Centurion Systems named Innovative Company of the year at 2020 SEIFSA Awards for Excellence

JOHANNESBURG, 25 NOVEMBER 2020 – In a year that has highlighted the importance of innovative thinking to drive the agility and resilience needed to dodge economic curveballs such as the COVID-19 pandemic, Centurion Systems walked away with the Most Innovative Company of the Year Award at the SEIFSA Awards for Excellence this evening.

Other winners announced at a COVID-19-compliant dinner held at Summer Place in Boksburg include Pamodzi Unique Engineering, which won the Most Transformed Company of the Year Award for the second year in a row, and Babcock Ntuthuko Engineering, which won the Health and Safety Award of the Year.
Beka Schreder took home the Award for Best Corporate Social Responsibility of the Year, while Kgabo Cars and Training & Services won the Artisan of the Year Award.

There were no entries for the Environment Stewardship Award and the Customer Service Award this year.
The annual SEIFSA Awards for Excellence promote and reward innovation and excellence in the Metals and Engineering (M&E) sector. This year’s Awards covered the period between July 2018 and December 2019 and vindicate SEIFSA’s belief that even during difficult times, there are companies in the M&E sector that display excellence and innovation at a time when many others choose to forgo these efforts in order to cut costs to survive.

Centurion Systems was selected as winner of the Innovative Company of the Year Award for creating a solution “that pushed the boundaries of speed, intelligence and technological sophistication, whilst giving a superior user experience”. Its D5 Smart gate motor had lived up to the company’s brand essence of “making lives easier”, the judges said.

Pamodzi once again received the Most Transformed Company Award, having stood out for the consistent and successful implementation of its transformation strategy over the past five years, which culminated in it achieving a level 1 status on its scorecard for 2019. The judges were especially impressed by its successful apprenticeship programme and enterprise and supplier development initiative.

Babcock Ntuthuko Engineering won the Health and Safety Award, having displayed excellence in this category through several interventions put in place to safeguard its employees. The interventions resulted in the company recording a zero disabling injury incident rate across all its business units, a performance that it has maintained for the past 24 months.

While Beka Schreder was the only entrant in the Best Corporate Social Responsibility category, the judges saw it fitting to recognise it for the work it had done in uplifting a community in one of the more impoverished areas of the country. By installing 160 LED streetlights in the East London town of Chintsa East in the Eastern Cape, Beka Shreder enabled community members to walk freely and children to play at night.

In the Artisan of the Year category, Kgabo Cars and Training & Services won for the highest activity in artisan training each year for itself and the industry. In 2019 alone, the company trained 67 apprentices at different levels.

In addition to these Awards, SEIFSA recognised the Cape Engineers and Founders’ Association with the CEO’s Award for Association of the Year. This prestigious award is presented to a SEIFSA-affiliated Association that has shown the best level of compliance, growth, participation and benefit offered to its membership and for promoting the interests of members in a specific region or sector.

HC Heat-Exchangers received the CEO’s Award for Company of the Year for having engaged with SEIFSA the most, using the Federation’s products and attending its events.

Finally, Jeffery Thomas, who is currently Director of the SA Reinforced Concrete Engineers Association (SARCEA), was honoured with the CEO’s Award for Outstanding Contribution to the Industry. Mr Thomas has played a significant role in the industry for the past 50 years. Apart from being at the forefront of various training schemes, he has served on the SEIFSA Council for the past 25 years as a representative of SARCEA.

“I congratulate all the recipients of tonight’s Awards. Each one of them demonstrates that the Metals and Engineering industry is brimming with potential and excellence, giving us the confidence that we can turn the industry’s fortunes around if we all focus on building partnerships that allow us to focus on our strengths and excellence,” said SEIFSA CEO Kaizer Nyatsumba.


Schedule 4 COID Benefit Increase

Dear Employer

COID Benefit Increase

The Minister of Employment and Labour, announced an amendment on Schedule 4 of COIDA, which provides guidance on the new way of calculating pension lump sums and monthly pension benefits made available to injured employees who have had accidents on or after the 1st of April 2019.
This amendment requires RMA to implement an increase in the monthly Constant Attendance Allowance (CAA) benefit as well as the Permanent Disability (PD) lump sums and Permanent Disability (PD) monthly pensions.

What has changed?

The new way of calculation includes the use of actual earnings for PD lump sums and PD monthly pensions and an increase in minimum and maximum compensation.

How does this impact Class IV and Class XII employees?

  • When using the actual earnings, and if the employee’s benefit amount is lower than the minimum compensation amount prescribed by the Act, RMA will pay the minimum amount to the employee. This rule applies to both PD lump sums and PD monthly pensions.
  • For the employee whose benefits are capped to the maximum compensation, RMA will ensure that an affected employee is not negatively impacted, provided that the employer has signed up for our value-added Non-COID products such as the Augmentation benefit.

