditions in our areas of work. For Thami's advice, ensure that justice is not only done but must also be seen to be done. In your case justice is not seen to be done because (if unattended) it means that all of you should queue to impress Natasha through malicious means in order to get recognition and that will be to the detriment of the plight of workers with regard to fairness and equal opportunity. Mduduzi Herman Vilakazi Internal Auditor Dept of P/Works, Roads and Transport Mpumalanga Province Tel: 013 766 8280 Cell: 083 357 4849 Fax: 086 544 3205
>>> Christopher Pikes <[email protected]> 6/4/2009 9:00 AM >>> Hey fellow comrades i agree I am currently in the same industry and we have a bunch of cowards that are surpose to represent us, and guess what i think in the eyes of the employer we look like idiots because the question they would ask is how can they choose these cowards to raise their issues? but my answer would be that I haven't had the privalage to even elect or nominate an individual. Where do these people get their mandate from? I don't know because we never have mass meetings, so with all this happening such instances stated below is bound to happen so what I suggest should be done to improve all this is to educate our collegues with their rights and LRA. KNOWLEDGE IS POWER On 6/3/09, Thamsanqa Tu <[email protected]> wrote: > > Greetings, > > The e-mails contained herein are correspondence between myself and the > HR manager, and the Natasha referred to is the manager in my > department. I'm posting this here to get your analysis and criticism > of this situation, and most importantly whether or not you think I'm > indeed out of order. Normally, I believe, such situations should be > dealt with by workplace forums, but this forum in this company is > constituted on the terms defined by the company and it is therefore > pretty useless. Again, the majority of employees here, and I believe > in the rest of the industry (Call-center), are clueless about their > rights and as such they have been programmed to believe that > questioning your superior is asking for dismissal. > I once sent an almost similar discussion on this forum and the > responses I received were quite progressive. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Thamsanqa Tu <[email protected]> > Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2009 17:10:11 +0200 > Subject: Re: > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > > Dear Rebecca, > > I hope this e-mail finds you very well. > > This is the last e-mail I'm writing on this matter. I hope you know > that I value your opinions on many matters related to > employer/employee relations, or the LRA, its interpretation and > application. As a matter of fact I believe that you are just the kind > of HR proffessional to set a shining example for the rest of this > industry. > > It seems that there isn't a will on Natasha's part to hold a meeting, > as you suggested, to address the concerns raised by myself in the > e-mails below and those concerns of the same issue raised by different > other people you have interacted with. Instead bullyboy tactics are > employed almost as if to prove the superiority of the employer over > the inferiority of employee opinion. > As much as there isn't a law enacted to regulate the handling of > temporary and fixed term contract appointments, it is also quite > scandalous to use the loopholes in legislation to disregard ethical > behaviour and what would otherwise constitute good practice in > governance. > > You have an opportunity here to prove yourself a paragon of good, > clean, and transparent governance. > > I am aware that there could be a plan being hatched to victimise the > individuals who have chosen to voice out their discontent. > > Please note that these are my views with which you are free to disagree! > > On 6/1/09, Rebecca Thornley <[email protected]> wrote: >> Thamsanqa, >> >> Please address this with your Manager as it is evident from your response >> below that you are misinterpreting what I have stated. >> >> I DID NOT indicate anywhere that a clear disciplinary record was a >> requirement for the position of acting team leader - this was one of the >> criteria for the individual selected to AUDIT. >> >> I have also NOT said anything about a proven fact of people moving from >> peer >> to superior. I was mentioning that very often individuals in the same team >> find it difficult to work as a superior when they have worked with the >> same >> people as a peer (a hypothetical situation and not relevant in this >> situation) as seeing as I have had a number of different people come to me >> and give me varying sides of stories, I was at the time under the >> impression >> that the complaint in this regard was that a 2IC from another team was >> going >> to lead a different team (which having gained additional clarification I >> now >> know is not the case). >> >> On the notion of 'fairness' and 'equal opportunity', we are not required >> to >> advertise positions of a temporary nature. >> >> Natasha, please hold a meeting as I am concerned about the backwards, >> forwards nature of the mails and the clear misinterpretation therein. >> >> May we please also ensure that in future these sort of situations are NOT >> handled in this matter as it creates confusion, misinterpretation and >> words >> being put into mouths. If there are areas of confusion, discontent, >> uncertainty etc they should be raised with the relevant team leader, who >> can >> take them up