The debate continues at Gauteng Blog and Mzansi Afrika.

For the record (and without wanting to completely endorse either side), I think Rethabile misreads the Employment Equity Act. He writes that “equal opportunities [are] actually good, it is progressive, and it falls in line with the general direction of the eleven-year-old South Africa”, and you certainly won’t find any disagreement here. But the whole reason the Act is controversial is that it doesn’t concern itself merely with equality of opportunity. A simple ban on racial discrimination in hiring would have accomplished that. Instead, the Act attempts to enforce equality of outcomes, which is something very different indeed, and instead of forbidding companies from discriminating on the basis of race, may actually require it. (In fact, as anyone who reads the employment ads in their local classifieds will know, it frequently does.)

While we’re discussing the Employment Equity Act, it’s also worth pointing out that, like all other pieces of government regulation, it has the potential to slow down job creation and economic growth. If you own a small business, and you know that once you grow to over 50 employees you’ll have to implement a comprehensive “employment equity plan” (and face the possibility of catastrophic repercussions if you make any mistakes doing so), let’s just say that you’ll think long and hard before hiring your 49th employee. This problem isn’t specific to affirmative action; like I said, it’s a consequence of many government regulations. But it’s worth bearing in mind when we think and write about the cost/benefit scale of affirmative action.