Implementation of Schedule 4 of COIDA 

  • The new and backdated payment for the CAA benefit will be implemented on the 20th of November 2020 with the November month pension run.
  • The new minimum and maximum compensation based on the actual accident earnings at the time of the accident will be implemented for all new disablement benefits both PD lump sums and PD monthly pensions effective on the 24th of November 2020.
  • The new minimum and maximum compensation based on the actual accident earnings at the time of the accident will be implemented for all existing disablement benefits where the accident happened on or after the 1st of April 2019 to the 24th of November 2020.

 

This means that RMA will do a once-off back-payment to all affected beneficiaries.

We are in support of the newly gazetted legislation for Schedule 4 of the COID Act, and believe that it will ensure that beneficiaries and their families receive the care and compensation they are entitled to when they have sustained either a work-related injury or occupational disease.

You can access the recommended COID benefits here and our Employer Guide is available here to assist you when reporting occupational injuries and disease claims. 

 

Regards

RMA


Unemployment numbers reflect deepening negative impact of COVID-19 lockdown, says SEIFSA

JOHANNESBURG, 12 NOVEMBER 2020 – The Quarterly Labour Force Survey (QLFS) released today by Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) reflects the deepening negative impact of the national lockdown put in place to curb the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the overall depressed economic environment across major economic sectors, the Steel and Engineering Industries Federation of Southern Africa (SEIFSA) said today.

The QLFS data shows that South Africa's unemployment rate rose to 30.8% in the third quarter of 2020, up from 23.3% in the previous period. It is the highest jobless rate since quarterly data became available in 2008 and comes amid the ongoing pandemic lockdown, which has contributed to the depressed economic environment.

The data indicates that the number of unemployed people rose by 2.2-million to 6.5-million when compared to the second quarter of 2020. Key to note are the yearly net job losses observed in trade (400,000), manufacturing (300,000), community and social services (298,000) and construction (259,000).

SEIFSA Chief Economist Chifipa Mhango expressed concern about the job-loss trend, which he said “demonstrates lack of business activity. He said it was important that  job creation was as a consolidated effort by both the Government and the private sector in order to ensure economic recovery.

Mr Mhango said recent available data for the third quarter of 2020 suggests that the economic scenario remains bleak, following the  record GDP contraction in the second quarter of 2020 due to the pandemic. He said although the drop in manufacturing output and retail sales had eased from the second quarter, largely reflecting the gradual lifting of restrictions, it was still relatively steep. The manufacturing Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) remained mired in contractionary territory in the quarter, as did business confidence, which weighed negatively on investment activity.

Mr Mhango noted that in recent months there were signs of improvement in overall business confidence levels, and that from an M&E industry perspective, the PMI’s return to expansionary territory for the first time in 18 months, coupled with a softening decline in manufacturing output, was encouraging news.

“We expect the South African economy to rebound in 2021 as economic activity gradually recovers amid further easing of the lockdown. However, as can be seen in several European countries and the UK, which are experiencing a second wave of the COVID-19 virus, South Africans will need to be cautious and adhere to hygiene and social distancing protocols in order to ensure that the virus remains suppressed if the current recovery is to be sustained,” he said.

“The contribution of the M&E sector to overall employment remains key for the South African economy. However, persistent challenges faced by businesses in the sector, such as high electricity costs as well as disruption in its supply, rising logistics costs and imports amid low capacity utilisation, are likely to weigh negatively on the industry, thus affecting job creation in the overall manufacturing sector. It is, therefore, important that engagements between the Government and the industry on the challenges continue constructively to deal with these challenges,” Mr Mhango concluded.


How to Implement the Occupational Health and Safety Act in the Workplace

This article is a guideline of how employers or organisations can implement effective health and safety procedures and structures within their workplace. The Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Act 85 of 1993 is one of the legislative drivers, that is responsible for enforcing and creating a healthy, safe, and prepared working environment for all employees, visitors, and suppliers within the workplace.   

Coat_of_arms_of_South_Africa.Department of Labour

REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA

Occupational Health and Safety Act No. 85 of 1993

ACT

To provide for the health and safety of persons at work and for the health and safety of persons in connection with the use of plant and machinery; the protection of persons other than persons at work against hazards to health and safety arising out of or in connection with the activities of persons at work; to establish an advisory council for occupational health and safety; to provide for matters connected therewith.

Signed by The State President

________________

There are 50 sections in the Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) Act, each with its own rules and regulations and 21 different regulations with some being applicable to all companies (General Administration Regulation) and some being only applicable to certain industries (Construction Regulation).

