Meeting on Friday, 3 July 2009

A General meeting will be held on Friday, 3 July 2009 at 13:00 at K1 Auditorium. Regions to be linked-up as usual.

It is important to attend this meeting. At this meeting we would like to get a mandate from you, the members on how to proceed with the salary issue. We would like to know if you still adamant to proceed with a strike, or should we approach the matter differently.

If you do not attend, other people may decide on your behalf.

We are aware of intimidation tactics from management. In particular the threats that they will lock-out all BEMAWU, MWASA and CWU members. We believe this is a flight of their imagination. The SABC will NOT be able to function without 70% of its operational staff.

This is not a threat, but if ANY freelancer is going to agree to perform the work of any striking member, they will no longer enjoy the protection of the unions at the SABC. We call on them to please not accept assignments from the SABC.

We also call on our members to not do the work of any striking employee, as it will work against any attempt to convince the SABC to pay us the 12.2% - a percentage we have an agreement on.

The Acting GCEO, Gab Mampone has requested a meeting with organised labour tomorrow at 10:00.

We will give feedback about that meeting here and in the 13:00 meeting tomorrow.

During a strike the principle of no work, no pay applies. If we decide to go on strike, we have to make sure we are as effective as possible. In doing so, we will make sure striking workings will get paid.

Please do not perform extra work now in order to stock-up programmes. You can refuse to do more than your daily task.

Since the producers out there are not being paid regularly, they are under no contractual obligation to provide the SABC with programs to broadcast. We have joined them in their march to the SABC. We will call on them to stop providing the SABC with material to broadcast during a strike.

BEMAWU will have its own meeting with members to determine support for a strike. We will communicate the date and time for this meeting.

Please make sure we have your correct cell number. Tell friends and colleagues too. Mail it to us at headoffice@bemawu.org.za or sms it to us at 0829208669. Please include your name.

We have received new complaints of the misuse of money and fruitless and wasteful expenditure. If you know of new wastage, let us know. Our fax is 0866715585. Send us the information and you don't have to include your name. We will never reveal your identity.

If you know of any audits being done and no action taken, let us know. Now is the time to rid the SABC from all the rot.

Kindly also respond to our SMS's.

It's 1-0 for organised labour

The SABC has lost, with cost it's urgent interdict against organised labour in the Labour Court. The SABC launched an urgent interdict against the unions to prevent us from going on strike.

Now the Labour Court has ruled on it, and we may now, within 48 hours embark on a protected strike with permission of the Labour Court.

We will update you soon on the way forward.

Labour Court

The matter has been postponed once again and to 3 July. CWU and MWASA agreed to not proceed with a strike. More details to follow as soon as I have more information. Someone is making money here...
Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom!

Gab's Lies

The Acting Group Chief Executive of the SABC, Mr Gab Mampone is lying if he says BEMAWU did not sign the multi-term agreement. We signed it in November 2008, and we faxed it to the SABC. We have proof of same.

We altered the agreement slightly by removing one word, but apart from that, we have accepted the agreement.

We have proceeded to refer the salary dispute to arbitration.

Should the other two unions succeed on Thursday in the Labour Court, we will apply for a secondary strike, and our members will be entitled to participate in the strike.

We still hope management will come to their senses and negotiate with us instead of having meetings until 02:00 in the morning to prepare strike plans.

There is massive support for a strike from within management because you had unilaterally decided to take their increases away, Mr Mampone. No plans will keep the SABC on air should we continue with a strike.

Mr. Mampone, you have confirmed in the general staff meeting you owe us the 12,%... Honour the agreement, or we may refuse to honour it next year with the World Cup.
Sent via my BlackBerry from Vodacom!

At the Labour Court

The matter was postponed until Thursday, 25 June 2009. MWASA and CWU agreed to the postponement and also gave an undertaking they will not embark on a strike in the meantime! The issuing of our notice for a strike is solely dependant on their CCMA certificate as our members will be able to join in a secondary strike only.

I think we have missed the boat by agreeing to a postponement and to not strike.

28 June is the last day of the Confederations Cup.

Eish!

SABC filed interdict

The SABC late yesterday afternoon filed an urgent application for an interdict in a desperate attempt to stop a strike at the SABC. Suddenly their arrogance is starting to make sense. They had this card up their sleeve, and what will be decided today, at 14:00 in the Labour Court is whether it was an Ace or not.

As if they haven't wasted enough money! Another court battle, costing hundreds of thousands of rands whilst employees received a ZERO percent (0%) increase and Producers and Service Providers are begging for payment - for money legally due to them.

The application was served on MWASA and the CWU and on an undisclosed group of employees. We are not sure if we are included in that group. We will in any event add ourselves as a party to oppose this application.

The SABC is acting in bad faith, high handedly and with arrogance.

D-Day for SABC

The CCMA issued a certificate of outcome a few minutes ago. It now means SABC employees may embark on a protected strike after proper procedure has been followed. The procedure is as follows:

• We must ballot our members ,
• If the outcome is in favour of a strike, the SABC must be given 48 hours notice,
• In respect of BEMAWU members, because we have structured our dispute slightly different, we will have to give slightly longer notice.

Permission has been granted by the SABC to have a general meeting with members, tomorrow at 12:00. - K1 Auditorium.

It is critical that you attend. If you don't, other people may make decisions on your behalf.

You do not have to strike if you don't want to. It is entirely voluntary. Nobody will force you to do so. It is however important to note that we will all benefit from a strike. The more people participating, the quicker it will be over.

Please attend the meeting.

At the CCMA....

In summary:

• Conciliation at the CCMA took place on Monday. 8.5% were offered and was rejected by the unions. The Commissioner undertook to issue a Certificate of Outcome by no later than Thursday, which will enable SABC employees to embark on a protected strike 48 hours thereafter.
• Union leadership met with Mr. Ismael Vadi, chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Tuesday at Wits. He gave an undertaking that the turmoil at the SABC will receive parliament's most urgent attention and expressed the Government's concern that the Confederations Cup may be in jeopardy if employees proceed with a strike.
• Please vote. See left.

In detail:

What has been called a revised offer were tabled by the SABC on 15 June at the CCMA.

Andre Weber, the notorious acting General of employee relations (oops, I left out manager) informed Senior part-time Commissioner, Mr. Patrick Stone the SABC is prepared to offer 8.5% and no more. The difference of 3.7% will disappear in thin air.

Another fatal and extremely poor managerial decision, Mr. Mampone!

You have send someone at the most critical time in the history of the SABC to the CCMA who has absolutely NO human relations and who is deeply mistrusted by the unions. No-one even listened properly to Mr. Weber who is always willing and ready to attempt to impress all and sundry with his legal technical arguments. For angry employees who has already started to embark on small-scale wild cat strikes (the sit-in at Gab's office for example) this is petrol on fire.

Mr. Mampone, this would have been the time to send your best and most trusted negotiators, not your police. If ever there was a need to spent money on a consultant, this would have been the time to do so. Those are the skills you don't have in the SABC. You would have expected in any normal organisation the Chief Executive of Human Resources to be that person. Trusted by the Unions because of the good relationship you have build with them. Instead, Mr. Mampone your CE, Human Resources has since the peaceful sit-in at your office (the office which you occupied illegally according to the Acting in higher grade Policy of the SABC) never came to work. Not that we miss her. She was in any event most of the time not there - in more than one way. Now she is too scared to come to work.

Has she filled in a leave form?

Back to salaries. Mr. Mampone has invited the unions to a meeting today. We will soon report back. If no better offer is made, we will proceed with action.

IMPORTANT!
The SABC raised a technical point in respect of the wording and classification of the disputes referred to the CCMA.

Mr. Weber wanted to delay the resolution of the salary dispute by arguing before the Commissioner that the matter must be set down for evidence before a certificate can be issued.

What a stupid thing to do!

When you are sitting with a situation where disgruntled employees are already spontaneously embarking on wild cat strikes every sensible employer would want to resolve this as quick as possible. Particularly an employer who has spent millions of public money to litigate against its own employees. More particularly an employer who has the responsibility to broadcast the Confederations Cup and who is on the eve of the Soccer World Cup.

But not Mr. Mampone and Weber.

BEMAWU filed our dispute as a dispute of right. It basically means we are saying our members are in terms of the agreement entitled to the 12.2% increase and we will enforce that by way of arbitration/court action. The consequence of this is that BEMAWU members may not embark on a primary strike, but may do so on a secondary strike.

The other two unions termed their dispute differently - as a dispute of interest. It basically means they are saying their members are not entitled to the 12.2% increase but they (we) want it and we want to resort to industrial action should we not get it.

Ok, so there is method in this madness.

We have structured the disputes in this manner to cover ourselves properly. We termed our dispute as a dispute of right because we have an agreement that stipulates the SABC is liable for CPIX plus 1% thus 12.2% increase. It can however take some time to get the dispute arbitrated. So the other two unions termed their disputes as interest disputes, which will enable all three unions to strike - in their case a primary strike, and our members may join in a sympathy strike.

