Challenges of post-apartheid state-owned company pension fund reform: a case study of the controversy around the Transnet-Transport Pension Fund
- Authors: Goqoza, Noluyolo Juliet
- Date: 2015
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/54766 , vital:26610
- Description: This thesis examines the restructuring of the pension funds of Transnet, a South African state-owned company involved in transportation, from the 1990s. Two of its main pension funds, the Transport-Transnet Pension sub-Fund (TTPF) and the Transnet Second Defined Benefit Fund (TSDBF), have been surrounded by controversy, with major court actions brought by aggrieved pensioners in 2006-2012 and again from 2013, and smaller cases in 1997-1999 and 2004. (There were also a number of smaller cases, mostly unsuccessful, but the thesis will not examine them). The case that started in 2013 is the biggest class action in the country‟s history, and makes claims of serious mismanagement and bad faith against the Transnet management. But the fundamental grievance is that (according to the 2013 legal case) “more than 80% of pensioners earn less than R4 000.00 a month… 62 % earn less than R2 500.00… 45% of the pensioners earn less than the state‟s ordinary old-age pension” grant for the poor. Although that case is ongoing, this thesis examines the background and controversies that frame the case. It provides an overview of the history and development of the South African pensions system and South African state-owned companies; it examines how these have been shaped by the apartheid and post-apartheid periods, and by the rise of neo-liberalism; it examines the evolution of Transnet and its pensions systems, from the early days of the South African Railways and Harbours Administration (SAR&H, formed 1910), to its restructuring into the South African Transport Services (SATS) in 1982, and then into Transnet in 1990. The thesis shows that the operations of the TTPF and TSDBF, which are closed to new members, have had serious effects on pensioners that rely upon them. Pensions are very low (the main reason for the various court cases), and this is for a range of reasons. Annual increases in pensions are formally set at below-inflation levels, leading to falling real incomes. More pressure on pensioners‟ livelihoods has arisen from Transnet‟s cuts to other benefits, like the medical aid Transmed, provided to pensioners. While the schemes are solvent, the pensions generally started at a low base, partly because most pensioners were relatively poorly paid workers before retirement (and the pensions were linked to former salaries). There is also a racial dimension: while most white workers at SAR&H/ SATS and Transnet were poorly paid, black, Coloured and Indian workers were paid even worse, and, further, were only brought into the pension schemes late. Both TTPF and TSDBF are defined benefit funds, which means members are guaranteed specific benefits at retirement, with the employer obligated to inject funds to meet shortfalls where needed. Yet neither the state nor Transnet has been willing to take actions to lift the basic pensions, such as investments into the funds, or to make systematic ex gratia payments to bring the pensions to a reasonable level, to remove historic racial inequalities between pensioners, to increase medical aid co-payments or coverage or to otherwise address the pensioners‟ situation. It does not seem that the reason for the problems is that the two funds have been severely mismanaged or asset-stripped, as alleged in the 2013 class action: it must be noted that both funds report surpluses. But the surpluses are possible because the pensions are low and falling in real terms, and the numbers of pensioners declining due to deaths. It seems clear that Transnet is unable or unwilling to act to decisively improve the situation of the pensioners: ensuring a surplus on existing pension funds is a major goal. This is partly because Transnet itself has ongoing financial problems, and partly because it operates in the context of neo-liberal restructuring, like corporatisation, commercialisation and privatisation, which places limits on the additional funding of the funds. At the same time, the pensioners have very little real, as opposed to a nominal, say in the administration of the pension schemes, limiting their ability to affect the rules and administration or raise issues. The thesis seeks to use historical institutionalism, which sees policies and major institutions, including state-owned companies, as shaped by power and conflict, especially between classes. This is used to try and explain changing state policies and the changing role and actions of state-owned companies, as a way of understanding Transnet‟s actions, as well as its treatment of its pensioners.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Goqoza, Noluyolo Juliet
- Date: 2015
- Language: English
- Type: text , Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/54766 , vital:26610
- Description: This thesis examines the restructuring of the pension funds of Transnet, a South African state-owned company involved in transportation, from the 1990s. Two of its main pension funds, the Transport-Transnet Pension sub-Fund (TTPF) and the Transnet Second Defined Benefit Fund (TSDBF), have been surrounded by controversy, with major court actions brought by aggrieved pensioners in 2006-2012 and again from 2013, and smaller cases in 1997-1999 and 2004. (There were also a number of smaller cases, mostly unsuccessful, but the thesis will not examine them). The case that started in 2013 is the biggest class action in the country‟s history, and makes claims of serious mismanagement and bad faith against the Transnet management. But the fundamental grievance is that (according to the 2013 legal case) “more than 80% of pensioners earn less than R4 000.00 a month… 62 % earn less than R2 500.00… 45% of the pensioners earn less than the state‟s ordinary old-age pension” grant for the poor. Although that case is ongoing, this thesis examines the background and controversies that frame the case. It provides an overview of the history and development of the South African pensions system and South African state-owned companies; it examines how these have been shaped by the apartheid and post-apartheid periods, and by the rise of neo-liberalism; it examines the evolution of Transnet and its pensions