Talk:Black Economic Empowerment

message: This article lacks neutrality and contains link that look suspicially like marketing. I will attempt to clean it up in the next few days, and provide information that is properly sourced and more comprehensive. As soon as more information is available on the page, I will also remove the commercial company links from this page, as the DTI and other South African Government websites has all the required information, and it is not acceptable for a verifcation agency to link from this page, especially not two of them! 196.30.245.149 15:35, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, also, I suggest we replace the "Effect of BEE" text with some actual researh... i'll be doing so soon if no one has a problem, and i'll be getting rid of unreferenced material in this section ... which is all of it..Goodlucca 19:53, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If we remove the link for Econobee, the one for Mpower ratings should be removed as well...Goodlucca 19:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Neutrality and marketing

message: Wha exactly is the relationship between BEE and Employment Equity? There is stuff in the "Criticism" section of the article that is actually about Employment Equity (Affirmative Action), which appears to be governed by a seperate act (the Employment Equity Act ) and which has its own article.
If employment equity and BEE are different, then the parts in the "Criticism" section after the merge notice should be removed from this article and placed in the Employment Equity article. 168.209.98.35 17:12, 15 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Many criticisms of BEE from the right tend to lump in or import criticisms of employment equity and affirmative action more generally. In editing the relevant section now, I’ve tried to make that explicit. I’ve also removed some points that are not relevant to BEE but rather to other aspects of affirmative action: the claim that Mangosuthu Buthelezi opposes BEE (the reference did not mention BEE, and he seems to support BEE itself ); and a paragraph about the “brain drain” at Eskom, which if it exists is not caused by BEE (BEE has no targets that would incentivise the removal of white engineers (it applies from management level upwards), and in any case Eskom has little incentive to meet BEE targets because it is a state entity and doesn't need to do business with the state. Its BEE rating is actually quite poor: !) Jlalbion (talk) 15:31, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

text: True — Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.7.19.225 (talk • contribs) 11:29, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

text: For more details on all these documents or to download them- Visit   Goodlucca 14:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticism: Black Economic Empowerment versus Employment Equity 