Our collective members at Sentech may also join in a sympathy strike.

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE!

Mr. Minister, let us not disappoint our viewers. Let us not scare away the World Cup. But please understand, SABC employees also have rights. And it is a legislated and constitutional right to strike on a matter on mutual interest, i.e a salary increase.

And PLEASE, you have now seen the results of party politics in an organisation. Learn from the past and please ensure we will get a broadcasting, and not a political board. And please get rid of the party political camps in management. Any citizen has the constitutional right to belong to a political party, but they don't have the right to practice that in a workplace where other groups of employees are discriminated against because they don't support the correct political party. We cannot again afford an organisation where you only get promoted and a nice job because you are carrying a card of the correct political party or its affiliates and alliances.

14913

Management by Police Force

Yesterday (12 June 2009) will most probably go down in history books as the ultimate low point in the existence of the SABC.

Who ever thought the Green Revolution would end with armed policeman flooding the Piet Meyer building (the old apartheid name for Radio Park) trying to intimidate union leaders and threatening us with military action by the Army?

Arrogant, rude and power-drunk policemen with no regard for human rights or the law.

Who ever thought being a First Citizen would mean having no voice, no right to peacefully demonstrate, no right to attend a meeting with your union, no right to attend a labour dispute at the CCMA whilst being an applicant in the matter?

Who ever thought Human Resources would mean having Group Exco being guarded and escorted by security guards in the workplace, not because there is a real threat against anyone, but because they screwed up the SABC so badly they believe they are under threat?

How badly do you have to manage an organisation that you are scared of your own, peaceful employees?

So what happened yesterday?
After our interview on Morning Live the three union leaders (myself, Lungile from MWASA and Vulture from CWU) went to the Coffee Shop at Radio Park. Shortly thereafter Vulture left and Lungile and I remained, having some more coffee. Then the police arrived. Guns, radios, spare magazines – armed to the teeth. And then some more and more arrived. Whilst sitting there, minding our business, two officers arrived at our table. The one, a “Sup” was fat, arrogant with a dirty gun in his holster. The other one a short inspector who could not speak properly, but barked at us the whole time, flashing his gold filled front teeth. He was clearly on his own planet and demonstrated behaviour exactly as they do in the movies. I think I saw a Movie Magic card in his pocket. Without telling us why, he wanted to have our names and contact details. He struggled to write it down properly and we had to repeatedly spell it to him. We were informed that they received information that there will be illegal action. We denied that there will be any illegal action and we informed them that there is a possibility that a few employees may gather at reception to peacefully demonstrate their utmost unhappiness with Group Exco and the Board. The “Sup” informed us that the SABC is a National Key Point, and any action would be illegal. When I asked him since when would it be a criminal offence to peacefully protest in a workplace he responded: “We will arrest anyone gathering here at reception.” I said to him that they cannot arrest people for that. The fat and clearly unfit “Sup” responded “You will see it today”.

What possible threat could we be - two peaceful union leaders - the one a woman sitting by ourselves having coffee in a public Coffee Shop in SABC reception? What possible threat could a handful peaceful employees demonstrating their dissatisfaction with incompetent management be?

We assured them that there will be no action, but also said to him that we will file a dispute at the CCMA, and after we have obtained a Certificate from the CCMA, we will peacefully and procedurally demonstrate.

As members have the right to know what’s going on in the workplace and unions have the right to meet with its members, I SMS’d Phumelele (Chief People’s Officer) and requested permission for a meeting at 12:30. She agreed.

Andre Weber then refused. He for the first time ever wanted to have an agenda, formal letters and wanted to know what we want to talk about in the meeting. Security police stuff. And then they send people to lock the venue we have booked.

What a sick showdown of power by an incompetent Board and Group Executive. No wonder Senior Management have also no faith in them and is calling for their resignation.

National Key point or National F-up?

ANOTHER VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE

We are in possession of a memo addressed to Group Exco where the Senior Management Forum demands the resignation of Gab and Robin Nicholson in particular and has put a vote of no confidence in Group Exco and the Board.

Since all three unions also filed a vote of no confidence in Group Exco and the Board, we have collectively decided, as BEMAWU, CWU nad MWASA that since we have no confidence and trust in Group Exco and the Board, we will henceforth and until such time we have a legitimate Board and a new Group Exco in place only deal with the Senior Management Forum. They together with employees and our members are the backbone of the organization and we share the same concerns and fears.

We will formally write a letter to the Senior Management Forum (excluding Group Exco) to establish a forum where will jointly make sure the SABC is managed properly and where we will address our issues and concerns. We will have our differences, but at least there will be trust and confidence from our side. We will no longer deal with Group Exco until our demands are met.

A reliable source informed us that the wastage of money is still continuing. It has been reported that Mvuso, Thelma Melck, the company secretary (WHY SHE???) and 3 other senior managers in the past week went to Los Angeles to the screening of new programmes. Whe already have more than enough programmes to broadcast, and what is he and she doing there in any event? If the SABC wanted to buy programmes, why not sending people involved in buying programs?

14652

Light at the end...

Three more Board members have resigned.

Desmond Golding, Andile Mbeki and Bheki Khumalo. Its almost like burning the place down to smoke the rat(s) out. Indiscriminately. What a pity the good rats - if there is such a thing - get hurt in the process.

What a pity government, the stakeholder did not act earlier. Party politics in an organisation are usually very destructive. The SABC is no exception. It is even more destructive if employees are drawn into the fight for political control, without them knowing they are in fact supporting a political party and its fight for control of the Public Broadcaster.

BEMAWU is not politically aligned and not affiliated with any Federation. We do not practice party politics - we are there for all our members, no matter what political party they support (or don't support). Political parties are for politics, trade unions for workers rights.

PROTEST ACTION
Yesterday’s “sit-in” which happened spontaneously was NOT legal. Today’s sit-in will NOT be legal! We do not support illegal action that may jeopardize the employment of our members.

This is a call for our members to please NOT participate in the unlawful action planned for today. We believe it is irresponsible and foolish to call on employees to support and participate in an unprotected strike or illegal work stoppage.

We did not plan it. The communiqué that was send out claiming to be a joint communiqué was NOT authorized by BEMAWU. Please take note that we will never request someone else to talk on our behalf. If you ever in future receive a communiqué from anyone else but BEMAWU, know its fake and please do not act on such communication. We will use our own letterheads and the other methods of communication to inform members of meetings, actions, etc. We will use this forum in particular.

We support the principle and we are in agreement that Gab and the people responsible for the mismanagement of the SABC must go. But we are not in agreement it should be done in an unlawful and unprocedural manner.

For such action to be lawful and protected, a dispute must be referred to the CCMA, conciliation must take place and 48 hours notice must be given. Else, it’s an unprotected strike and employees can be dismissed/disciplined. We cannot criticize the SABC for not adhering to Law and Policy, whilst we also do the same.

We are at the CCMA on Monday in respect of the salary dispute.

Members who want to attend the CCMA hearing may do so. It is your right to be there as you are an applicant in the matter. The exact details will be added here soon.

If it is at all possible to be there, please come and show your support.

14460

Retrenchments coming under this Board?

This is what the acting Group Chief Executive that is trusted by only half of the dysfunctional board, who now has three votes of no confidence in him,

1. By organised labour at the SABC consisting of three trade unions representing by far the majority of SABC employees,
2. By the Top 100 managers of the SABC,
3. By disgruntled staff, after he failed to address staff yesterday,

is saying:

"He said all major consulting work had now been stopped completely. "There are just small areas where we believe specialist intervention needs to be done."He said a study done on behalf of the SABC had showed that the organisation had surplus staff "all over the place"."Our new operating model that we need to implement will clearly allow us to come up with an optimal structure that says wherever we have excess fat, that fat must be removed from the organisation."

What part of vote of no confidence does he not understand?

• Why do we need more consultants (again!) to tell us the SABC is overstaffed? The mere fact that you did not ask HR to do the study clearly indicates that you yourself don't trust them. This confirms our vote of no confidence in them. You have also now effectively put a vote of no confidence in them.
• Human Resources Management (HR), and they alone are in control of appointments. Why did they allow and made all these appointments? Why must staff who bona fide accepted employment with the SABC and left previous jobs now be faced with retrenchments because incompetent HR Management appointed them? Why do we still have those HR Chief Executive employed? Why haven't you taken action against her, Mr. Mampone?
• WE DO NOT TRUST YOU, YOUR NEW MODEL OR YOUR CONSULTANTS TELLING YOU ABOUT SURPLUS STAFF. There is a vote of no confidence in you. You were told this three (3) times, or is it 4 times? Did the Independent Producers say so too?
• The only surplus staff we have is the Board and Group Executive.
• Staff did not appoint themselves. If we are in this financial crises because of surplus staff, then HR Management has put the SABC in this financial crisis. Why no action? What if they do so again?

In terms of Section 189A of the LRA employees may embark on a protected strike if faced with retrenchments.

We will not allow the SABC to retrench our members without us fighting this in the highest court.

Cutting must start from the top and end before the bargaining unit.