These different sections and regulations dictate how and what the employer, employees, and whole company need to adhere to and implement, to ensure compliance and create sound OHS related practices and structures within any organization. 

What does an OHS management plan entail?

An OHS management plan is the organisation's overall plan, in the form of a detailed OHS Policy document which dictates and guides the organizations in OHS-related requirements and strategy. This comprehensive and detailed OHS Policy document can be structured in any format and contain any content, but it must address the important sections and applicable regulations of the OHS Act. The policy must be communicated to all employees within the organization, who must be made aware of specific and general OHS related content and requirements. Listed below are important elements which should be included in any OHS Policy document:  

  • OHS policy

The OHS Act states the following with regards to a Health and Safety Policy: 

Section 7 - Health and Safety policy

(1)    The chief inspector may direct

         (a)    any employer in writing; and

         (b)    any category of employers, by notice in the Gazette, to prepare a written policy concerning the protection of the health and safety of his employees at work, including a description of his organisation and the arrangements for carrying out and reviewing that policy.

(2)    Any direction under subsection (1) shall be accompanied by guidelines concerning the contents of the policy concerned.

An employer shall prominently display a copy of the policy referred to in subsection (1), signed by the chief executive officer, in the workplace where his employees normally report for service.  

The company must ensure that its OHS Policy Statement (1 page document) is signed by the CEO, framed and placed in the reception area of the workplace. This shows executive management support and commitment to OHS within the workplace. 

The detailed OHS Policy document must be published on an internal communication resource platform and be communicated to all employees and relevant external parties. The policy must be reviewed and maintained on an annual basis or if significant organizational changes occur in order to ensure its continuing suitability, adequacy, and effectiveness. 

2. Structures and Organogram

OHS team structures and organograms should be reviewed and updated regularly / every quarter to ensure that there are no non-compliances, vacancies, or gaps within the structures.  This review function can be performed by the OHS supervisors or management for each office within the organization. The OHS structure in each office location should include an OHS supervisor, OHS representatives, first aiders, fire wardens, and evacuation marshals. The OHS team members must receive training, then be appointed in writing, and then sign their appointment letters, which are to be stored on the employee’s employment file. When the OHS organogram is completed and all OHS team vacancies are filled then the organization or region or department has a thorough OHS structure within the workplace.      

3. Appointments

OHS team member appointments are a critical element of any OHS Policy and structure, as these appointees assist in managing and driving OHS generally as well as where specific matters and challenges are required. OHS team vacancies should be communicated to all employees in the offices where vacancies exist and employees requested and encouraged to volunteer and forward nominee name for the vacant positions. Management should also have input into appointing appropriate staff to attend first aid training, firefighting training, and evacuation planning training, but the OHS representatives must be appointed by fellow employees and not management. The OHS team appointment letters should be valid for a 

4. OHS committee

The OHS committee is one of the primary driving forces mandated by the CEO and management team, to assist in developing the OHS strategy and successfully managing OHS on behalf of the organization. Through communication and teamwork, the OHS committee creates and establishes documents, processes, systems, mechanisms and outputs that contribute to the success of OHS. The success of OHS is directly related to the success of the OHS committee.  

5. OHS training

All companies need to send some of their staff on OHS related training, as this is an OHS Act requirement. Employees must nominate their OHS representatives through a nomination process and the nominated representatives then represent their OHS interests at the quarterly OHS committee meetings. The employer or management may not nominate the OHS representatives. Employees are encouraged to volunteer, or suggest suitable nominees as OHS team members, who are then trained and appointed into the various OHS disciplines, namely First Aiders, Firefighters, Evacuation Marshals, and OHS Representatives. Once trained, each OHS team member is appointed in writing and together take an active role in implementing and managing OHS in each office within the organization. The duration of the OHS training is as follows:

  • First Aiders - 2 days;  
  • Firefighters - 1 day;
  • Evacuation Marshals - 1 day;  
  • OHS Representatives - 1 day;
  • OHS Supervisor - 2 days;
  • OHS Specialist / Officer.

The OHS training must be completed through an HWSETA and Department of Labour accredited training company like SEIFSA and Absolute Health Services. This will ensure that the OHS team knows how to implement and perform their duties correctly and assist in creating a healthy, safe, and prepared workplace. 

6. OHS equipment

OHS and emergency equipment must be strategically placed in all office locations of the entire organization, to be utilized by the OHS teams in emergencies or evacuation drills. This equipment is a critical element of an effective OHS strategy. The OHS team members must check the equipment at 3-monthly intervals and ensure that all the equipment such as:

  • first aid boxes, 
  • firefighting equipment, 
  • evacuation plans, 
  • loud and clear devices or hailers etc.

are serviced and in a good condition. This equipment may not be tampered with or used unnecessarily by anyone. When the OHS strategy is developed, there must be funds allocated for the purchase of OHS equipment. The OHS Act states the following with regards to OHS equipment: 

Section 15 - Duty not to interfere with, damage or misuse things

No person shall intentionally or recklessly interfere with, damage or misuse anything which is provided in the interest of health or safety.