message: Black Economic Empowerment has two different catergories: 
* Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (BBBEE)
* Narrow-Based Black Economic Empowerment
The two are very different but it can be said that they both serve the same purpose- To empower black people.
Let me break it down for you to see the difference between BEE and Employment Equity or Affirmative Action employment.
Broad Based Black Economic Empowerment
This is black empowerment using seven pillars/core elements of BEE. 
* Black Ownership and Control
* Black Executive Management
* Employment Equity
* Black Skills Development
* Procurement from BEE Companies
* Black Enterprise Development
* Black Corporate Social Investment
""broad based black economic empowerment" means the sustainable
economic empowerment of all black people, [including] in particular
women, workers, youth, people with disabilities and people living in rural
areas, through diverse but integrated socio-economic strategies that
include, but are not limited to:-
# increasing the number of black people that manage, own and control enterprises and productive assets;
# facilitating black ownership and management of enterprises and productive assets by communities, workers, cooperatives and other collective enterprises;
# human resource and skills development;
# achieving equitable representation in all occupational categories and levels in the workforce;
# preferential procurement, including the promotion of local content procurement; and
# investment in enterprises that are owned or managed by black South Africans.
To fully understand understand the history "BBEEE" one however needs to fully understand the history of South Africa.  Before any European settlement, the country had been undeveloped.  In 1652 Jan Van Riebeek landed three ships in the future Cape Town where they had begun to develop the countries infrastructure.  Thus bringing with them all the knowledge and skill required to develop an entire country, other European fleets had also began to colonize the land such as the British over the next few century's.  
When the African people began to mix with the European settlers they were far less evolved in terms of development and technology for e.g they had only lived in huts built from mud and had not yet discovered literacy.  In 1948 the Afrikaner Party gained power. Their goal was to set down the rules that would ensure the separation of "whites" and "blacks" as the social level was too different and "blacks" had not yet developed into a modern society.  During apartheid rule, more than half of the tax expenditure went to developing black communities, however there were many strict laws governing "black" south Africans such as a curfew at night so they had to be out of the streets after 9 pm to ensure the safety of the "white" South Africans, they also had their own schools and own entrances into general shops etc, hence the term apartheid meaning separation.  In 1990 the president of South Africa FW De Klerk had lifted all the laws of apartheid and all races were allowed to mix.  Then in 1992 all white South African's had to vote whether black South Africans could vote for a new governing party thus becoming a democracy despite the fact that most of them were still highly uneducated.  Hence in 1994 the African National Congress (Black only) governing party was elected and Nelson Mandela was the first black president of South Africa.
Now in the year 2012, 22 years after races have mixed in South Africa the majority of black South Africans are still living in poverty while the majority of "white" South Africans still live in the same conditions as have since developing their own wealth.  It is thus said among critics that the new government has failed to create enough wealth for the black majority as there are around 35 million black people in South Africa and are implementing a policy known as "BEE" or "BBEEE" (Since 1998) which is meant to level out the percentage of black and white people living in poverty thus granting many advantages to black South Africans such as job opportunities; all major corporations have to employ black people into certain positions, only black people can get certain bursaries as well as certain shares can only be bought by black South Africans. Critics say however redistributing the wealth from white South Africans to black South African's is failing to uplift the black majority as there are only around 4 to 5 million white South Africans and thus transferring their wealth to around 35 million "black" South Africans can not work. 
Their are also many who call "BBEEE" "blatant racism" as certain advantages are given based only on race.
Employment Equity
The arguement on the criticm part of this article it that a company would have to hire an unskilled worker instead of a qualified and well skilled one because of race. I find this to be a fallacy and inaccurate. Looking at the pillars of BEE, one can choose to groom these workers. Lets take an example:
# Through CSI- one would invest in clinics, schools and social upliftment programmes that would enable the young black child to get a chance to be educated. This can be done through bursary schemes or scholarships for these scholars who in the previous government had limited access to finance to further their education, limited schools that gave them real value and no skills at all that they can use that would affect the community in which they live in.
# After employment, the company employs a skills development strategy where they skill the worker.
# Through Affirmative Procurement, the company would outsource services or source supplies from companies actively doing the same thing- Grooming future leaders and balancing the system.
# Same worker can branch out and the company can support him/her through Enterprise Development.
 
The arrogance and fear in which people approach this issue is that the SA government is trying to take away jobs and impoverish white people.
Nobody is taking anyone's job or robbing anyone of their money. Its a system that works by choice and if one sees the need to help- they'll do so.
Please refer to documents such as the Treaty of Vereeniging which was signed in early 1900 (about 1902) which stated that a franchise can only be given to natives after the introduction of self-gorvenance.
To learn more about BEE- Please refer to the Black Economic Empowerment Act, BEE Codes of good practice and all industry charters. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sbudah (talk • contribs) 12:38, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: For more details on all these documents or to download them- Visit   Goodlucca 14:53, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed explanation 

message: "Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) is a program launched by the South African government to redress the inequalities of Apartheid by giving previously disadvantaged groups (black Africans, Coloureds and Indians) economic opportunuties previously not available to them. It includes measures such as Employment Equity, skills development, targets for ownership and management and preferential procurement."
It states that Coloureds and Indians are also given opportunities, however that is not the case. Black economic empowerment focuses solely on the Black culture of South Africa. Would someone care to research this and confirm the fact/ arguement? Scotteh 12:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Reading a recent article ont the matter seems to indicate that in practice, your assumption seems correct:  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hurkummer (talk • contribs) 15:15, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

text: In response to above:  A lot of Coloured people feel that, they were to black for apartheid and too white for BEE and the new south africa. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.202.82 (talk • contribs) 23:31, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Coloured and Indian beneficiaries