And whilst Mampone is saying the SABC must cut staff, the Minister says appoint more:

"Nyanda was briefed on challenges facing the SABC, including the broadcaster’s financial crisis, the salary negotiations with unions, differences between board members and the filling of key vacant positions.
The SABC has been facing a leadership crisis since the appointment of the new board in December 2007. Three board members — Peter Vundla, Christine Qunta and Fadilah Lagadien — have resigned this year, with Lagadien citing a lack of leadership at board level. A Deloitte report this year found that the board was damaged by extensive infighting and that both board and management were suspicious of each other.

Nyanda raised concerns about the negative public perception of the board and management’s ability to give direction to the operation, and reminded the board that the SABC’s mandate is to deliver quality broadcasting ."

So who do we believe now?

14214

Night of the long knives and other short stories

• Help, the SABC is sinking!
• A sit-in at the Acting GCEO, Gab's office from 10:00 to 14:00.
• A vote of no confidence in Group Executive at SMF (Senior Management Forum) by Senior Management.
• A vote of no confidence in the Board and Group Executive jointly by the three unions.
• A spontaneous vote of no confidence in the Board and Group Executive and a demand they must all resign with immediate effect on Wednesday by disgruntled staff and union members.
• A vote of no confidence in the Chief Executive, Dr. Pat Naves and the Acting General Manager of Employee Relations, Andre Weber.
• A visibly shaken Dr. Naves escorted by SABC Security to her office.
• There is war out there at the SABC, Minister! Stop turning a blind eye and act.

So where did this soap opera started off?

Not so long ago the acting GCEO, Gab Mampone wrote what he called a thesis for his Doctorate in Philosophy which he named “Help, the SABC is sinking!” This document landed with the Board which later caused the departure of inter alia Mr. Mark Jakins, the Chief Executive of Sales & Marketing of the SABC.

Sales & Marketing is off course where more than 85% of the SABC’s income is generated.

When Jakins left, Mampone took over the engine room of the SABC. So we had Mkhonza as captain in charge of a multi billion rand ship with barely experience to sail an inflatable dinghy and Mampone in the engine room who had never before seen the inside of ship, let alone an engine room.

And they decided to change the name from SABC to Titanic. And it is exactly what it became… a pleasure ship with lots and lots of luxury for the captains and first officers (Board and Group Executives) whilst the crew (staff and senior management) had to work like dogs with not proper or late salary increases and not sharing in all the luxury.

And as we know, history always repeats itself.

Crew who is not properly treated and paid normally revolts, and this is exactly what happened. The officers (senior management) were told they will not get any salary increase this year. Well knowing how lavishly the captain and her team have lived to date, a mutiny broke out. On Tuesday, 9 June 2009 the Senior Management Forum (SMF) met with Group Executive (GE). The SMF is a fancy name for the Top 100 most senior managers at the SABC. At the commencement of the meeting the SMF asked for a caucus without GE present. The SMF then tabled a vote of no confidence in Mampone and Nicholsen, but later changed that to a vote of no confidence in the entire GE.

So out came the long knives.

Meanwhile the crew (staff) were preparing to be addressed by Mampone on 10:00 on Wednesday morning (10 June). Being faced with a vote of no confidence from his own management, Mampone decided to cancel the meeting and requested Group Communications to send an e-mail to all staff late Tuesday night to inform them of his decision.

That made staff really angry, because not once in the salary dispute saga did Mampone once showed his face in a meeting. Not once did he bother to invite the union leadership to his office to try and explain the situation. Not once did he bother to call a meeting with staff to apologise for the situation and explain why salaries have not been implemented.

Disgruntled staff spontaneously decided to go to his office and to demand an explanation from him. At 10:00 approximately 35 staff members, both unionized and not, started with a sit-in outside his office. When he refused to address the staff, they became agitated and demanded that the Board, Mampone and the entire Group Executive must resign with immediate effect.

The sit-in ended at 14:00 after Mampone agreed to meet with union leaders.

On Monday, 15 June we are at the CCMA with the salary dispute. Mampone has indicated they will come with an offer then. Why do we have to wait for the CCMA? Management by litigation?

So how do we get theSABC to not sink further?

Maybe the time has come to file an official dispute of mutual interest to have the Board and Group Executive removed, else all SABC staff (including the Top 100 managers of the SABC) should embark on a protected strike?

Only the SMF and staff can now jointly safe the SABC, or the Minister.

Who are they fooling?

This is the MOST incompetent Board the SABC EVER had!!

They do not understand the Broadcasting Act at all. If they do, they are deliberately in breach of an Act of Parliament which makes it a criminal offence.

Since when can the Board appoints it own chairperson?

The Broadcasting Act is very clear on this. The Board CANNOT appoint itself or it's chairperson or vice chair.

This is what the Broadcasting Act says in this respect:

13. Members of Board.--(1) The twelve non-executive members of the Board must be appointed by the President on the advice of the National Assembly.

(3) The President must designate one of the members of the Board... as the chairperson and another member as a deputy chairperson, both of whom must be non-executive members of the Board.

(7) Every appointment of a member of the Board must be published in the Gazette.

Please President Zuma, regard this as an official complaint from BEMAWU against the SABC Board that they are acting in breach of the Broadcasting Act. Recall the whole Board and replace them with an Interim Board, as per the Broadcasting Amendment Act. A Board that does not understand the few simple sentences above should NEVER have been there in the first place. And make it a requirement that new Board Members must know by heart and understand the Broadcasting Act before they can get appointed.

The new, illegal appointment was also never published in the Gazette.

If any of our members are in breach of a policy, they usually gets disciplined and fired. We please want to see consistency, Com President.

And whilst we dusted off our copy of the Act, how many Executive committee members do we have? It cannot legally be more than 14.

“Executive committee
14. (1) The affairs of the Corporation are administered by an executive committee consisting of the Group Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and no more than 11 other members.

Maybe the SOS Coalition must start organising a mass viewer and listener march to all SABC Offices for the SABC to take note of the illegal things going on at our Public Broadcaster and to get the Board removed.

We cannot have a Board who is in breach of national legislation, alternatively is making their own laws. And why exactly has Khanyi decided to step down? The vote of no confidence was put in her by fellow board members for misconduct. Why is she allowed to remain on the Board?

13723

What next...

So Mkhonza has resigned as Chairperson, (yipeeee!!!) but not from the Board :-((

This is not sufficient. She must GO! She is responsible for the turmoil at the SABC and the sorry state we currently find ourselves in. She should have enquired about implementation of salaries, etc. a long time ago. She should have asked on a monthly basis a report in respect of the finances of the SABC from the CFO. Maybe it was difficult to hear the employees begging for an increase whilst listening to Jazz music at the same time.

However, she is not alone. The Board, so we are told, is a collective.

What about the incompetent top management? Those who managed us into a position short of bankruptcy?

SALARIES
BEMAWU will be at the CCMA on the 15th of June for conciliation. We will then take a final decision in respect of the route to follow to protect our member's rights. We believe we will refer the matter to arbitration.

VOTE OF NO CONFIDENCE
Following yesterday's serious intimidation and threats to discipline and dismiss members who went down yesterday in their lunchtime to witness the handing over of a memorandum to the SABC by independent producers we AGAIN hereby put a vote of no confidence in the head of what is called Employee Relations (nogal) Mr. Andre Weber and Dr. Pat Naves, head of Human Resources. We are sick and tired of Mr Weber and Dr. Naves victimising, harassing and threatening our members. We are sick and tired of the sorry state the SABC Human Resources finds itself in under the leadership of Dr. Naves. There is NO career progression structure or plan. An employee cannot, according to her, be regraded. They must apply for re-evaluation of their positions. What nonsense! What happened to performance and reward for same? We have members sitting for years on the same scale code because they cannot be regraded according to Dr. Naves. This must stop!

Please give us an employee friendly employee relations practitioner - not someone acting like a Gestapo commander that is out to ALWAYS prosecute, harass and screw employees where he can. Both other unions have put a vote of no confidence in Mr Weber and has complained about his behaviour. (Mr. Weber: "I'm only following orders!") Reality is - you do not have to follow order if they are unreasonable and unlawful. It is unlawful to intimidate employees when they want to exercise their constitutional rights in their lunch time (not working time) and to threaten them with disciplinary action. Why do YOU leave work every day before 16:30, Mr. Weber? The official hours of the SABC are from 08:00 to 17:00. Can every employee start working earlier and leave earlier? If not, why can you do so? If you so badly wants to police employees, why don't you start with yourself?

We have members who also wants to work flexi-time, Mr. Weber. Can you kindly arrange for them to do so? They want to start working at 06:00 and they want to leave at 15:00. Some wants to start at 05:00 and leave at 14:00. They are all office workers, like you, Mr Weber.

And no, I am not stupid to ask for permission for members to join yesterday's march. I never asked permission, I wanted you to confirm their right to participate over lunchtime, because management threatened them with disciplinary action. In the same way I asked you to confirm their right to strike now for their salary increase, which you confirmed. You said, "employees may embark on a strike in respect of the re-opened salary negotiations."