What determines the complexity of implementing OHS within the workplace? 

The complexity of the OHS Policy and structure is determined by different factors of the business, department, or organization, such as: 

  • Organizational Infrastructure

The organizational structure and location of the branches and offices - if the business structure is large or has a national infrastructure, then the OHS team needs to accommodate the large structure and service all the office locations. The larger the OHS structure the more challenging successful OHS management of that large structure is.    

  • Service Offerings

The type of services offered i.e. administrative or industrial - If the business does not operate within a high-risk environment, such as an administrative business, then OHS implementation and management may be simple and easy. However, if the nature of the business is a high risk such as industrial or mining, then the OHS Policy and detail needs to be complex to address the higher risk factors. 

  • Employee Numbers

The number of employees i.e. 50 or 1500 which is similar to organizational infrastructure. If the organization is small in staff numbers then there is only a need for a small OHS structure and cost. An example of this is with less than 20 staff, there only needs to be 1 person trained in OHS training disciplines such as first aid, firefighting, evacuation marshal and OHS representative. With larger companies of over 100 employees then, for every 50 employees someone needs to be trained in these OHS disciplines and courses.      

  • Financial Implications

If the organization is financially sound and successful then the sooner OHS could be implemented, as the OHS related costs would not really have an impact. If the organization is not financially sound and struggling in a challenging environment then OHS would need to be implemented over a longer period i.e. 2 years. The financial implications are also similar to organizational structure and employee numbers, as the larger these elements then the larger the financial budget needs to be.       

The correct procedure for implementing successful OHS within the workplace

It is important to follow a procedure or process when implementing OHS. Listed below is an example of such a procedure and process management or the OHS team could utilize: 

  • Policy

Management must develop the OHS Policy ideally in consultation with the employees and their OHS representatives. This policy will detail the OHS direction/aims/objectives and commitment by management and all employees.   

  • Organising

To promote a positive OHS culture within the organization and determine the OHS roles and responsibilities and resources required, use the 4C’s method:

  • Competency of employees – knowledge, ability, training, and experience;
  • Commitment and control - allocating responsibilities, accountabilities;
  • Co-operation internally and externally – between individuals and clients;
  • Communication systems – orally, written, visible or example.
  • Planning / Implementation

Conduct an initial documented review of the organization to establish the status of the OHS systems in the organisation and then identify the hazards and risks. Thereafter set objectives and targets and set standards such as design specifications for equipment, products and services, safe systems of work, purchasing policies, emergency procedures etc to achieve the required OHS status and objectives.

  • Measurement of performance (evaluation)

Develop procedures and systems to monitor, measure, and record the OHS performance, on a regular basis at different levels within the organization. This can be achieved by “active monitoring” which includes monitoring of organisational achievements to prevent accidents and ill-health e.g. systematic inspections of equipment and premises, or “re-active monitoring” which monitors failures that have occurred e.g. accidents and near misses and dangerous occurrences, enforcement action, etc. Through this evaluation, the organization has a benchmark to strive in improving year by year.  

  • Review

This is the annual review and evaluation of the overall OHS Policy and structure by management and the OHS committee, to ensure the performance objectives have been met. There is always room for improvement in the overall structure and policy when looking after the wellbeing of all of the employees! 

 


The Changing Nature of Work

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way we work. Remote working is fast becoming the norm for many organisations as they seek to help curb the spread of the disease and keep their employees safe. However, remote working comes with its own challenges. Many employees may feel disconnected from their colleagues. They may be finding the solitude of working from home difficult to deal with. Anxiety and depression might be kicking in.  

It is safe to assume, then, that the pandemic has brought to the fore the importance of managing the personal well-being of employees. But to do that, Managers need to understand stress, anxiety and depression in the workplace in order to ensure their own wellbeing and support the mental health and personal wellbeing of their teams during this unprecedented time. 

The Strategies for Mental Health, Resilience, and Emotional Intelligence course will equip managers with this understanding. 

The course dates are as follows:

  1. November 2020
  2.  December 2020

Companies that have survived past the lockdown will agree that the two key business traits for their survival have been preparedness and resilience. However businesses that had models that were hard to digitise, highly people dependent, or heavily exposed to global supply chains were hit the hardest.  Within organisations people were forced into long periods of isolation, with serious concerns in terms of their Job Security and future survival. These were serious and justified concerns, as to whether they would be able to eventually return to their jobs. People who have been able to return to work are considered “lucky” as the unemployment statistics escalate. In returning to work the challenges for employees are still high, from the fear and anxiety about the risk of being exposed to the virus, to other personal challenges that could relate to finance, work-life balance with family responsibilities, to the increased workloads as colleagues are being retrenched. 

Whether it has already happened or is still to present in your organisation, it is important for HR Professionals to remain prepared, for staff to be overwhelmed with the global changes, and how these may have had or are still to be experienced in their lives. New research conducted by the ADP research institute, related to workplace resilience during COVID 19, found the only 19% of workers are highly resilient, with 81% being vulnerable.  These statistics were confirmed by the WHO report that indicated that bereavement, isolation, loss of income and fear arising from measures to combat the pandemic are triggering new mental health issues and escalating existing ones.

For this reason, organisations will have to step up caring for employees in this regard. They will have to make available tools and resources to help their remaining employees cope better. 

What will be important is for leadership to be empathetic to what staff may be going through. Starting with those reporting to you, the actions of showing support will cascade down to lower and lateral, layers in your organisation.  This is a period where management will be expected to reassure staff of their importance within, the organisation.This also means, taking time to invest in your staff’s up-skilling when coming to developing resilience. 

For this reason SEIFSA has set up a number of support workshops that SIFSA members can access for their staff members on “Strategies for Mental Health, Resilience and Emotional Intelligence”. Should you require, this can also be provided, In-House or Web-based to your employees. 

Furthermore on the 18th of November, we will be hosting a Webinar aimed at HR Professional and Managers on “Mental Health Strategies for Managers.” Various speakers will share their insight on this topic.

Read More


Don’t be the next Clicks

Diversity and inclusivity are strengths. An organisation that promotes diversity in its workplace gives itself the advantage of different perspectives, allowing it to make informed decisions in all its operations. Unfortunately, while many companies promote diversity and inclusivity, they go out of their way, consciously or unconsciously, to silence conversations about equality, diversity and inclusion.

As a result, organisations often neglect to address the narratives of mistrust found among diverse individuals within their businesses.

SEIFSA offers a Managing Diversity & Social Inclusion course to help businesses manage diversity within their companies. Topics covered in the course include:

  • Why managing diversity is important in the South African workplace;
  • How to promote a culture of equality between people of different races, classes, sexual preference and gender;
  • The key elements of equality and how it is dealt with in organisations; and
  • Solutions to organisational challenges related to discrimination.

For more information about this course, please click below

Read more


MEIBC Levies: Administration and Dispute Resolution Levy

The Metal and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council (MEIBC) is registered in terms of section 29(15)(a) of the Labour Relations Act, 1995. The MEIBC is a statutory body created under the LRA to provide for the co-regulation of stable and productive employment relations in the metals and engineering industries.

The MEIBC provides the necessary administrative infrastructure and technical expertise to ensure effective collective bargaining, industry compliance, dispute resolution and social protection services. 

Over the last few years, the MEIBC has faced a number of challenges. These include the extension of its collective agreements to non-parties to the Council, as well as the discharge of its dispute resolution functions under the LRA. These challenges pushed the Council to the edge of potentially being wound up under the LRA. 

In order to arrest the state of disarray in which the Council found itself, the majority of the parties, supported by the Department of Labour, agreed to approach the Labour Court with a request to place the Council under Administration. The Court considered the unopposed relief sought by the Parties and concluded that there was a need for the appointment of an Administrator and that the MEIBC was, indeed, capable of being rescued.        

The MEIBC came out of Administration at the end of February 2020, with the Court-appointed Administrator formally ending his tenure on 18 February 2020. There is no doubt that Business Rescue and Administration prevented the Bargaining Council from entering full-blown liquidation and closure.

During his term, the Administrator appointed a Council Secretary with strong accounting and corporate governance skills, presented a rehabilitation plan and budget and oversaw the gazettal and extension of the Bargaining Council’s Administration and Dispute Resolution Levy Agreements to all employers and employees in the industry. These two levies account for over 95% of the Council’s income. The Administrator was also effective in reducing overheads and stabilising the Council’s finances.

The Administration and Dispute Resolution Levies, which were gazetted and extended to all in the industry, re-introduced a levy structure that was last reviewed in 2011. These levies became legally effective on 28 October 2019 and will expire on 28 October 2020.

ADMINISTRATION LEVY

Per week Per Month
R1.72 (reduced from R2.05) R7.45 (reduced from R8.88)
  • The Administration Levy is payable by each scheduled employee, with a matching contribution paid by the employer. 

