100 Days of Sodom
There are 33,000 vacancies in state hospitals. Government administrators have thousands more unfilled positions. And this is just in the public sector.
Clearly there is no shortage of opportunities to work and, just as clearly, the massed unemployed must be unsuitable for the work available.
Take a deep breath and read that again.
Talk to any employer in the country. They are not refusing to hire people. They are desperate to hire people. But not just any people, skilled people.
The state has allocated R 18 billion for the task which, at an average of R 2 225 per person per month (their recommendation), would employ a total of 1.6 million people per year. That would make quite a difference to the 7 million unemployed. However, consider the implications for those who benefit from the scheme.
A company contracted to refurbish a road will, of necessity, hire people. Those jobs will be filled. Under this scheme they would have to make way for those who are participating in the scheme.
Every four to five months (depending on the nature of those 100 paid days) the entire workforce will be replaced. Instead of a permanent job will come a short-term contract. The new staff will require training, safety equipment and the like. The overall cost of the project will go up as will the time taken for completion.
And it isn't much of a step up for the beneficiaries since the nature of the work won't present them with much opportunity to build a curriculum vitae.
The problem with a right to work is the same as that of a right to housing: people will fight amongst each other for who gets seniority on the list, jobs of dubious value will be created and the state entrenches the idea of short-term contractual work as a solution to unemployment.
And – you may consider this unusual coming from me – there is the potential for terrible worker exploitation.
Where does worker job security go (especially for those in the semi-skilled sectors) when everyone is entitled to 100 days of paid work? How will the state adjudicate unfair dismissal when unscrupulous companies declare that they're obeying the spirit of "100 days" when they dismiss their workforce and replace them?
There is, absolutely and without debate, a critical unemployment problem. But the solution is not in creating meaningless jobs for the unskilled. It lies in appropriately skilling the unemployed so that they can take advantage of the jobs that are available.
The billions of rands lying unspent in the SETA bank accounts are testament to the lack of training taking place.
We need nurses, we need artisans, we need builders. We need people who can fulfil a function and achieve a required outcome. We do not need people employed simply to keep them busy.
Why choose India as a role-model for job creation? Reported unemployment is not an indicator of success. India's is 7.8% and 25% of the population earns less than US$ 1 per day. Nigeria's is 5.8% but 60% of the population are below the poverty line. China's unemployment is 4.2% and only 10% of the population is below the poverty line.
Why not choose the low-waged industrial Chinese model and invite the world to invest?
Creating unnecessary jobs at the expense of the small pool of taxpayers seems an unlikely way to create long-term sustainable development.