Thank you for that permission.

Lastly, Mr. Weber and Dr. Naves, you are solely responsible for BEMAWU now hardening our attitude and stance in respect of the salary increases. We want the 12.2% and nothing less!

13601

Remove these clown...

The SABC has now lost it completely! What happened to constitutional rights? See correspondence between BEMAWU and SABC Management hereunder. We wrote the letter to the SABC to confirm employee's constitutional rights to join the march because individual members informed their line managers (for the sake of courtesy) of their intention to join and they were threatened with dismissal and disciplinary action. Please General Ghebuza, remove these clowns. They don't know what they talking about and have no regard for human rights. What happened to freedom of speech?

Our correspondence:

____________________________________________________________
From: BEMAWU HEAD OFFICE [mailto:headoffice@bemawu.org.za]
Sent: 03 June 2009 01:10 PM
To: Andre Weber
Subject: Demonstration - Thursday

Dear Mr Weber, Please confirm that SABC employees may participate if they so wish in the peaceful demonstration tomorrow at the SABC during their lunch time.

BEMAWU

____________________________________________________________
From: Andre Weber [mailto:webera@sabc.co.za]
Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2009 2:05 PM
To: headoffice@bemawu.org.za
Cc: Patience NavesSubject:
RE: Demonstration - Thursday

Dear Hannes

As you are aware that the march has been organised by Independent Producers and that same was not intended to include SABC employees. Under normal circumstances where SABC employees are involved, the necessary official notification within a reasonable time period would have been given by the unions and certain rules would have been agreed upon. Given the circumstances the SABC cannot give such permission or confirm that SABC employees may participate in the march.

Regards ANDRE

_______________________________________________________________
From : BEMAWU HEAD OFFICE

Dear Dr. Naves,

We do not understand why SABC Employees may not, in only their lunchtime (this is not working time) join a demonstration outside the SABC?

Are you infringing on employee’s constitutional rights of freedom of expression and freedom of association?

This is not an official strike and we therefore do not need to give official notification.

We would like you to withdraw your statement and threats that employees must be guarded like prisoners during their lunchtime tomorrow and to communicate to employees their right to do whatever they want to do in their lunchtime. Since when can you regulate what employees may do in their lunchtime?

We await your urgent response.


Sincerely,

Hannes du Buisson
President : BEMAWU


13376

The End of the Road?

We had two meetings with the SABC, yesterday and today. In both meetings we have demanded the implementation of the 12.2%. We have also informed the SABC we are prepared to negotiate but they must adhere to the agreement and implement CPIX +1 until we have come to another agreement. They have refused to do so. We are now proceeding with legal action.

The other two unions, MWASA and CWU declared a deadlock and indications are they will now embark on a strike.

13165

We did NOT sign...

BEMAWU did NOT sign a 7% or any salary increase with the SABC.

Apparently some reckless and clueless individuals has spread this rumour. It appears to be the same clueless individuals who are currently foolishly advising union members to embark on a strike on an agreement that has already secured 12.2% for members. Failure to implement MUST be referred to litigation, and cannot be subjected to a strike. It is the same individuals who has said they will NOT negotiate with the SABC, whilst we have agreed (in the multi-term agreement) to negotiate should the CPIX be more or less than what was stipulated in the agreement.

Those individuals are repudiating the contract (multi-term agreement) by refusing to comply with terms of the contract, and the SABC can accept the repudiation and cancel the contract if they want to, resulting in negotiations from scratch.

In short, they are risking the 12.2% we have already secured.

BEMAWU has a cordial relationship with both the CWU and MWASA and we will not allow uninformed selfish individuals in those organisations to risk that relationship or the employment and well being of SABC employees.

We will continue to negotiate with the SABC to secure the best deal for our members without risking their employment. We will not lead our members on a strike for the sake of striking. Should we not be able to get what we believe is fair, we will pursue a legal route.

Without repeating what we have said previously, we see the issue at hand very simply to be:

• We concluded an agreement where the SABC and us agreed to CPIX +1%
• We have agreed that it will be implemented 1 April 2009. (This is where the SABC is in breach of contract, and we have threatened them with legal action)
• The SABC must therefore implement the 12.2% until we have concluded a new agreement, if at all
• We agreed any party to the agreement may re-open negotiations should the CPIX falls below 4% or rises to 9% or above,
• The opening of negotiations does not terminate the agreement, in particular not the implementation of the CPIX +1% which has been fixed on 12.2%,
• Only when we have concluded a new agreement after negotiations, the 12.2% obligation changes to whatever we have agreed to, if we agree to something else.
• Putting it differently, we have 12.2% in hand. The SABC should convince us to accept less.
• They can only do so by means of negotiations, meaning we must agree to a lower increase or by locking us out after they have followed due procedure.
• Had the CPIX been below 4% - say 3%, the SABC would have been contractually bound to implement 4% (CPIX + 1%) on 1 April 2009.
• We would have been entitled to re-open negotiations, and in the event that we were not able to negotiate a higher percentage increase, the increase would remain 4%. It would be possible to embark on a protected strike to persuade the SABC to offer more.
• So can employees strike at this point in time?
• Technically yes, but it would be stupid to strike for something you already have (the 12.2%). If the CPIX was 3%, we would have had 4% in hand (CPIX + 1%), and could then strike for a higher percentage.

It was never the intention of the parties to this multi-term agreement to delay the implementation date of salaries because we are not in agreement with each other on a lower (or higher) percentage. The SABC has admitted to the 12.2%.

We will on Monday again demand immediate implementation of the 12.2% and we will again commit ourselves to good faith negotiations in respect of a possible different structuring of the agreement. Should the SABC fails to agree, we will proceed with litigation.

12683

Meeting 28 May

The three unions and the SABC met at 10:00 this morning. A revised proposal was presented by management being 7% at the end of June 2009, back dated to 1 April 2009 plus an additional 1.5% by September 2009, backdated to 1 April 2009. The SABC proposed that we enter into negotiations in respect of the remaining 3.7% but they clearly stated they will not be able to afford at least 2% of the 3.7%.

By re-opening negotiations, the SABC has taken the process back into the normal collective bargaining arena where employees will be allowed to strike. The acting head of employee relations, Mr Andre Weber confirmed that employees of the SABC will now be able to lawfully strike since the SABC has invoked the clause where they want to negotiate.

It is however not necessary to strike. In terms of the contract (multi-term agreement) the SABC must implement the 12.2%, which will remain in force until a new agreement has been reached. Putting it differently, nothing can be taken away from members, unless we agree. Had the CPIX been low, we could then strike for a higher percentage. Should we not agree to a lower percentage, the SABC’s remedy would be to lock-out members to compel us to accept a lower increase. They are however currently in breach of the contract by refusing to implement the 12.2%.

We have already started negotiations with the SABC. Our willingness to negotiate is no way an admission that our members are not legally entitled to the 12.2%. This also does not constitute a relaxation of the agreement to not implement the 12.2%.

The 12.2% must be implemented with immediate effect and will remain in force until we have agreed on another percentage.

Apart from our legal right to the increase, this is a test of their sincerity, goodwill and integrity.

Fact is, we have entered into an agreement where we have agreed to accept average CPIX +1%. Had the average CPIX been 3%, the SABC would have insisted on, and in fact implemented 4%. They would have said to us the agreement stipulates they must implement on 1 April 2009, and if we want to enter into negotiations, we have the right to do so (because the agreement says so). If we fail to agree on a higher percentage, the 4% will remain effective. They would be correct.

According to the SABC they have decided to re-open negotiations because we did not want to negotiate (their term for not agreeing) with them. (Yes, we are confused too).

We will meet on Monday again with the SABC. If they do not agree with our proposal, and they continue to be in breach of the agreement, we will proceed with legal action.

12414

Report Back

The meeting attended by BEMAWU, MWASA and CWU members took place at 15:00 today.

Auckland Park was well attended and the Auditorium packed and filled to its capacity. Members in all the regions participated via line conference. The proposal by management of a staggered increase was put to the joint caucus. It was almost unanimously rejected and the joint caucus demanded the immediate implementation of the 12.2%. Employees were not interested in a staggered increase.

The main reason voiced was a total lack of trust in the Board and Top management. Despite the assurance from union leaders that there will be a watertight agreement, employees were adamant that they have absolutely no trust in the Board and Top Management. Employees voiced their concerns and fears that the SABC will not honour the agreement to implement the staggered part (4.2%) later.

A vote of no confidence were then passed in the Board and Top Management and the caucus demanded the immediate resignation of the Board and Top Management. Fears and concerns were voiced that the SABC will finds itself in a much worse financial position by March 2010 when the last part of the multi-term will kick in. (Again CPI-X plus 1%). It was said that we will have to go through the same motions to get the increase. The majority of the joint caucus mandated the three unions to jointly declare a dispute of interest and to embark on protected industrial action should the Board and Top Management refuse to resign with immediate effect.