message: While all the elements/pillars of BEE sounds rosy, it is not so in practice. For example, it is next to impossible for a white doctor to specialize in South Africa. White policemen don't get any advancement (i.e. one person I know stayed in the same salary post for 11 years.). It is also extremely difficult for a white male to get any bursaries. Companies use bursaries as a tool to fix racial and empowerment quotas. (i.e. When you phone Siemens and the secretary tells you that if you are a white male, you shouldn't even bother to apply.)
In response to the statements raised by the person above:  I know that it is politically incorrect to be a white afrikaner in south africa, but I just want to raise a few comments to the statements above. The person who wrote the statements above, have never been on the receiving end of BEE.  A lot of white people lost their jobs to be replaced by black people. (some people even had to train their replacee's). A lot of large companies and government institutions gives people "severance packages". It sounds nice, you get a lump sum of money and you lose your job. The packet is the person's pension contributions given in one lump sum. Most white males can't get another job (a lot of people start businesses with their packages, but most of them fail). In a few years, there is going to be a generation of elderly white people without any pension. The largest increase in unemployment between 1996 and 2001 was under white people. It is a 200% increase.  (article by Filp Buys leader of a trade union for afrikaners) The result, white people gets poorer.
Another two problems complicate the matter. 
# Afrikaners have no political power, as afrikaners are a minority. In the USA laws protect minorities, but BEE acts against minorities in SA. There will be no incentive for the government to stop BEE. The minister of Labour (Mdladlana) said that there would never be an end to affirmative action. 
# It is politically incorrect to be an afrikaner. Afrikaners is the scapegoat for all the thing that go wrong in south africa. Most people in other countries feel that afrikaners deserve affirmative action/BEE. 
The only viable option for a lot of afrikaners is to emmigrate to other countries.(There is over a million south africans in England, most of them white). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.202.82 (talk • contribs) 
: I got to disagree a bit. Afrikaners may not have formal political power, but they do have some informal power. They are strong in some civil society organisations. I.e. Solidarity. This power could be very potent, if used correctly. One big power is Apathy, and of course the trauma of having been sold out by traitors in their own elite. This has to heal and a will to power needs to develope. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.137.133 (talk • contribs) 
BEE is the main reason that over 2million out of 3milion Afrikaner live under the breadline. Please put something about that in your article.
:^ not it isn't... quit talking shit  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 143.160.124.40 (talk) 09:56, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Impoverishment of White people 

message: BEE is probably one of the major causes of the South African “brain drain”. Quote from a BBC article:  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.54.202.82 (talk • contribs) 
:.......... What is a young white graduate to do? Or for that matter a qualified and experienced white person who wished to change his/her job. Employers in SA are bound to discriminate against them. So they seek work where they are welcome. Quite simple! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.171.103.47 (talk • contribs) 
:That's the law of unintended(?) consequences. It must be added that while some of the Blacks are financially better of then 10years ago. Many more of the Blacks are worth of then previously. Similar features apply to Whites. Actually the bargaining power of the remaining skilled people has grown since the last years. One can see this also in the property market, more money means higher prices. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.241.137.133 (talk • contribs) 
:It should be noted that this is pure opinion as black skilled people have also left the country, due to various debatable reasons. I suggest we edit the main article to be more neutral in keeping with wiki guidelines. 196.211.19.34 14:01, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Brain drain 

message: As with many well meant plans, it is the application thereof that can be its undoing. BEE relies on the Apartheid classification of different population groups. Thus entrenching racist division. In essence the discrimination against so called "white" and then in the second line "coloured" jobseekers makes the measure of ability or skill secondary to the discussion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.171.103.47 (talk • contribs) 
Also bearing in mind that apartheid has been over since 1994, equilibrium should have been reached. When BBBEE was first introduced< it was introduced as a plan to reach employment equity. this should then reach a point were it can be said enough time was given to reach this equity, so BBBEE an affirmative action can be scrapped to give everyone and anyone a fair chance on employment.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.242.110.108 (talk) 15:56, 22 August 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  An application problem 