systems, from the early days of the South African Railways and Harbours Administration (SAR&H, formed 1910), to its restructuring into the South African Transport Services (SATS) in 1982, and then into Transnet in 1990. The thesis shows that the operations of the TTPF and TSDBF, which are closed to new members, have had serious effects on pensioners that rely upon them. Pensions are very low (the main reason for the various court cases), and this is for a range of reasons. Annual increases in pensions are formally set at below-inflation levels, leading to falling real incomes. More pressure on pensioners‟ livelihoods has arisen from Transnet‟s cuts to other benefits, like the medical aid Transmed, provided to pensioners. While the schemes are solvent, the pensions generally started at a low base, partly because most pensioners were relatively poorly paid workers before retirement (and the pensions were linked to former salaries). There is also a racial dimension: while most white workers at SAR&H/ SATS and Transnet were poorly paid, black, Coloured and Indian workers were paid even worse, and, further, were only brought into the pension schemes late. Both TTPF and TSDBF are defined benefit funds, which means members are guaranteed specific benefits at retirement, with the employer obligated to inject funds to meet shortfalls where needed. Yet neither the state nor Transnet has been willing to take actions to lift the basic pensions, such as investments into the funds, or to make systematic ex gratia payments to bring the pensions to a reasonable level, to remove historic racial inequalities between pensioners, to increase medical aid co-payments or coverage or to otherwise address the pensioners‟ situation. It does not seem that the reason for the problems is that the two funds have been severely mismanaged or asset-stripped, as alleged in the 2013 class action: it must be noted that both funds report surpluses. But the surpluses are possible because the pensions are low and falling in real terms, and the numbers of pensioners declining due to deaths. It seems clear that Transnet is unable or unwilling to act to decisively improve the situation of the pensioners: ensuring a surplus on existing pension funds is a major goal. This is partly because Transnet itself has ongoing financial problems, and partly because it operates in the context of neo-liberal restructuring, like corporatisation, commercialisation and privatisation, which places limits on the additional funding of the funds. At the same time, the pensioners have very little real, as opposed to a nominal, say in the administration of the pension schemes, limiting their ability to affect the rules and administration or raise issues. The thesis seeks to use historical institutionalism, which sees policies and major institutions, including state-owned companies, as shaped by power and conflict, especially between classes. This is used to try and explain changing state policies and the changing role and actions of state-owned companies, as a way of understanding Transnet‟s actions, as well as its treatment of its pensioners.
- Full Text:
Evaluating support service co-operation in the Netcare-Settlers public private partnership, Grahamstown, South Africa
- Authors: Mahote, Tulisa
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Settlers Hospital , Netcare 911 , Public-private sector cooperation -- South Africa -- Grahamstown , Privatization -- South Africa , Medical care -- Privatization -- South Africa , Health services accessibility -- South Africa , Contracting out -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: vital:3408 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1020834
- Description: The neo-liberal restructuring of state assets and facilities, which has taken place internationally over the past three decades, as well as in South Africa, has been a matter of great controversy. Privatisation, in particular, has been a polarising issue, especially when applied to fields like healthcare. Supporters of privatisation view it as cutting costs, mobilising funding, expertise and innovation, resulting in improved delivery, and opening possibilities for a spread of ownership. Critics claim the process involves retrenchments, declining services for the (poorer) majority of people, and a focus on the elites as citizens become transformed into customers, and with any economic empowerment going to the already prosperous. This thesis examines these issues by looking at the privatisation of hospitals in South Africa, with a case study of the Netcare-Settlers Public Private Partnership (PPP) (also known as the Settlers Private Hospital) in Grahamstown, South Africa. Netcare is South Africa’s largest private hospital company, and also has substantial operations in the United Kingdom. The thesis sets out the context: a highly inequitable healthcare system in the country, the rise of privatisation in the apartheid and post-apartheid eras, and healthcare privatisation. In terms of the Netcare-Settlers PPP, the thesis examines how the PPP was structured and developed, focusing on the impact of the PPP on non-clinical operations. The thesis argues that the results of the PPP are mixed, that it has greatly improved areas like facilities, maintenance, cleaning and catering, performed less well in increasing the doctor/ patient ratio or in attracting specialists, and is associated with the widespread and problematic use of outsourcing of service workers like cleaners and security. Overall, the PPP has improved healthcare, with some effective sharing of resources between the public and private parts of the hospital, but also relies on a pool of relatively low waged, under-unionised, labour. In terms of the general debate over privatisation, the Netcare-Settlers PPP shows that both supporters and critics have some valid points, and that privatisation in practice is not an either/ or, black/ white, good/ bad proposition, but something more complex. The success and failure of PPPs depend on the details of the contracts, and these can be used to maximise the performance of both the public and private partners. Better contracts may help avoid the uneven results seen at institutions like the Netcare-Settlers PPP.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Mahote, Tulisa