It was clear from the reaction of employees present at the meeting that they were angry about what they called disrespect for employees in general by management and the Board and some of them were prepared to embark on an unprotected strike to get their 12.2% immediately. We advised them against such action.

With a joint caucus it is difficult to determine what the real mandate of each individual union is.

BEMAWU will therefore seek a mandate from our members by means of SMS or electronic voting in respect of the staggered increase.

We will also poll our members in respect of the collective vote of no confidence in the Board and Top Management. Should the initial results show a strong support for procedural industrial action to force the Board and Top Management to resign, BEMAWU will conduct a proper ballot of BEMAWU members only and in terms of its constitution to determine support for a protected strike by our members.

With the Confederation Cup around the corner, we trust that the Board, or at least what is left of it, will resign to avoid a stand-off between the three unions and them. As the SABC has said, it will not be in the public interest.

Employees are not allowed to strike in respect of the salary dispute, but can certainly do so to get the Board to resign.

It is our view that industrial action should be reserved only as an absolute last resort, and it is not our intention to lobby our members to strike to get the Board to resign, and in particular to jeopardise the broadcasting of the Confederation Cup. We will therefore call on our members to be responsible and make their choice with their heads and not their hearts. Should the Board however refuse to resign, and the majority (80%) outcome of a ballot is in favour of industrial action, we will ensure that such industrial action will be procedural, protected (in compliance with the Labour Relations Act, and members will therefore not be at risk) and peaceful.

11946

Feedback

We have met with individual members of the Board and Top management today to discuss the implementation of the 12.2% salary increase. Only BEMAWU and MWASA attended the meeting.

The following came out of the meeting:

• SABC Board and Top Management admitted and confirmed that the percentage increase they are legally liable for and obliged to implement amounts to 12.2%.
• That it is their intention to honour and implement the agreement of 12.2%
• That the SABC is currently in a tight cash flow position and they cannot afford to implement the 12.2% in one month,

The SABC proposed the following:

• That the increase be staggered as follows:
• 8% increase at the end of June 2008, backdated to 1 April 2009.
• Thereafter 1.5% increase at the end of July 2009, backdated to 1 April 2009.
• Thereafter another 1.5% at the end of the 3rd quarter (no specific date given) and they want to have further discussions with us as to whether they will backdate this or not,
• Further discussions in respect of the remainder (1.2%) and whether it will be backdated or not. Indications are that it will only be implemented in the last quarter (March 2010).
• That they are not prepared to pay any interest on the money due and outstanding to members.

We proposed the following, without prejudice:

• 8% increase immediately, backdated to 1 April 2009 and within a week from now.
• 4.2% on 1 December 2009 (or before if possible), backdated to 1 April 2009 plus interest from 1 April 2009.

We also proposed that the following conditions be included in the agreement:

1. That the SABC will not retrench any BEMAWU or MWASA member in the next two years,
2. That the SABC consents to civil judgement in the High Court should they fail to honour the (new proposed) agreement.
3. Interest be paid on all monies not implemented now.
4. Back pay be effected on all.

A general meeting will be held on Tuesday, 26 May 2009 at 15:00 to seek mandate from members.

We will also send out e-mails that will request members to vote. The options are:

1. Accept the offer of management, as is.
2. Proceed with legal action to enforce the 12.2% at once.
3. Present a differently structured demand to management, which may include interest and if they don't agree, proceed with legal action.

A follow-up meeting is scheduled for Thursday, 28 May 2009 at 09:00 with SABC management.

We were informed at the meeting that the CWU has proceeded with a CCMA referral to arbitrate on the implementation of the agreement. We believe this is premature and detrimental to its members at this point in time, as the SABC is willing to honour the 12.2% and wants to discuss the implementation of same.

Update on Salary Increase

On Thursday, 21 May 2009 BEMAWU served a letter of demand on the SABC to effect the CPIX + 1% increase in terms of the Multi-term agreement signed last year. We made it clear we will proceed with legal action should the SABC not implement the 12%. We were called to an urgent meeting on Friday, 22 May 2009 with Khanyi Mkhonza and Mr. Andile Mbeki of the Board. The CPO, CFO and other members of the Board/Management also attended.

We made it clear that we are not there to negotiate a percentage increase, but that we want to enforce our right in terms of the Multi-term Agreement.

The SABC admitted and acknowledged that SABC employees are entitled to the 12% increase. They explained the financial difficulty they are finding themselves in to us (again), and undertook to report back to us Monday, 25 May 2009 at 12:00 as to how they intend to implement the 12%.

Please note that a looming strike in respect of the salary increase is devoid of all truth at this stage. This however does not mean that we are not prepared to embark on procedural industrial action as and when the need arises.

We believe the SABC will implement 7% immediately, and discuss with us how to implement the rest in today's meeting. We are hopeful that we can reach an amicable agreement with them to avoid further legal action.


ISSUED BY THE BROADCASTING, ELECTRONIC, MEDIA AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION (BEMAWU)

Please Vote

We have received NO RESPONSE from Gab. We call on BEMAWU members to vote on a way forward.

We have two options:

1. Enforce the multi-term by means of an urgent court application (BEMAWU will go ahead and bring an application on its own to enforce and protect the rights of our members, as other Unions have not responded to a request from us to join in such an application and share the costs).

2. Wait until the SABC wants to schedule negotiations, which may take months, and re-negotiate a salary increase.

Please get everyone to vote.

No Response!

LETTER TO GAB MAMPONE, ACTING GCEO, SABC

Dear Sir,

On Friday, 24 April 2009 we have send you the letter attached below.

We have not received a response.

Could you urgently respond to our letter and request?

Sincerely,

Hannes du Buisson

Salary Negotiations April 2009

The letter below was send to the SABC today.

To : The Acting GCEO, SABC
CC : All BEMAWU members and interested parties

Dear Mr. Mampone,

The multi-term agreement signed on or about July 2008 has reference.

In this agreement the parties agreed that the salary adjustment on 1 April 2009 shall be based on the 12 months average CPI-X as at 31 March 2009 plus 1% for the period 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2010.

The average CPI-X for the period in question currently is 11.54% (11 months) with only March 2009 outstanding. We have been informed it will be published by next week Wednesday. The SABC has unofficially requested to re-open negotiations. We are however getting the impression that management is dragging its feet to get the negotiations going.

BEMAWU members want their increase to be implemented as per the agreement as soon as the CPI-X (or CPI excluding OER as it is called now) is announced next week. We need the assurance from you that it will happen without any delay. The SABC is free to attempt to negotiate at any time with BEMAWU, and should the parties reach agreement on any other percentage increase, the salaries will be adjusted accordingly.

Post Retirment Medical Aid

To all BEMAWU Members and interested parties.

The SABC yesterday has lost another, very expensive battle in the Supreme Court of Appeal in respect of Post Retirement Medical Aid (PRMA).

The Coop-group (“the group”) won their case in the Appeal Court and the SABC were ordered to re-instate their Post retirement Medical Aid benefits. The court ordered the SABC to treat them “like any other SABC Pensioner.” The SABC thought they were smart and then gave notice to the group to terminate their
PRMA benefits as they did with you a few years ago when they gave you notice and informed you that you will have no PRMA benefits when you go on pension.

PRMA benefits are terms and conditions of employment.

The group referred the decision to the High Court, and won. The SABC appealed the matter, and lost. They then lodged an appeal with the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA). Yesterday the SCA ruled that the SABC must pay PRMA benefits to the group until the day they die.

BEMAWU is the only union who has instituted legal action on behalf of its members in the High Court to re-instate the PRMA benefits of our members. The case will go to court in February next year. We need to finalize our summons. Please make sure there is a BEMAWU deduction on your payslip if you are a BEMAWU member. This is the only way to be sure you are a claimant in the matter and will benefit from a court decision in this regard. We will soon send out again personalized e-mails to again check your details. The list of applicants needs to finalized by the end of April 2009. If you are not on the list, you will in all probability not benefit from a ruling in this regard. Only the claimants listed will benefit. The SABC will save every sent it can (they will need it) and not extend the PRMA benefits to people who were not interested in challenging their decision in court.

We believe it will be a formality to win this case, as it has technically already been decided by the SCA.

BEMAWU cares for its members, and we do not hesitate to spend money to protect your rights.

Hannes du Buisson
BEMAWU President

headoffice@bemawu.org.za
Cell. 0829208669
Fax 0866715585

Discrimination rife at SABC

The SABC is still a male dominated environment, a man’s world.
According to the SABC’s Employment Equity report Black (African) woman only accounts for 20.69% of the SABC workforce oppose to their male counterparts that dominates the workforce with 36.21%. This despite the fact that African woman are the most recruited (40.44%). African woman also seems to feel the most unwelcome as they were the majority (31.29%) that resigned in the past year. On top of that they were on the receiving end in respect of disciplinary action with 50% of all disciplinary action instituted against them. When it came to promotion, they again had to bow the head to their male counterparts who were in front in the queue with 32.84% versus their 29.85% of the cake. And they are also not welcome in management as they only makes out 20.69% of Top and Middle Management.
On the other hand it appears as if their white sisters were not doing too badly. In respect of promotions white females were third in the queue (14.18%), none of them got dismissed and no disciplinary action was instituted against any white female. They were also the third most preferred when it came to new appointments and the forth most representative in Top and Middle management. Their white male counterparts beat them with one place, being the third most representative.
There appears to be a huge inequality when it comes to the distribution of salaries.
The top 11% (Senior officials, management) earns 24% of the salary bill with an almighty R 308,786,802 per year averaging a salary of R 55 800 per month!
The professionals (3.19%) earn 4.35% of the bill and Technicians and Associated professionals (50.33%) earn 47.46% of the bill. The huge discrepancies in salaries are starting to manifest with Clerks who accounts for 25.85% of the workforce but only are allocated 17.43% of the salary bill.

