Race-horse groomers engagement

Meeting report

The Chairperson welcomed the members and allowed the secretary to outline the agenda for the day.

Mr Zolani Sakasa, Committee Secretary, outlined the agenda and submitted apologies from members who would not be attending the Committee.

The Chairperson said that the draft budget report on the Department of Labour’s budget would not be engaged as it had not been finalised yet for consideration by the Committee.

South African Grooms Association Submission (SAGA)
Mr C Simoto, Chairperson, SAGA, said that groomers had been struggling for some time to grapple with their rights as employees and to organise themselves until they had been advised to approach the Minister of Trade and Industry, Mr Rob Davies, for assistance with their grievances against their employers.

He then read through his submission.

SAGA had since 2011 been fighting for recognition and only managed to get recognition through an agreement facilitated by the Department of Trade and Industry between the National Gambling Board (NGB) and the National Horseracing Authority.  Having been recognised similarly as other associations in the horse racing industry SAGA was admitted to the Horseracing Industry Liaison Committee which processed all issues to do with horseracing. The treatment of SAGA had been nothing but disdain such that SAGA had opted to exit the liaison Committee. SAGA had then approached DTI for assistance and the DTI had initiated a process to draft a national gambling policy since 2013 that included grievances from SAGA but the policy had since stalled.
Reasons given by the DTI for that delayed process had been that it had to go through multiple processes in the National Assembly and the National Council of Providences (NCOP).
There were high levels of inequality in the industry regarding grooming as the wages were differentially set according to colour. Additionally all other associations in the horseracing industry received sponsorships and funding from the NGB with the exception of SAGA.

SAGA felt hampered in its drive to get the required recognition and assistance because there were politicians involved in horse racing.

Discussion
Mr B Martins (ANC) wanted to know about the latest response SAGA had received from the DTI, in terms of the process it had initiated through the DTI.

Mr D America (DA) noted that as it seemed that the recognition agreement had not been signed yet for SAGA the Committee unfortunately had no power to compel any employer organisations to recognise the entity. Concerning unfair treatment of grooms in terms of labour practise including unequal wages; had the SAGA considered taking those matters up with any of the registered trade unions in SA? Had those issues been raised with labour inspectors or the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA)?

Mr Simoto replied that SAGA’s last response from the DTI was that SAGA was awaiting a response to date regarding the release of the gambling policy, as that would take time to get approved.

The recognition agreement had already been signed and because SAGA was an association it had no room to approach the CCMA as it was not a union by nature. It had reported to the Department of Labour (DoL) inspector the unfair conditions grooms worked under as the written attachment submitted to the Committee evidenced. The main complaint there had been that when horses were being transported to a racing event, the groom was bundled together with the horse into the same trailer without any ventilation; or securing the groom onto something within the trailer. Past experiences had been that grooms travelling with horses had been injured if something happened to the trailer whilst in transit to a race. The DoL inspector had gone to inspect the conditions and had confirmed the report and had inquired from the National Horseracing Authority (NHA) what action it would take to rectify that. The NHA, as could be seen from the correspondence submitted, had to date not responded to the DoL request. 

Mr L Mashile (ANC) said the submission was clear and therefore the Committee would probably need to discuss a way forward but he needed clarity about whether the SAGA had lobbied its own members to join a particular union to access the services of a union.

Mr Simoto replied that indeed SAGA had attempted to convince its members but the disadvantage of joining a union was that immediately it became apparent to employers that one was unionised that meant dismissal from work. That was the reason SAGA decided to work towards getting the national gambling policy released.

Mr Mashile said there had to be a way for groomers to be unionised to receive maximum benefits of labour relations representation. On the issues of racism, benefits not accruing to grooms, and working for unregistered employers; the Committee could assist SAGA get some relief in some instances but certainly the SAGA members had to be protected because dismissal for joining a union was a threat.

The Chairperson noted the correspondence from SAGA and commented that as some of the issues were not within the ambit of the DoL the Committee would respond to Mr Simoto regarding labour related issues in due course.

Mr Simoto thanked the Chairperson adding that indeed he had been aware about which aspects of their challenges lay with the DoL hence he had approached the Committee because he had also been advised in that regard. SAGA had been struggling with getting responses from the DTI and their bigger concern was that 2019 was an election year and if SAGA’s grievances were not sorted out in 2018 their issues would fall by the wayside.

The Chairperson replied that the Committee was committing to look into labour related matters affecting SAGA. She suggested that the Committee follow up with DoL on the SAGA matters; with the director-general of DoL as well as DTI on where the processes where regarding the grooms association.

Mr America said whilst sympathetic to the grooms and what they continued to endure the Committee would not be able to assist them as SAGA needed to use its collective power to reach out to a union. There were labour issues that DoL could assist with but SAGA also had access to the CCMA when it experienced unfair labour practises. What also made issues worse was that grooms generally worked for a single employer who happened to be the racehorse owner.

Ms T Tongwane (ANC) said the Committee had to make time to do a site visit at any horse racing course to appraise itself of the challenges that grooms faced. 

Ms L Mjobo (ANC) supported Ms Tongwane’s proposal on the understanding that the   Committee’s oversight programme allowed the proposed oversight visit.

Mr Mashile said that the Committee’s researcher could work on how the oversight could be best used by the Committee but he also needed clarity and was proposing that the Committee had to determine a date where the DoL and the DTI could brief the Committee on SAGAs issues. He proposed that the Committee ask both the DoL and DTI to come and respond to the submission and correspondence submitted to the Committee by SAGA.

Mr America said he was opposed to oversight by the Committee to acquaint itself with grooms employment conditions because who would be the point of contact? Would the Committee simply do a walk about? His proposal was that if the Committee planned to engage horse race owners, it would be best to engage them through their association. He cautioned that although regrettable as it was that grooms were subjected to the reported employment conditions; there were many others in similar situations but the Committee had to refrain from being emotional in having sympathy for a particular set of employees as opposed to many others. The SAGA submission had been quite precise and succinct and therefore did not require an in loco inspection. The DoL inspectors had to do their work so that the Committee could follow up as proposed by Mr Mashile.

Mr Martins noted that a number of allegations had been made against certain people and probably it would be in the interest of justice for SAGA to provide proof to support those allegations.

The Chairperson concurred with Mr Martins that Mr Simoto had alluded to attachments he had submitted relating to the Public Protector (PP) which she still had had no sight of. She informed the Committee that Parliament had made no provision for oversight visits in the ongoing term as the Committee was tasked to deal with legislation only. Oversight would have to be parked as there was no provision and her proposal for processing the SAGA matter administratively as proposed by Mr Mashile. Furthermore she was suggesting the DoL be allowed 4 weeks to respond to communication which her office would send regarding the SAGA issues by end of business that day. Beyond the DoL’s written response the Committee would have to determine thereafter if there was a need to have a briefing.

The Committee agreed to proceed as proposed by the Chairperson.

Consideration of outstanding Draft Minutes
The Committee considered its minutes for the 14, 20, 22, 23, 27, 28 March 2018.

The minutes were adopted with technical amendments.

The meeting was then adjourned.