message: There are several problems with the Logic of BEE / affirmative action. 
In the first place the premises are somehow wrong. The Republic of South Africa under the NP. Did understand itself as a state for White people only. So actually Blacks were not excluded, but simply not included. The political future of Blacks was assigned to the homelands, which were to be extended, developed and finally released into independence. The lack of development in the homelands can not be blamed on White people, but is the Blacks own responsibility. 
Of course the NP-Bureaucrats made many mistakes in executing their policies - I sometimes get the impression that they didn't graps the essence of their own policiy of "separate development" (That's the scientifically correct name for "Apartheid"). So the premise was that Whites and the Non-Whites groups were seen as separate political entities. Those shouting "Apartheid was unfair" work with a wrong premise: That Whites and Blacks were one political entity. Since their premises are wrong, their conclusions have to be wrong by necessity as well.
Not all White people had that big "unfair Advantages" in the past. One can even see this from the economic data. Actually only those part of the powerful networks in the country, really could reap over the top. These networks by name are "Broederbond"(Afrikaners), Free Masons and their clubs (mainly English), the Jewish community. There were other networks of less importance as well. If you were not part of those networks, their was no "unfair advantage" for you at all. The rest of Whites had more or less first world avarage standards of living. Which would be typical for a country run by social democrats. The NP was essentially a social democratic Party for Whites, and also handled the Blacks in a state interventionist way. In a sense the ANC is continuing the policies of the NP. The racial classifications have been formally dropped. Ironically they just continue using those labels. But since their is no legal classification any more what standard do they apply for distinguishing between Blacks/Whites?!
If their is no standard, a company can actually put anybody on its management and call him "Black". 
Then of course their is the question whether their is really benefits from the whole BEE Scheme. Is the economy as a whole benefiting?! Certainly some individuals do benefit. But a company employing someone, that won't have got the position, if it wasn't for an interventionist policy, will probably make less money. This loss they will have to get somewhere. Guess what most probably they'll dismiss weaker employees or subcontractors! Let's assume that a manager costs the company a loss of R20.000 - They'll have to fire 10 other employees costing them R2000. So the company might shrink or not be able to grow sufficiently. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 41.241.137.133 (talk • contribs).
The ICERD (International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination) defines racism as follows:
“Any distinction, exclusion, restriction, or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment, or exercise, on equal footing, of human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural, or any other field of public life.”
196.46.70.95 06:46, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Problems with Apartheid - BEE/Affirmative Action Logic  

message: If you read the name of the Act it is racist by name. It is pro-black and against every other race. I have heard talk from white business owners where they believe it is extremely unfair that they have to sell part of their business so it has a share that is black owned. They also feel it is unfair that they are required to hire a certain percentage of black people especially when it is the case that they are not the most qualified. 68.108.156.244 05:00, 19 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Apartheid didn´t impoverish the black population. It wasn´t as if they had TVs and Cars before Apartheid, which were "taken off them". BEE is aimed at taking stuff from white people. Not "restoring" equality which never existed. 2.125.117.24 (talk) 16:39, 25 February 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Act is racist by name 

message: Blacks came before whites and eliminated Pigmeys. Where will be Pigmey economic empowerment?? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Mveljko (talk • contribs) 21:08, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This is not entirely true. In a large part of South Africa, whites came before blacks and enslaved/eliminated Pigmeys too.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.190.253.150 (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  Blacks eliminated Pigmeys 

message: I added it to racism, discrimination and politics and race as it correctly belongs into that categories. --41.150.199.225 (talk) 09:57, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Categories 

message: Hello: could someone perhaps make a list of international companies that are BEE, ie Barclays Bank Thebigflyin (talk) 05:32, 15 June 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: International BEE

message: This article is just the latest of a long-line of semi- and explicitly-racist drivel on South Africa here. Please fix it. If you are going make a claim of a catastrophic situation, you need to produce some evidence.90.220.71.77 (talk) 16:11, 10 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title: Evidence for negative effects

message: The Rationale section contains the text:  Unless anyone objects I believe this should be removed  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Colonycat (talk • contribs) 04:50, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed, uncited and clearly not objective. Jlalbion (talk) 18:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Uncited opinions in Rationale section - March 2021 

message: I think it makes sense to merge Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment into this page, Black Economic Empowerment. Even if the policy is officially known as BBBEE now, BBBEE is so substantively similar to pre-2003 BEE, and so commonly referred to as just "BEE", that I think anyone who is looking for the Wikipedia article for BEE is probably looking for BBBEE. Plus the broad rationale for both, and the criticisms directed at both, are pretty much identical. 
Alternatively, this could be an article about the broader underlying policy, and the other article could be renamed and rejigged as the Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment Act, 2003, laying out the specifics of the legislation and regulations? Or, alternatively, keep both articles under their current names. But in that case I think there still has to be some editing of both based on a clearer division of labour between the two. Jlalbion (talk) 18:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)
replies: text: I completed the merge (rather belatedly!). Jlalbion (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merger proposal