Only 55.98% of all SABC staff are employees involved in core operational functions. The rest are support staff (44,02%). This effectively means for every 1.27 employee involved in core operations there is one support staff member.

White males are the third largest group of employees totaling 13.76% of the workforce.

WORKFORCE BY RACE (3,946)

African Male 1,359 = 34.44%
African Female 1,060 = 26.86% (Total 61.30%)
White Male 543 = 13.76%
White Female 440 = 11.15% (Total 24.91%)
Coloured Female 194 = 4.92%
Coloured Male 131 = 3.32% (Total 8.24%)
Indian Female 104 = 2.64%
Indian Male 94 = 2.38% (Total 5.02%)
Foreign National Male 13 = 0.33%
Foreign National Female 8 = 0.20% (Total 0.53%)

WOULD IT NOT BE NICE TO WORK FOR SUCH AN ORGANISATION?

If organisations managed their assets as carelessly as they do their employees, not only would their lifespan be rather limited, but they would also find themselves under extreme pressure from their shareholders for gross under utilisation of assets and resources. Although it is commonly accepted within most organisations that their employees are one of the primary critical success factors, many organisations are either unable or unwilling to set up procedures to effectively measure and thus effectively manage their employees' contribution to the organisation.
Many years ago whilst still in school we had an annual event called the Talent Night which after inception soon became the entertainment highlight of the year. In fact, in the second year, the acts had to be spread across two nights as the school hall could just not accommodate the crowds. What soon became apparent, was that there were some individuals in the school who had exceptional talent, be it playing a musical instrument, a stand up comedy routine or just being a great actor. These individuals soon became "icons" within the school, and each year all and sundry waited to see what they would be doing at the Talent Night evening. I remember clearly how these individuals were given every opportunity to improve their talents and of course, as the event drew closer schoolwork actually took second place. Why? Well as the Talent Night was the flagship for talent within the school it was seen as imperative that all the individuals involved were given every opportunity to ensure they could perform to their maximum potential. Imagine if that was the vision statement hanging in your canteen - "Here at the SABC we ensure that all our employees are given every opportunity to perform at their maximum potential". Imagine the impact on employees, clients and any other visitors you may have reading this statement. So what relevance does acting in a Talent Night production have to my organisation you might ask? Well in a typical organisation you have, just like in a school, people with various talents and potential, employees that others look up to regardless of position or power and those who become your informal leaders, mentors or advice givers. Once talent is recognised it needs to be nurtured and grown in order for the individual to maximise their potential and of course for the organisation to reap maximum rewards. I relate the story from my school days because the same principles should be applied in the workplace today. I cannot believe that the teachers of my school, which was stuck in the middle of the Free State, were that far ahead of their times. The teachers realised that, once they had identified talent in a student, they then needed to nurture it by creating opportunities for this talent to grow, in order to maximise the individual's potential. It was plain common sense - and it worked!
So why do so many organisations fail to even get out of the starting blocks with the cornerstone of managing and valuing their talent - performance management? There can be two significant barriers that could stand in the way of a more productive or strategic approach to managing or developing employees. Firstly, many managers are reluctant to categorise employees, sometimes in fear of appearing elitist and others for the fear of being seen to discriminate. Secondly, the HR Department classifies employees according to their functions or their business units - in vertical silos - and not how essential the employee's roles are, or what experience and other personal qualities are required to perform in the role. Often no attempt is made to classify people across the organisation, in other words horizontally as opposed to vertically, where the value of how "business-critical" they are is seen as the most important criteria. In many organisations, where the employees' contribution to the success of the organisation is considered, it is all too often limited to a discussion around the employee's individual performance rather than any consideration of the organisational measurements of success. Organisations need a far better understanding of the strategic value of their employees as this is critical to their success in the global marketplace. Your company's future growth and competitiveness now depends more than ever before on attracting the right people – qualified employees - who are becoming an increasingly scarce resource. Once these individuals are part of your organisation you need to ensure that they perform not only on an individual level, but also as part of the team. Key to this is role definition. Just like in the Talent Show, each employee should know their role, and yes, you will have employees in starring roles and others in supporting roles.
Reference: Rethinking the Value of Talent by Jeffrey Joerres and Dominique Turcq.

No Response!

Hereunder e-mail correspondence between BEMAWU and the Acting GCEO.

Remember he accused us of not following the right channels and taking matters outside the SABC instead of discussing it internally.

So the Acting GCEO never kept his promise and he never reverted back to us yesterday. (We removed the individuals name as she has merely handled the communication on behalf of the Acting GCEO)

______________________________________________________________
From: BEMAWU HEAD OFFICE [mailto:headoffice@bemawu.org.za]
Sent: 13 March 2009 15:31 PM
To: Gab Mampone
Subject: Information

Dear Mr. Mampone,

We would like to enquire about the following:

How many Board members attended the Cape Town Jazz festival?
· How much did it cost the SABC?
· Why was it necessary for the Board Members to attend the festival?

How many Board members attended the Beijing Olympics?
· At what cost to the SABC?
· Why was it necessary to attend the Olympics?

How many Board members attended the Durban July?
· At what cost to the SABC?
· Why was it necessary for the Board to attend the Durban July?

Did any Board member attend the Dakar Rally or visited Dakar for any reason in the past 24 months?
· At what cost to the SABC?
· Why was it necessary to visit Dakar on SABC expenses?

Sincerely,

Hannes du Buisson
BEMAWU
__________________________________________________________________
From: xxxxx xxxxx [mailto:xxxxx@sabc.co.za] On Behalf Of Gab Mampone
Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 3:37 PM
To: headoffice@bemawu.org.za; Gab Mampone
Subject: RE: Information

Afternoon Mr Du Buisson,

This e-mail is sent to confirm receipt of your mail. Please note that we will revert by close of business on Monday the 16th of March 2009.

Have a blessed weekend.

Kind and warm regards
Xxxx xxxx
Commercial Enterprises
SABC
_________________________________________________________________

So we feel duty bound to inform you of the following:

• At least 7 Board Members attended the Cape Town Jazz Festival at a cost of at least R 209 589.05 - but there is no money to regrade and promote employees!
• At least 2 Board Members attended the Durban July at a cost of at least R28 372.51 - but there is no money to regrade and promote employees!
• At least 1 Board Member went to Dakar at a cost of R 60 227.00!
• At least 4 Board Members attended the Olympics in Beijing!

The Board must go! They wasting our money!

SOS - Save Our SABC

SOS – SAVE OUR SABC!

It is very sad that SABC Management has decided to embark on an unjustified mud-slinging campaign to try and discredit BEMAWU, when our only intention was to assist in fixing problems and to inform you, our members of the real situation the SABC is in.

The facts are as follows.

BEMAWU did not issue a statement to its members and external media. We addressed personalised letters to each and every member of BEMAWU to inform them what really is going on in the SABC. Our members - SABC employees - have the right to know about issues threatening their security of employment. No statement was issued to the external media. If we had the intention to release the information officially to the external media, we would have issued a formal media statement. We do not need the SABC’s permission to do that.

Furthermore, we have never put out any statement that is not true and correct.

BEMAWU has no quest for sensationalism and attention as claimed by the SABC. We have not made any false, misleading, derogatory or personal claims. We have proof of each and every statement we have made, and if the SABC continues to insist they are false, we will release the evidence into the public domain to protect our integrity.

This however is false and misleading. Why did the SABC lie about the deficit?

(From The Times)
“Acting chief executive Gab Mampone said yesterday the broadcaster was now “monitoring and stopping unnecessary spending” as part of a wide-ranging turnaround strategy.
He said the fact that the broadcaster was in the red and surviving on overdraft was due to “external factors”, mainly the global economic climate.
At least R400-million of the R784-million in losses was attributed to the loss of advertising revenue from multinational companies, said Mampone.
Expenses for the 2009 financial year were R5.5-billion, up R1.2-billion from the previous year.
The Times reported on Wednesday that the broadcaster was facing a deficit of about R700 million — which SABC spokesman Kaizer Kganyago repeatedly denies.
Mampone, his managers and several SABC board members, including chairman Kanyi Mkonza, put up a united front as they tried to explain the financial crisis crippling the parastatal.”