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Settlers Hospital , Netcare 911 , Public-private sector cooperation -- South Africa -- Grahamstown , Privatization -- South Africa , Medical care -- Privatization -- South Africa , Health services accessibility -- South Africa , Contracting out -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: vital:3408 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1020834
- Description: The neo-liberal restructuring of state assets and facilities, which has taken place internationally over the past three decades, as well as in South Africa, has been a matter of great controversy. Privatisation, in particular, has been a polarising issue, especially when applied to fields like healthcare. Supporters of privatisation view it as cutting costs, mobilising funding, expertise and innovation, resulting in improved delivery, and opening possibilities for a spread of ownership. Critics claim the process involves retrenchments, declining services for the (poorer) majority of people, and a focus on the elites as citizens become transformed into customers, and with any economic empowerment going to the already prosperous. This thesis examines these issues by looking at the privatisation of hospitals in South Africa, with a case study of the Netcare-Settlers Public Private Partnership (PPP) (also known as the Settlers Private Hospital) in Grahamstown, South Africa. Netcare is South Africa’s largest private hospital company, and also has substantial operations in the United Kingdom. The thesis sets out the context: a highly inequitable healthcare system in the country, the rise of privatisation in the apartheid and post-apartheid eras, and healthcare privatisation. In terms of the Netcare-Settlers PPP, the thesis examines how the PPP was structured and developed, focusing on the impact of the PPP on non-clinical operations. The thesis argues that the results of the PPP are mixed, that it has greatly improved areas like facilities, maintenance, cleaning and catering, performed less well in increasing the doctor/ patient ratio or in attracting specialists, and is associated with the widespread and problematic use of outsourcing of service workers like cleaners and security. Overall, the PPP has improved healthcare, with some effective sharing of resources between the public and private parts of the hospital, but also relies on a pool of relatively low waged, under-unionised, labour. In terms of the general debate over privatisation, the Netcare-Settlers PPP shows that both supporters and critics have some valid points, and that privatisation in practice is not an either/ or, black/ white, good/ bad proposition, but something more complex. The success and failure of PPPs depend on the details of the contracts, and these can be used to maximise the performance of both the public and private partners. Better contracts may help avoid the uneven results seen at institutions like the Netcare-Settlers PPP.
- Full Text:
The developmental impact of non-contributory social grants in South Africa : a study of Ezibeleni, Queenstown
- Authors: Xaba, Mzingaye Brilliant
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Economic assistance, Domestic -- South Africa , Poor -- South Africa -- Queenstown , Poverty -- South Africa -- Queenstown , South Africa -- Economic conditions -- 1991- , South Africa -- Social conditions -- 1994-
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: vital:3402 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1018919
- Description: Amartya Sen argued that poverty was the “deprivation” of the capability to lead a “good life”, therefore ending poverty meant meeting basic physical and social needs, and enabling meaningful economic and political choices. The principal objective of this research was to investigate whether (and if so, in what ways) post-apartheid state-provided non-contributory cash social grants in South Africa reduced “poverty” in Sen’s sense. This thesis used Ezibeleni, a historically black working class township at Queenstown, in the Eastern Cape, as a reference area. Using in-depth interviews, it found that social grants did help reduce poverty, both in terms of helping meet basic needs and enabling grant recipients to make more choices, including facilitating job searches and small businesses. However, it was also found that grants fall short of ending poverty, as the grants were too small to adequately cover basic needs in the context of large family sizes, a serious and long-term lack of resources, persistent unemployment, and high indebtedness, and could also enable only a limited expansion of choices. The grants played a positive role, but were inadequate to remove the “unfreedoms” facing the poor.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Xaba, Mzingaye Brilliant
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Economic assistance, Domestic -- South Africa , Poor -- South Africa -- Queenstown , Poverty -- South Africa -- Queenstown , South Africa -- Economic conditions -- 1991- , South Africa -- Social conditions -- 1994-
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: vital:3402 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1018919
- Description: Amartya Sen argued that poverty was the “deprivation” of the capability to lead a “good life”, therefore ending poverty meant meeting basic physical and social needs, and enabling meaningful economic and political choices. The principal objective of this research was to investigate whether (and if so, in what ways) post-apartheid state-provided non-contributory cash social grants in South Africa reduced “poverty” in Sen’s sense. This thesis used Ezibeleni, a historically black working class township at Queenstown, in the Eastern Cape, as a reference area. Using in-depth interviews, it found that social grants did help reduce poverty, both in terms of helping meet basic needs and enabling grant recipients to make more choices, including facilitating job searches and small businesses. However, it was also found that grants fall short of ending poverty, as the grants were too small to adequately cover basic needs in the context of large family sizes, a serious and long-term lack of resources, persistent unemployment, and high indebtedness, and could also enable only a limited expansion of choices. The grants played a positive role, but were inadequate to remove the “unfreedoms” facing the poor.
- Full Text:
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »