THE Gauteng Children’s Rights Committee (GCRC) and its employees are squabbling over the change of employment contracts.
This was after the NGO announced plans to change the permanent staff’s contracts to temporary contracts.
The organisation said the decision was made because of the Gauteng Department of Social Development’s (DSD) announcement to cut funding for non-profit organisations (NPOs) in the province.
The organisation said the temporary contracts would be reviewed every year on the last day of March. It said that would be in line with the industry norms and funding availability from various funding organisations.
However, the staff said the organisation did not follow procedures when changing their contract.
They said they were told that there was no money to fund retrenchments. The company terminated their contracts without compensating staff.
They said that was unfair because the organisation had been making monthly deductions from their salaries to contribute to their pension funds.
GCRC was established in 1999, initially as a provincial structure of the National Children’s Rights Committee (NCRC), to prompt and protect the rights of children in Gauteng, through various programmes and projects that address four main areas of children’s rights: the right of a child to protection, development, survival and participation, as outlined in the legislative framework.
GCRC has offices in Braamfontein (Johannesburg), Diepsloot (north of Johannesburg) and Evaton (north of Sebokeng).
In the July 28 memorandum, GCRC said the proposal was presented by attorney and labour expert Judge Sibanda, who outlined and unpacked the new clauses in the contracts.
The letter, issued by the executive director, Mamiki Ramaphakela, stated that the organisation reserved the right, in light of the yearly services level agreement, not to renew the contract should the funding for operations and salaries be unavailable in 2024.
Ramaphakela said they were also informed about the possible withdrawal of funds in the coming years.
“Parties hereby agree that no expectation is created regarding the renewal of this contract of employment as the renewal is based on the availability of funding for the incoming year,” the letter read.
Ramaphakela said the staff were given two weeks to digest the proposal and submit their suggestions on how to deal with this “crisis”.
It was revealed in July that the DSD would be cutting funding for the NPOs in Gauteng next year. The organisations were told to source their own funding for the next financial year because they were no longer part of Premier Panyaza Lesufi’s elevated priorities.
The priorities are now poverty alleviation and substance abuse.
On Wednesday, Gauteng DSD spokesperson Nkosana Mtolo contracted Ramaphakela’s statement, saying there was no communication from the department that went to the NPOs about budget cuts.
Mtolo said his department was not aware of GCRC's proposal to staff, saying it was a contract between employer and employee.
“The NPO is an independent entity, it should have policies in place which should guide on the recruitment and retention of staff including contracting with their staff.”
GCRC and Ramaphakela did not respond to the questions sent on Tuesday.
The employees said there was something “suspicious” about the organisation’s decision, given that it had requested the service of a “bogus attorney” to make presentations.
According to media reports, Sibanda was declared a bogus attorney by the Johannesburg Magistrate Court after he and his co-accused Ziko Madikane were found guilty of fraud.
The two had defrauded the owner of News Café Newtown of more than R88 000 over a few months in 2019.
The state said the two men were not legal practitioners, not authorised to render legal services, not authorised to charge and receive fees for legal services, and not entitled to compensation for their services.
In response to the memorandum, the staff raised the following issues with Ramaphakela:
- “We humbly need clarity about the procedure that will used to change the contracts of the permanent staff members to the temporal contracts.
- During the meeting, it was mentioned that there is no money for retrenchments, therefore we would appreciate knowing how we are going to be compensated for the years of service as stated in our conditions of employment contracts.
- Under the duties on the new contract it also states that the employer serves the right to retrench the employee under certain circumstances, therefore we are of the opinion that the organisation has the means to apply this procedure as it is mentioned on the contract.
- On the new proposed contracts read by Mr Sibanda, he emphasised that the contracts will be renewed based on DSD funding availability, however, we have noted amendments on the new contract which makes us be of the opinion that it not only based on DSD funding but also on performance.
- It also mentioned under point no:3, on the new contracts that the employee confirms that she is suitably qualified, experienced, capable, and competent to perform the duties. We would appreciate further clarity on this clause as we believe that such screening was done during and after the interviews prior to our appointments with the organisation.
- Lastly, we would like to know that since DSD has not made any decision on whether or not they are funding us for 2024/2025, what are the reasons for signing the contracts now before knowing their final decision?“
In her response, Ramaphakela said the organisation made attempts to address the points raised, even in the meeting on July 28.
She said her response to clarify the issue paved the way to take the next step, adding that the organisation would await the employees’ inputs on the initial mandate they were given during the meeting.
“Namely, with provide suggestions on how to mitigate the financial challenges that are prevailing in the organisation. You are therefore provided with a final two-week period, effective August 28, in which to submit your proposals and inputs,” the letter read.