DISPUTE RESOLUTION LEVY

Per week Per Month 
R0.62 (reduced from R0.77) R2.68 (reduced from R3.37)
  • The Dispute Resolution Levy is payable by all employees, with a matching contribution paid by the employer.  

An application seeking the renewal of the gazette extending the above levies for a further 12-month period has been lodged with the Department of Employment and Labour, but the gazettal has been delayed owing to a number of factors. Unfortunately, this has resulted in a hiatus period or interruption of continuity.

In light of the fact that the majority of stakeholders represented on the MEIBC believe firmly that a properly-resourced and well-functioning Bargaining Council is in the best interests of employers and employees in the industry and is critical for the maintenance of labour market stability, the SEIFSA-affiliated Employer Associations on the Bargaining Council and all the Trade Unions have agreed to recommend and encourage their respective members to continue to make payments during this period in-between the expiry of the current agreement and gazettal of the next agreement. 

All the trade unions on the MEIBC – namely NUMSA, Solidarity, MEWUSA, UASA and SAEWA – are favourably disposed to this interim arrangement. In order to ensure the continued viability of the MEIBC during this period, we ask that affiliated member companies do the same. 

If your shop floor is not unionised, we advise that you raise this matter with your non-unionised employees and seek their agreement before continuing with the contributions to the MEIBC.

Thank you for your understanding. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call the staff of the SEIFSA Industrial Relations and Legal Division on (011) 298-9400, who will gladly assist.

Kaizer M. Nyatsumba
Chief Executive Officer

For more Information:
Lucio Trentini
Operations Director

Direct | Tel: 011 298 9414 | Cell: 082 449 6270 I E-mail: lucio@seifsa.co.za


COVID-19: Health data reporting by employers in South Africa – what you should know

Direction 4(2) of the revised COVID-19 Direction on Occupational Health and Safety in the Workplace issued by the Minister of Employment and Labour and published on 1 October 2020 (Revised OHS Direction) introduces health data reporting obligations on certain employers.

We set out below answers to some important questions that employers may ask about this reporting obligation.

Who does it apply to?

All employers who employ more than 50 employees must submit a record of the employer’s risk assessment and written health and safety policy to the Department of Employment and Labour. Employers who employ more than 50 employees in a workplace have additional health data reporting obligations in terms of Direction 4(2).

This means that if, for example, an employer:

  • employs 100 employees in total, but these employees are spread evenly across five different offices/workplaces (with 20 employees in each office/workplace); or
  • ordinarily employs 100 employees in a workplace, but 60 of those employees are currently working exclusively from home; or
  • employs 100 employees in one workplace, but these employees are coming into work on a rotational basis, such that there are only 20 employees who come into the workplace each day;

then that employer will not be required to report in terms of Direction 4(2).

On the other hand, if for example, an employer employs:

  • 100 employees in one workplace, who are attending the office on an ad hoc basis and on any given day there could be more than 50 employees at the workplace; or
  • 30 employees in one workplace (workplace A) and 70 employees in another workplace (workplace B) who are all working at the workplace, as opposed to from home;

then in respect of the first scenario, the employer will be required to report in respect of all of its employees who are physically coming into the workplace from time to time; and in respect of the second scenario, the employer will be required to report in respect of the 70 employees in workplace B only (and not the 30 employees in workplace A).

This is because, as we understand it, the Direction is only intended to apply in condensed workplaces, where more than 50 employees are physically present in the workplace at the same time.

What information must be provided?

Where the threshold described above (of 50 or more employees physically present in the workplace) is met, the below health information must be provided only in relation to those employees who are physically coming into the office (be that on a full-time, part-time or ad hoc basis). Information is not required to be submitted in respect of employees who are working exclusively from home.

Another point to bear in mind is that it is only information regarding an employer’s own employees that needs to be submitted. An employer is not required to submit information in relation to other workers who may be working on its premises and these other workers are not taken into account for purposes of determining whether the threshold number is met.

The following categories of data are required to be submitted to the National Institute for Occupational Health (NIOH):

The vulnerability status of the employees physically present at the work premises

This information is only required to be submitted on a once-off basis, and updated as necessary (e.g. as new employees are engaged or comorbidity information changes).

Importantly, when it comes to identifying the employee, an ‘EmployeeID’ is required. We understand that it is not necessary to refer to an employee’s South African ID number here. The employer can use the employee number that it assigns to employees in the ordinary course of business.

What is important is that the same Employee ID number is used each time the employer reports in respect of that individual (so that the NIOH can link the relevant data).

While the templates referred to in the Department of Health guidelines make provision for the disclosure of each employee’s particular comorbidity, this information is not mandatary. An employer will be required to confirm whether or not an employee falls into the ‘vulnerable employees’ category.