with Natasha for resolution and if there is still no >> resolution >> then ONE representative can approach me. That way we can ensure the >> appropriate handling of the situation and no confusion and >> misinterpretation. >> >> Thanks >> >> Rebecca Thornley >> HR Manager >> >> | Tel: +27 11 777 6265 | Fax: +27 11 777 6001 | >> www.oks.co.za >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Thamsanqa Tu [mailto:[email protected]] >> Sent: 01 June 2009 11:40 >> To: [email protected] >> Cc: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: >> >> Dear Rebecca, >> >> Thank you for the prompt response. >> It does certainly add clarity on some issues, but also creates >> confusion on others, for instance, you come accross as saying that the >> person chosen for the temporary position of Acting Team Leader is the >> only person in the department without a disciplinary record and with >> experience on the sales floor. >> As you correctly mention that I also had an opportunity to lead a team >> previously in an acting capacity, you seem to make a mistake in >> suggesting that I was also annointed to take up that position. I >> remember clearly that it was announced that if anybody was interested >> they had to indicate as such, and therefore the position was opened >> for competition, a number of us were interviewed and we wrote >> assessments and I was appointed on that basis. Bear in mind aswell >> that I've never been a Sales Consultant. >> You also do not give clarity as to how it is that these two specific >> people were chosen over others. >> You are further complicating matters when you speak of the "proven >> fact" that people can't move from peer to superior. >> >> Please note that I am not raising this matter here because I think I >> should be the one to get any of the two positions; I am merely raising >> questions about fairness of procedure. It is my view that the >> procedure followed here dismisses any notion of fair and equal >> opportunity. >> >> As you say that you have had a similar discussion about this matter >> with another individual here, it is worthy to note that there are many >> more who feel that injustice is being committed. >> >> On 6/1/09, Rebecca Thornley <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Dear Thamsanqa, >>> >>> I have copied Natasha on this mail as she should most certainly be privy >> to >>> these sorts of discussions. >>> >>> First off, I was involved in the meeting with Candice Kieck regarding the >>> conduction of audits within the department. The criteria stipulated there >>> was clear for the individual necessary to assume the role. Firstly, no >>> disciplinary record was required. Secondly, it was necessary to have >>> performed a role in both the call centre and in the verification >> department. >>> I am of the understanding that the individual who has been identified to >>> assume this short term role has these exact criteria and therefore has >>> not >>> been appointed under the circumstances you have suggested below, but as >> they >>> meet the criteria which the circumstances necessitate. >>> >>> Secondly, it is not necessary for the individual selected to perform the >> 2IC >>> role while Charmaine is on leave to have been the 2IC of that exact team. >> It >>> is a proven fact that in any environment it is very difficult for an >>> individual to move from peer to superior. As such, it is very appropriate >>> that for functions to be performed optimally that the individual firstly >> has >>> 2IC experience and secondly has been in a different team. This is not to >> say >>> that will always be the case, but it is just to indicate to you that the >>> acting 2IC does not have to have been a member of the team where the >>> temporary post is required. >>> >>> Please bear in mind that you have had the role of acting team leader in >> the >>> past under similar circumstances. Now the opportunity has arisen for >> another >>> individual to develop and assume that role for the duration required. >> Should >>> a situation arise where a position of a permanent nature is required, >>> then >>> this will most certainly be advertised to all parties and fair >>> opportunity >>> will be given for application for that role. It is not however necessary >> to >>> follow these criteria (advertising, application, interviewing etc) for >>> positions of such a temporary and short term nature. >>> >>> I have had discussions with another individual in the verification >>> department regarding similar circumstances and my suggestion was to >> approach >>> the relevant managers and always make them aware that you are interested >> in >>> performing ad hoc duties, 2IC functions, additional projects etc should >> such >>> opportunities avail themselves. It is more often than not that >>> individuals >>> are not interested in fulfilling a post of a temporary nature unless >>> there >>> is the possibility of that position becoming permanent. In both the >>> scenarios above, this is not a feasibility. As such, the appointment when >>> these posts arise lies on the most suitable candidate for the duration of >>> that post. >>> >>> Trust that this clarifies. >>> >>> Thank you very much for the comments on the award. >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Rebecca Thornley >>> HR Manager >>> >>> | Tel: +27 11 777 6265 | Fax: +27 11 777 6001 | >>> www.oks.co.za >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Thamsanqa Tu [mailto:[email protected]] >>> Sent: 01 June 2009 09:24 >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: >>> >>> Dear Rebecca, >>> >>> I hope this e-mail finds you well. >>> First I would like to congratulate you for winning the award for >>> Support Employee of the month; you deserve it! >>> >>> I am writing you this morning because I would like to express my >>> dissatisfaction about one thing: >>> Many of us if not all in the department are aware that Charmain is >>> going on leave (maternity) sometime this week; but contrary to what >>> many of us believed is that the person who has been chosen to act in >>> Charmain's position is not a 2IC in that team. >>> One other matter is that I'm informed that one person in the >>> department has been chosen to audit verified sales. >>> Both these appointments were not subjected to competition for people >>> who might have interest in broadening their knowledge and experience. >>> Both these individuals who have been chosen for these positions are >>> seen to be friends with Natasha. >>> For me this raises questions about ethics and transparency in governance. >>> >>> I am addressing this to you with the hope that you will make time to >>> look into this, and give clarity. >>> >>> -- >>> Kind Regards, >>> Thamsanqa Tu (073 282 2512) >>> I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to death >>> your right to say it - Voltaire >>> >>> >>> O'Keeffe & Swartz Consultants (PTY) Ltd Reg. no 1993/05364/07 >>> Directors: Sean O'Keeffe; Russell Brown; Rudi Stumpf; Nolo Letele >>> O'Keeffe & Swartz is a licensed Financial Services Provider (13775) >>> >>> DISCLAIMER: This e-mail may be confidential or privileged, and O'Keeffe & >>> Swartz does not waive any related rights and obligations, which may >> include >>> the protection of intellectual property. Any distribution, use or copying >> of >>> this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended >>> recipient is unauthorized. If you have received this e-mail in error >> please >>> delete it immediately. Due to the inherent uncertainties involved in >> modern >>> e-mail transmissions, O'Keeffe & Swartz cannot accept any responsibility >> or >>> liability for any errors or omissions, loss or damage from either use or >>> miss-use of the content, including viruses >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Kind Regards, >> Thamsanqa Tu (073 282 2512) >> I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to death >> your right to say it - Voltaire >> >> >> O'Keeffe & Swartz Consultants (PTY) Ltd Reg. no 1993/05364/07 >> Directors: Sean O'Keeffe; Russell Brown; Rudi Stumpf; Nolo Letele >> O'Keeffe & Swartz is a licensed Financial Services Provider (13775) >> >> DISCLAIMER: This e-mail may be confidential or privileged, and O'Keeffe & >> Swartz does not waive any related rights and obligations, which may >> include >> the protection of intellectual property. Any distribution, use or copying >> of >> this e-mail or the information it contains by other than an intended >> recipient is unauthorized. If you have received this e-mail in error >> please >> delete it immediately. Due to the inherent uncertainties involved in >> modern >> e-mail transmissions, O'Keeffe & Swartz cannot accept any responsibility >> or >> liability for any errors or omissions, loss or damage from either use or >> miss-use of the content, including viruses >> >> > > > -- > Kind Regards, > Thamsanqa Tu (073 282 2512) > I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to death > your right to say it - Voltaire > > > > -- > Kind Regards, > Thamsanqa Tu (073 282 2512) > I may disagree with what you have to say, but I will defend to death > your right to say it - Voltaire > > > > -- Sent from my mobile device Kind Regards, Christopher Pikes 076 657 7388 074 833 5523 When somebody does good, and does it honestly, they must expect that they will be overpowered by evil forces, but it would be incorrect not to do good just because you know that death is coming. - Thabo Mvuyelwa Mbeki This message and any attachments relating to official business of the Mpumalanga Provincial Government (MPG) is proprietary to the MPG and intended for the original addressee only. The message may contain information that is confidential and subject to legal privilege. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender. If you receive this message in error, please notify the original sender immediately and destroy the original message. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you are hereby notified that you must not disseminate, copy, use, distribute, or take any action in connection therewith. The MPG cannot insure that the integrity of this communication has been maintained, nor that it is free of errors, viruses, interception and / or interference. The MPG is not liable whatsoever for loss or damage resulting from the opening of this message and / or attachments and / or the use of the information contained in this message and / or attachments. --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You are subscribed. This footer can help you. Please POST your comments to [email protected] or reply to this message. You can visit the group WEB SITE at http://groups.google.com/group/yclsa-eom-forum for different delivery options, pages, files and membership. To UNSUBSCRIBE, please email [email protected] . You don't have to put anything in the "Subject:" field. You don't have to put anything in the message part. All you have to do is to send an e-mail to this address (repeat): [email protected] . -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