In respect of Gemini Consultants, we have never claimed that procurement processes were not followed. We do say the SABC is wasting money by employing these consultants. Management was employed to manage, and management by consultants must stop. We never claimed that we were making new revelations. We are pointing out where the money has gone.

Whether it is a farewell party or a Christmas Party, it is absolutely ridiculous and irresponsible to spend nearly half a million rand on one party whether it has been budgeted for or not. The fact that it has been budgeted for does not make it right and justifiable.

We are astounded that management finds detailing of any individual’s expenses while involved in the carrying out of his/her duties, irresponsible, personal and insulting. If an SABC employee spends SABC money on Johnny Walker Black Whisky whilst we are facing a very serious deficit, to the extent that a court application has been brought to liquidate the SABC it needs to be exposed. Management should thank the union for bringing such matters to their attention, not call us irresponsible. Is this really the message that the SABC wants to send out to employees? If you know of wastage of money, don’t report it, because you will be accused of being irresponsible, personal and insulting? Is this the view of the Board and the Acting GCEO?

There appears to be something seriously wrong with the mindset of the SABC and it confirms why we are in such a financial mess.

The SABC says: “It is not clear why Mr. Naicker is being singled out for receiving training, while all other employees, including Bemawu and other union members also receive training from time to time.”

We are not singling out Mr. Naicker. Mr. Naicker has not applied via the SABC’s Bursary Scheme for a bursary to study an MBA. In any event it is highly irresponsible to spent money on a person’s MBA when in the midst of a very serious financial crisis. Surely all employees can then now apply and the SABC will pay for their MBA studies or is this reserved for a few privileged individuals?

The SABC says: “It is not true that Group Executives received the salary increases as stated in the memo. The figures were once again lifted from the Annual Report, without a proper breakdown being done to understand them.”

Does that mean the figures in the Annual Report are not correct? Then we should report this to the Auditor General. A primary school child with a calculator can do the calculations of the figures lifted from the Annual Report. The percentage increases (whether salary or salary and benefits and whether it has been breaked down or not) are 100% correct and verified by our auditors.

The SABC says: “The stated figures include a basic salary, allowances, bonuses, employer’s contribution to pension fund, medical aid and other.”

It does not matter how you look at it, there has been an increase by the percentage stated in our previous letter.

The SABC says: “It is not only unrealistic but unthinkable that any Group Executive can get such high salary increases in a year.”

We agree it is unrealistic and unthinkable. It is in the Annual Report and we believe it is highly irresponsible on top of being unrealistic and unthinkable. And there is absolutely nothing false and misleading about this, unless the Audited Annual Report is false and misleading. We want to know who is going to take responsibility for these exorbitant increases and wastage of money?

We want the wastage to stop and we want competent and responsible management at the SABC, management that will not risk the employment of our members. We have enquired about more matters of concern. We await the SABC’s answers.

We have a good relationship with most of the SABC’s management, and we intend to keep it like that. We believe they are as concerned as we are about the current financial and governance situation the SABC finds itself in.

What more evidence does Government need before they act to put a responsible and proper Board in place? In any private organisation a Board in a similar financial situation would have been investigated and removed with immediate effect.

The Board must go!

Any manager wasting SABC money must go!

It appears as if the SABC wants to stop us from communicating with you. If you know about any other wastage, please let us know. We have to plug the holes to stop the outflow of money from the SABC (that is off course if there is anything left).

Let’s act now to save the workers from retrenchments!

Broadcasting, Electronic, Media & Allied Workers Union (BEMAWU)
16 March 2009

Fruitless and Wasteful Expenditure

It is with regret that BEMAWU is once again the bearer of extremely worrying news. A disclosure has been made to BEMAWU and our lawyers in terms of the Protected Disclosures Act (the so-called Whistle Blowers Act ) and some of the information will be shared hereunder.
Despite the serious financial crisis the SABC is in, money is still flowing out of the SABC as if we are not facing retrenchments. Whilst we all are at risk of losing our jobs due to the irresponsible manner in which the SABC’s finances have been managed by management, in particular Sales and Marketing Executive Management, who are still spending money on, inter alia, personal training for themselves. The HR Manager there has not ceased recruitment, and new staff are being appointed on an almost daily basis at enormous cost to the SABC.
The SABC is currently leaderless and the Board is incapable of exercising its fiduciary duties. Deloitte so stated in a report widely published by newspapers. Why is it that staff always have to read about their own employer problems and issues in the media instead of being informed by the GCEO in an open and transparent manner?
We are fast running out of options as to how to stop the flow of money from the SABC. We cannot talk to the Board, as they are responsible for the SABC's current mess. Besides, they won't be with us much longer.We cannot talk to the Minister, as she is on her way out. We cannot talk to the President, as he is on his way out.
We have seen shocking details of fruitless and wasteful expenditure that explain why the SABC is now in serious financial trouble. Here are some examples:
· Gemini Consultants being paid astronomic amounts of money (R8.2m in 10 months) and on an ongoing basis:-
o April 2008 – R4 999 825,29 (R5m)
o December 2008 - Radio Strategy – R 980 000
o UK Expenses for January 2008 – R 540 853,62
o Management Fees August 2008 – R 877 500,00
o Management Fees for the failed Convergence at Sales & Marketing June 2008 – R 877 500,00
· R 430 000,00 in March 2009 to KPMG,
· In 2007 the Board authorised nearly half a million rand (R481 707,00) for their Christmas Party;
· 31 days ago the SABC paid R175 000 for Mr. Strini Naicker, the Acting CE of Sales and Marketing’s MBA Degree studies;
· In the financial year ending March 2008 (all in the financial statements of the SABC on its website) the Board authorised expenses of:
o R220m to consultants (an increase of 70.54% from the previous year)
§ R163m (96.39% increase) of this went to management consultants – the job management was employed and paid to do!
o The Acting GCEO received a 230.19% salary increase!
o Other Executives received salary increases ranging from 30% to 59%;
§ Charlotte Mampane – 57.54%
§ Dr. Snuki Zikalala – 46.05%
§ Dr. Pat Naves – 39.31%
§ Pearl Luthuli – 31.95%
§ Mavuso Mbebe – 30.23%
o In the same period total advertising revenue increased by 10.71%
· The SABC had to pay back (credit) R80m to advertisers due to, inter alia, operational problems at the SABC;
· Since May 2008 the Sales and Marketing Division alone has spent R1.1m in placement of new employees, including almost R100 000,00 paid to a recruitment agency to place a Training Manager and R 150 000 to place three HR Temps. The most recent appointment being 24 February 2009;
Mr. Naicker’s Shopping List
· The purchasing of 7 Ipods in April 2008 for R34 078,03;
· Several bottles of Johnny Walker Black Whisky, Pongraz Champagne, KWV Brandy and Jack Daniels Whisky purchased on an ongoing basis;
o 22 May 2008 – 15 x Johnny Walker Black, 15 x Pongraz Champagne, 6 x Jack Daniels Whisky;
o 23 May 2008 – 2 x Johnny Walker Black, 2 x KWV Brandy, 24 Amstel Beer, 24 Red Square, 24 x Brutal Fruit, 24 x Savanna Light
o 15 August 2008 – 2 x Johnny Walker Black, 2 x KWV 10 year old Brandy;
o 13 October 2008 – 2 x Johnny Walker Black;
o 27 January 2009 – 2 x Johnny Walker Black, 2 x KWV 10 yearold;
· Gifts, Gratitude Gifts and Corporate gifts purchased to the value of R230 000,00 including Mont Blanc Briefcases;
· R 162 000 paid out in February 2009 for the now aborted APEX assessments where an elite group of people were appointed to take over portfolios and clients of other employees already selling to those clients;
· R107 000 paid out in two days in March 2009 for, inter alia, Business Report Writing training;
BEMAWU demands that Mr. Naicker be suspended with immediate effect, as have our members have been suspended in the past when they were under investigation. He is in a position to tamper with evidence and to interfere with the investigation. He has already threatened to dismiss the union shop stewards at Sales & Marketing.
On a more positive note, BEMAWU would like to request that you continue to do what you have done in all the previous times the SABC was faced with a crisis, which is to keep the SABC afloat.
We, the workers are the backbone, body and soul of the SABC.
If it wasn’t for your hard work and dedication, the SABC would have been another Eskom long ago. The Board and Top Management can disappear any day, and we will still be able to continue broadcasting. We trust however that someone will notice your valuable contribution and commitment to keeping the SABC afloat and broadcasting in trying times and will reward you.We undertake to make a special case for reward for our members for their years of loyal and dedicated hard word after we have weathered this storm and the SABC is back to normal.
We also know there is currently no career progression in the SABC and we undertake to fix this on behalf of our members.
Do we hear the song played by the band on the Titanic when it finally went under and is it Mr Naicker with a Johnny Walker Black in his hand on deck?

Application removed from Roll

We have just received a Notice of Removal from the applicant, Barry Aaron.

The SABC undertook to pay him, and he has removed the Application from the Roll. What it means is that the matter will be held over to a later date and can be re-enrolled at any time if the SABC does not pay.

The Application has not been withdrawn.