If the answer to that question is ‘yes’, then the particular comorbidity or risk factor only needs to be provided if (i) it is known to the employer and (ii) the employee has consented to the disclosure of that information to the NIOH. This consent should preferably be obtained in writing.

Details of the symptom screening of employees who are symptomatic

The remaining data must be reported on a weekly basis, every Tuesday. However, this does not necessarily mean that an employer will need to make a submission each week.

An employer is required to screen employees who enter the workplace daily, but the employer is only required to report in respect of employees who are symptomatic.

This means that the employer would only submit data in those weeks in which it has employees who have been identified at the workplace (through the screening process) as having COVID-19 symptoms.

The exact symptoms that have been displayed by the employee are not required to be identified, however, if this is known to the employer, then this information should be provided in the report.

Details of employees who test positive for COVID-19

If there are any employees who test positive for COVID-19 during a particular week, then the employer will be required to submit information regarding those employee/s in its weekly report.

When reporting a positive case, the employee’s South African ID number must be provided (in addition to any Employee ID previously provided).

The number of employees identified as high-risk contacts within the workplace as a result of exposure to a worker who has tested positive for COVID-19

In the event that there is a positive case identified at the workplace and the worker who has tested positive has come into contact with other workers at the workplace, an employer is required to assess those workers’ exposure to ascertain whether the exposure carries a high or low risk of transmission.

In the event that any of the employer’s employees are identified as being high-risk contacts, the employer will be required to submit information regarding the number of those employees when the positive case is reported.

It is possible that the positive ‘index case’ may not be the employer’s own employee (but rather another worker at the premises). In that case, the positive case will not need to be reported (because this will be reported by the worker’s employer), but the number of high-risk contacts must be reported.

Details on the post-infection outcomes of those testing positive, including the return to work assessment outcome

Where an employer has reported on any employees who have tested positive for COVID-19, the employer will be required to provide information regarding those employees’ post-infection outcomes, including their fitness to return to work, if applicable (i.e. either ‘fit for job description’, ‘fit with accommodation’, ‘temporarily unfit for job’, etc.).

How do employers submit the data?

The first step is for employers to register on the NIOH web portal (https://ohss.nioh.ac.za/Register). Once registered, the employer will receive a unique BusinessID and login credentials.

From there, employers will be able to select their preferred method for submitting their data. The following three options are currently available:

  • Manual submissions via Next Cloud: the employer can use the excel templates for reporting and manually submit the data by uploading the file onto Next Cloud; or
  • Submission via the Cmore web or mobile app: there is an application hosted by the CSIR which employers can either download or access via the web, which they can then use to submit their data onto the Cmore server; or
  • API Integration (submission using the employer’s own tools): where an employer is already using its own technology to obtain the information from its employees (such as a screening app), then the technical team at the NIOH can work with the employer to seek to integrate that technology so that the information can be shared with the NIOH.

Do employees need to consent to the submission of their health data?

No, not necessarily. Health data would be regarded as special personal information for purposes of the Protection of Personal Information Act, 2013 (POPIA). However, this information may be processed lawfully by the employer and provided to the NIOH in order to comply with its obligations under the Revised OHS Direction.

Where consent will be required, is in the event that information regarding an employee’s particular comorbidity or risk factor (which makes her/him a ‘vulnerable employee’) is shared as part of the employer’s submission (as discussed above).

Notwithstanding that an employee’s consent is not required for the submission of her/his health data, an employer is required to inform its employees that their information will be submitted to the NIOH and advise them that their data will be treated confidentially and that the NIOH will comply with its obligations under the POPIA.


Growing Unemployment Numbers Runs Counter to the Government’s Economic Recovery Plan, Says SEIFSA

JOHANNESBURG, 15 OCTOBER 2020 – The quarterly employment statistics (QES) data released today by Statistics South Africa (Stats SA) runs counter to the Government’s economic recovery plan, which needs all productive hands on deck in order to ensure success, Steel and Engineering Industries Federation of Southern African (SEIFSA) Chief Economist Michael Ade said today.

According to the QES data, the broader manufacturing sector, of which the metals and engineering (M&E) sector forms an integral part, lost 8.2% of total employment, comprising an alarming 100,000 jobs in June 2020 as compared with June 2019. There was also a corresponding decrease on a quarterly basis, with manufacturing employment decreasing by 85,000 jobs or -7.1% in quarter two when compared with quarter one.

Dr Ade said the data showed that the M&E cluster of industries had felt the double whammy of the COVID-19-induced economic lockdown and stagnant economy, as its sub-components had recorded the biggest decrease in job numbers. He said there were also decreases in employment in the basic metals, fabricated metal products, general machinery and equipment, and transport equipment sub-sectors.

