SA’s transformation journey is a national imperative. It is rooted in our constitution, demanded by justice and essential to unlocking our full economic potential. That is why business has supported employment equity since the Employment Equity Act’s inception and why Business Unity SA (Busa) has advocated for fair, effective and sustainable transformation for many years.
On September 1, numerical sectoral targets came into operation under the Employment Equity Amendment Act. We would like to be clear: our decision to approach the labour court in respect of these targets is not a repudiation of transformation. Rather, it is an affirmation that transformation must be done properly: lawfully, transparently and with the data, consultation and sectoral nuance the Employment Equity Amendment Act itself envisages.
When rules are rushed, opaque or internally inconsistent, they don’t accelerate change; they produce uncertainty, reduce compliance and ultimately set back the very inclusion we all seek.
Parliament amended the Employment Equity Act to allow for sector numerical targets under section 15A. That provision prescribes a sequence: identify national economic sectors, publish draft notices for comment and meaningfully consult before finalising targets. It’s a sensible design: transformation goals must be debated in the open, grounded in evidence and adapted to each sector’s realities.
Our court papers contend that key steps in the process were either skipped altogether or reduced to rushed one-hour briefings. In some cases, more than 1,000 stakeholders were placed on a last-minute call, given no methodology and offered no real opportunity to engage on critical issues such as skills pipelines, attrition, geography and subsector differences.
We have asked the court to review and set aside the sector identifications and targets and to rule on the lawfulness of the approach to compliance certificates for state tenders. This is not about seeking loopholes; it is about ensuring the rule of law is observed so that transformation measures are credible, durable and enforceable.
Evidence and sectoral reality
There are two reasons the process is substance in this case. First, evidence. Targets must be anchored in transparent methodology. Employers across sectors repeatedly requested the data and assumptions behind the numbers, including the sharp increase in the disability benchmark (the EE disability target was raised to 3%, despite the department of employment and labour acknowledging the lack of disability statistics). Without access to the model, stakeholders cannot assess feasibility or craft plans to close gaps. Evidence-based policy is not a luxury in a country facing severe skills constraints; it is the only way to avoid perverse outcomes that harm both equity and growth.
Second, sectoral reality. “One-size-fits-all” rules rarely fit anyone well. Wholesale and retail logistics are not the same as advanced manufacturing; financial services are not the same as agribusiness or construction. Sub-sectors differ in occupational profiles, qualification requirements, geographic footprint and turnover rates. If we ignore those differences when setting targets, we create obligations that some firms literally cannot meet without sacrificing operational integrity.
We believe there is a significant risk in getting this wrong. Unworkable targets do not change incentives; instead, they entrench mistrust. They undermine legitimacy, as people who experience rules as arbitrary lose faith in the policy intent, even when that intent is just. They divert resources, with companies spending time contesting methodology rather than investing in talent pipelines, bursaries, mentorship, and mobility. And they misalign frameworks: when sector targets clash with existing BBBEE codes or procurement law, firms face conflicting compliance signals and heightened regulatory risk, discouraging growth and job creation.
None of these outcomes serve workers, youth or the millions of South Africans still locked out of opportunity. They certainly don’t serve the constitutional promise of substantive equality.
Conversely, getting it right offers SA a real opportunity. Busa believes we can reset the process and set targets that are ambitious yet achievable. That means following lawful steps with genuine consultation, including publishing draft sector notices, allowing time for comment, and holding structured dialogues where evidence is tested and alternatives weighed.
It means using transparent methods, disclosing data and assumptions, and strengthening weak data rather than guessing. It means recognising subsector and regional differences, so targets reflect real occupational structures and skills pathways.
Above all, it means a skills-first approach: investing in learnerships, internships, TVET-industry partnerships, regional talent pools, and bridging programmes for new managers, tied together in a national skills compact focused on throughput, not box-ticking. And it means building fair processes for justified exceptions, so firms facing scarce skills or other constraints can commit to remedial plans and timelines, ensuring the system rewards effort and continuous improvement.
South Africans have every right to expect faster progress in transformation. The pace of change in top and senior management remains too slow, and people with disabilities remain underrepresented.
Better framework needed
Business agrees. What we are saying is let’s design targets that actually move the dial, that stretch organisations, unlock mobility and widen access without damaging the sectors that must create the next job.
This requires collaboration, not confrontation. In recent months, Busa has participated in multiple engagements with the department responsible for employment equity. We presented data-rich feedback, proposed a sequenced process to fix procedural gaps and requested further bilateral work to refine the numbers. We did so precisely to avoid litigation. When it became clear that the process defects were baked into the outcome, we sought judicial review to protect the integrity of transformation policy for the long term.
There is a path that honours the constitution, accelerates equity, and strengthens growth. It starts with listening, with evidence, and with respect for the diversity of our economy. It continues with joint problem-solving: agreeing on the facts, fixing the process and aligning incentives so that every rand spent on compliance builds capability and expands opportunity.
Business stands ready to do its part: opening pipelines, financing skills, mentoring young professionals and holding ourselves accountable for progress. But we need a framework that is lawful, intelligible and workable. South Africans deserve no less.
If we get this right, five years from now we will see more black women and men running complex operations; more people with disabilities succeeding across occupations; more inclusive teams solving tough problems; and more firms, small and large, growing because their talent is broader, deeper and more diverse. That is the substance of transformation and is the prize we cannot afford to miss.
Busa’s case is about securing that prize by ensuring the rules that govern transformation are built to last, built on evidence and built for SA.
• Mathe is CEO of Business Unity SA.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.