The State should be using such amounts to protect job loses.

On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 8:31 AM, Trevor Kekana <[email protected]>wrote:

>  Gugu,****
>
> ** **
>
> I think I must familiarise myself with that resolution. Did Polokwane
> resolve to ban labour brokers or did Congress resolve to regulate labour
> brokers?****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* [email protected] [mailto:
> [email protected]] *On Behalf Of *[email protected]
> *Sent:* 20 July 2011 08:22 AM
>
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [YCLSA Discussion] Government to expand labour inspectorate
> ****
>
>   ** **
>
> Highly defeatist! ****
>
> Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom - let your email find you!****
>  ------------------------------
>
> *From: *Dominic Tweedie <[email protected]> ****
>
> *Sender: *[email protected] ****
>
> *Date: *Wed, 20 Jul 2011 08:13:57 +0200****
>
> *To: *<[email protected]>****
>
> *ReplyTo: *[email protected] ****
>
> *Subject: *[YCLSA Discussion] Government to expand labour inspectorate****
>
> ** **
>
>
> [image: Business Day]
>
>
> *State to spend R60m vetting labour brokers *
>
> *Government will employ additional inspectors to monitor labour brokers
> and ensure they adhere to regulations being amended *
>
>   ****
>
> *Alistair Anderson, Business Day, Johannesburg, 20 July 2011*
>
> THE government has set aside R60m to employ additional inspectors to
> monitor labour brokers and ensure they adhere to regulations being amended,
> Labour Minister Nelisiwe Oliphant said yesterday.
>
> Employing inspectors for the next financial year, in categories such as
> enforcing labour law and ensuring workers’ safety, was a priority, she said
> in Pretoria.
>
> While the government still saw labour broking in an unfavourable light, Ms
> Oliphant said talks were being held at the National Economic, Development
> and Labour Council (Nedlac) between the government, unions and business to
> address problems in labour broking legislation.
>
> Both the government and unions have voiced concern that labour brokers
> often abuse workers’ rights, but the government has also conceded that
> millions of people are employed by labour brokers. Unions have repeatedly
> raised the banning of labour brokers as a wage and benefits demand during
> strikes.
>
> "A central objective of the current round of amendments to labour
> legislation is to deal with the increase in labour broking and, in
> particular, with the abuses associated with the practice and the way in
> which it deprives many workers of basic protections under labour law," Ms
> Oliphant said yesterday.
>
> The labour bills being discussed at Nedlac are the Basic Conditions of
> Employment Act, the Employment Equity Act, the Labour Relations Act and
> Employment Services Bill .
>
> Ms Oliphant said a team at Nedlac was engaging on the amendments and "had
> decided to discuss changes under a number of themes and to broaden the scope
> of amendments further".
>
> "I am pleased to report that the work in Nedlac is progressing well and
> there is a meeting of minds on a number of issues. New legal drafting has
> started on the following issues including fixed-term contracts; temporary
> employment agencies; part-time work; and probation."
>
> She said because of the urgency attached to the amendments, three meetings
> were "in the pipeline at Nedlac to continue with the discussion". A meeting
> is scheduled for tomorrow and two more meetings for next month.
>
> "As government, we have agreed with the social partners to reopen
> discussion on the key issues that require legal amendments before proceeding
> with legal drafting.
>
> "I am sure that we all want certainty about the new legal framework as soon
> as possible and time is, therefore, of the essence.
>
> "But while speed in finalising the process is important, we would want a
> final product that enjoys the support of organised business and organised
> labour," she said.
>
> Ms Oliphant said labour statutes needed to be "simple" and "coherent".
> During the public hearing the bills were criticised for their "incoherent"
> and "confusing" wording.
>
> "In addition to enjoying the support of our social partners, our labour
> legislation must meet two additional criteria.
>
> "First, labour statutes should be simple. Labour law guides the courts,
> employers and employees as well as labour organisations … and it should be
> understandable. Second, our labour laws need to be coherent. At a time when
> we are amending three statutes and introducing a fourth, it is imperative
> that we have coherence between statutes."
>
> She hoped the bills would be drafted by November. But Ian Ollis, the
> Democratic Alliance’s spokesman on labour, said the process may take longer.
> "Only one section of one bill has been completed," he said.
>
> *[email protected]*
>
>   ****
>
> *From: http://www.businessday.co.za/articles/Content.aspx?id=148711*
> * *
> * *
> * *****
>
> --
> 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] .****
>
> --
> 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] .****
>
> http://www.investec.com/en_group/#home/legal/email_disclaimer.html
>
> The disclaimer also provides our corporate information and names of our
> directors as required by law.
>
> The disclaimer is deemed to form part of this message in terms of Section
> 11 of the Electronic Communications and Transactions Act 25 of 2002.
> If you cannot access the disclaimer, please obtain a copy thereof from us
> by sending an email to: [email protected]
>
> --
> 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] .
>

-- 
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] .

<<image001.gif>>

Reply via email to