The worrying trend was compounded by contemporaneous decreases in employment and business activity in important industrial sectors with high interlinkages, such as the mining and construction sectors, which both recorded job losses of 12,000 employees and 111,000 employees respectively, in June 2020 as compared with June 2019, he noted.

He said the decline in job numbers was expected for a plethora of reasons. These included the fact that the GDP figure published earlier last month for the second quarter of 2020 revealed weaker-than-expected domestic growth relative to quarter one, as local manufacturing production and sales dipped amid a generally poor business expectation following the COVID-19 storm. He said given the slack in economic activity and poor inventory turnover for businesses in manufacturing, the decrease in employment for the same period was anticipated and highlights the negative effects of subdued domestic demand conditions on jobs.

Dr Ade said  a distortion in supply chains and an increase in operational expenses and intermediate input costs for businesses has made it even more difficult to sustain jobs. As a result, companies were forced to retrench workers and offer voluntary severance packages.

He said the situation was compounded by the persistent lingering of the coronavirus pandemic regionally and globally, with extended implications for the intensity of domestic business activity and greenfield investment decisions by foreign and anchor investors.

“The concern is that as companies continue to struggle with cashflow challenges, with no delineated implementation plan regarding the novel economic recovery plan in sight, and amid the on-going coronavirus pandemic, it is hard to forestall an immediate end to the trend of poor employment numbers in the short-term.

“The galloping unemployment scourge will, no doubt, have extended socio-economic consequences as the increasing number of unemployed expend their severance packages and unemployment stipends from the unemployment insurance fund,” he said.

Dr Ade said while commendable efforts were being made by policy makers on paper to curb unemployment and reduce difficult business conditions, there was invariably a gap in co-ordinating the activities of the relevant Government departments or agencies, resulting in delays in implementation. The anticipated lag effects were compounded by unforeseen costs to businesses, also impacting negatively on confidence levels.

Dr Ade said despite these challenges, there remained a need to continuously improve business expectation and business confidence by engaging with key stakeholders, including rating agencies, on how to map a sustainable turnaround strategy.

Ends

Issued by:

Mpho Lukoto

Communications Manager

Tel: (011) 298 9411 / 082 602 1725

Email: mpho@seifsa.co.za

Web: www.seifsa.co.za


SEIFSA Announces 2020 SEIFSA Awards for Excellence Entrants

JOHANNESBURG, 15 OCTOBER 2020 – The Steel and Engineering Industries Federation of Southern Africa (SEIFSA) is pleased to announce the entrants for the sixth edition of the SEIFSA Awards for Excellence.

The Awards, which aim to promote and reward innovation and excellence in the Metals and Engineering (M&E) sector, take place at a time when the world is dealing with the fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic that broke out in Wuhan, China late last year and has since spread around the world, devastating lives, livelihoods and economies.

In South Africa, many businesses have had to close their doors, unable to survive the lockdown put in place to curb the spread of the virus. However, there are companies that were better placed to adjust to the new normal by recalibrating their businesses – manufacturers that refocused their production lines to making ventilators, or textiles companies that formed dedicated teams to make cloth face masks.

“The agility and innovation that were required to respond to the pandemic is precisely what we, as SEIFSA, seek to celebrate through these Awards,” SEIFSA CEO Kaizer Nyatsumba said.

Mr Nyatsumba said while this year’s entries were related to activities that took place before the pandemic started, the Award entrants had demonstrated the sort of commitment to excellence that would be needed to help drive economic recovery after the pandemic.

The finalists for the 2020 SEIFSA Awards for excellence are:

Most Innovative Company of Year

  • Hencon & Afriveyor Vacuum Technologies
  • Alos Holdings
  • Boikano Industries
  • Elgin Brown and Hammer
  • Mann Makhene Machinery
  • Centurion Systems
  • Sinter Metals
  • Matsway Steel

Health and Safety Award of the Year

  • Babcock Nthuthuko Engineering
  • Kaefer Thermal Contracting Services

Best Corporate Social Responsibility Programme of the Year

  • Beka Schreder

Most Transformed Company of the Year

  • Boardroom Appointments
  • Movidna Services
  • Pamodzi Unique Engineering
  • Trecento

The Artisan Award

  • Kgabo Cars Training & Services

In addition to these Awards categories, SEIFSA will also honour a member company with the CEO’s Award. That Award goes to a company that has fully engaged with SEIFSA and its services for the benefit of its employees.

The Awards will take place in a COVID-19 compliant ceremony on 24 November 2020 at Summer Place in Boksburg.

“We look forward to celebrating the winners of the SEIFSA Awards for Excellence and hope that the winners will inspire other companies to embrace innovation as they seek to find solutions to better serve their customers, employees and the communities in which they operate,” Mr Nyatsumba concluded.