Equal employment opportunities: a conceptual puzzle

Abstract

Various concepts are used in official and academic discourses on affirmative \naction in general and the transformation of the South African public service \nin particular. If what is meant by the different words is not clear, people will \nnot be able to understand each other clearly and assess the progress being \nmade with the various interventions.The purpose of this article, therefore, \nis to produce a conceptual framework that will untangle the major transfor- \nmation-related concepts in the public service. It is shown in this article that \nequality and fundamental equal employment opportunities seem to be the \nend of all the transformation-related interventions. Four criteria, prerequi- \nsites or standards (i.e., equity, justice, merit and representativeness) have \nbeen identified to assess all human resource-related interventions. Affirma- \ntive action has been shown to be a means to achieve equality and equal \nemployment in the public service. Affirmative action seems to aim, legally, \nat the enhancement of the `designated groups'. Although the designated \ngroups are defined as blacks, women and disabled, it is argued that not all \nmembers of the three designated groups will be people who are historically \ndisadvantaged persons.The article comes to the conclusion that it may be \npossible to have true equality and fundamental equal employment oppor- \ntunities based on equity, justice andmerit, without having a staff compo- \nnent representing hundred per cent of the country's population composi- \ntion. At the same time, itmay be possible to have representativeness,with- \nout having an equitable, just and merit-based staff component and without \nreal equality.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 10 citations exist upstream.