The SABC Board has really put us in a huge mess. It is their most important task to see that the SABC stays afloat and be able to meet its mandate. By allowing money to be spent in this manner and end up on the steps of the High Court before they pay smacks of unprofessional and irresponsible management. Now everyone’s jobs are at stake.

We must demand that we get a competent Board and top management.

BEMAWU will consult it's lawyers on Monday to investigate the possibility to bring an application to put the SABC under judicial management.

SABC in liquidation?

On Friday 27 February 2009 a Sandton-based firm of attorneys, Barry Aaron has filed an urgent application in the High Court to provisionally liquidate the SABC. The application was served on all the trade unions and the non-represented employees of the SABC.
In layman’s terms, it means the SABC is technically bankrupt if the order is granted.
Currently the application is for a provisional order. We do not intent to oppose the provisional order. However, we will oppose an application for a final order to wind-up the SABC.
What is the implication of such an application for you?
· If the SABC is insolvent, and a final order is granted, the SABC’s assets will be sold to pay it’s debtors.
· The SABC may stop paying you a salary, and you will have a preferential claim of 3 months salary capped at R12 000.
· Thereafter you may have a concurrent claim.
In our application to oppose the winding-up of the SABC we will request the Court to place the SABC under judicial management.
If you are a BEMAWU member, you will automatically be taken care off and you do not have to take any further action. We will make sure that all legalities are followed and we will do our utmost best to protect your employment and benefits. We have already instructed our lawyers to oppose the application and file for judicial management.
This is a very serious matter and only the Government can bail the SABC out of this. The SABC Board has put employees in a very serious predicament by not managing the SABC’s affairs responsibly and properly.
Remember what happened to Saambou Bank? No-one ever thought it could be liquidated, and it was.
We are aware of the problems at Sales & Marketing. We however are of the view that we first have to make sure the SABC still exists, and is not liquidated and thousands of employees loose their jobs before we deal with the problems there. It does not make sense to win the fight (of Apex and the other problems) but loose the battle when lots of employees loose their jobs if the SABC is liquidated.
The Application for provisional liquidation is available at our offices and can be forwarded to you on request.

Retrenchments, or not?

BEMAWU yesterday met with the CFO, Robin Nicholson, the CPO. Phumelele Ntombela-Nzimande and the Group Executive, Pat Naves.

The meeting was inter alia about the financial position the SABC finds itself in and the possibility of retrenchments.

The SABC is currently in a R700M deficit. Immediate plans to rectify the situation were discussed and the SABC will cease recruitment unless it is absolutely necessary to fill a position. The SABC will also make a recommendation to Parliament to increase TV License fees.

The CFO has confirmed that the SABC is in a financial crisis. He said we have to start to be responsible and we have to take difficult decisions to keep the SABC alive.

Our advertising income (85% of our income) is drastically down.

The freelance budgets has already been cut in an attempt to save cost and renovations were stopped.

He also said management and the Board must be managed.

In respect of the substantive negotiations the SABC will revert back to us as to when we will continue negotiations in this respect..

WHAT CAN WE DO

We need input from you as to where the SABC can save money.
If you know of any wastage please let me know. We know of a lot of fruitless and wasteful expenditure. Although the SABC has said that they do not foresee any retrenchments in the short term, we have absolutely no guarantee this will not happen. In fact, we cannot see the SABC surviving with it’s current headcount and the deficit. If the government tells them to cut heads, they will have to.

Therefore it is very important to come up with solutions in time to soften the blow of any possible retrenchments.

BEMAWU

BEMAWU is the only independent trade union organised in the broadcasting and media industry. Any media worker serious about Independence will not join another trade union but BEMAWU. Whilst other unions may want to mislead you with all sorts of sweet talk, the proof of the pudding lies in the eating.

That is why employees want to cross the floor to BEMAWU the moment they are in need of proper representation.

Don't be mislead by frills and empty talk.... when it comes to action, NO OTHER UNION CAN BEAT BEMAWU!!!

VIVA BEMAWU!!!..... FOREVER!!!

Latest correspondence from SABC re Substantives

SABC Board will meet on 8-9 December 2008 were the employer will present the progress report to date on substantive negotiations. The employer proposes due to the holiday period coming soon that we convene Substantive Negotiations and determining the bargaining requirements for 2009 in the week 12-16 January 2008 for two (2) days.

Substantive Negotiations

We have received no further invitations from the SABC to conclude the substantive negotiations. Rumour has it that the Head of Labour Relations, Nthlaks has resigned. We have also heard rumours of retrenchment packages that will be offered to employees, but could not confirm it. We have not been informed by any SABC Official of such intention.

We are concerned about the state of the SABC. It appears from their financial statements that they have showed a surplus as a result of the Pension Fund surplus. If it was not for that, the SABC would have been R99M in the red.

We have been trying to get an appointment with the Acting Group CE, Mr Gab Mampone. He appears to be complete unapproachable and the only deduction we can make from this is that he is anti-union.

When we requested a meeting with him to discuss the SABC's financial situation, he wanted an agenda. When we told his office it's about the financial and general state of the SABC, we have not heard from him again.

So organised labour is out in the cold again!!!

BEMAWU has won another case at the CCMA

BEMAWU has won another case at the CCMA.

Member Mr Steven Carlton worked for the SABC for several years on a fixed-term contract. These contracts were rolled-over very time it came to an end. At the end of his last contract he was offered a longer contract but for a total different, lower position. He rejected the contract on the basis of a reasonable expectation that his contract would be renewed on similar of better terms. The CCMA ruled in his favour and awarded him compensation.

This once again confirms that an employer cannot roll over contracts and then simply decide to terminate it. A fixed-term contract is primarily meant for non-permanent positions.

If you have been on a fixed-term/freelance contract for a number of years and you want it to be converted into permanent employment, contact us at headoffice@bemawu.org.za

Salary Negotiations Update 24 July 2008

We have accepted and signed an agreement with the SABC for the 11.5% increase only. BEMAWU will enter into discussions about the multi-term with the SABC soon. We will also discuss the issue where the SABC seeks to exclude members of BEMAWU above scale 300 from the annual salary increase (a principle the other two unions agreed to and signed that their members above scale 300 must be excluded). We do not believe it is fair.

Urgent Update

The SABC has once again succeeded to create mass confusion.

The General Secretary of MWASA and Chief Negotiator, Com Albert Malgoba has once again confirmed that he did not sign the salary agreement.

The so-called ballot by the SABC is utter bad faith and has no status.

We (and the SABC) has no control over the process as one person can vote more than once. It is clear that the SABC wants employees to accept their offer. Therefore they will report back that the majority of employees has voted in favour of the offer. There is absolutely no way we can control and verify their flawed voting process.

WE THEREFORE URGE MEMBERS TO EITHER COMPLETELY IGNORE THE SO-CALLED BALLOT SENT OUT BY THE SABC, ALTERNATIVE TO REJECT THEIR OFFER. THE OFFER IS IN ANY EVENT MISLEADING, AS IT DOES NOT REFLECT THE WHOLE OFFER.

We have insisted in a letter to the Chief People's Officer that the SABC withdraws the so-called ballot with immediate effect.

Update on Salary Negotiations - 8 July 2008

The SABC is spreading rumours that some of the Unions has accepted the SABC Salary offer of 11.5% plus the multi-term.

It is false and misleading!

BEMAWU has NOT accepted the multi-term as members has voted (via this web site, sms and at the meeting) against it.

MWASA has NOT accepted the multi-term as I contacted MWASA yesterday and spoke to their Chief Negotiator and General Secretary, Com Albert Makgoba and he has assured me that MWASA has NOT accepted the SABC's offer.

Albert also assured me he had contact with the CWU and they have NOT signed and accepted the SABC's offer.

The offer being put on the table by the SABC, in terms of Percentage is not bad but is not an exceptional offer. Unions are settling on 12% currently without any multi-term.

The mandate we have received to date, via sms, this website and in the meeting is to accept the 11.5% but to reject the multi-term. If we accept the multi-term next year and the year thereafter you will automatically receive whatever CPIX of the previous year was plus 1%.

So if the CPIX at the time is sky-high and you are struggling to make ends meet, we will NOT be in a position to engage the SABC in negotiations for a better increase.

If the SABC has an exceptionally good year, which they will have as a result of 2010, we will NOT be able to approach the SABC for a better salary increase.

If bond interest rates sharply rise, (as it did this year and more than 100 000 has already lost their houses because they cannot afford the higher interest rate) we will NOT be in a position to approach the SABC for a better salary increase, as CPIX EXCLUDES bond interest rates.

We will again send out an sms to ballot you to either reject or accept the salary offer as it stands.

The offer is 11.5% plus the multi term.

Please do not vote with anything else than ACCEPT or REJECT.

If you want to accept the 11.5% with the multi-term, vote ACCEPT.
If you want to accept the 11.5% without the multi term vote REJECT, as the 11.5% without multi-term is NOT on the table from the SABC's side at this point in time.

If you haven't received any sms's, please sms your number to 0829208669.