In a recent revelation, Employment and Labour Minister Thulas Nxesi has stirred controversy with his proposal to utilize surplus funds from the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) and the Compensation Fund for ambitious job creation projects. The minister aims to allocate a substantial amount of R15 billion before the end of the financial year in March 2024, with the goal of generating 2 million jobs.
Critics argue that this move mirrors a typical strategy employed by the ruling party, risking the job security of workers in a calculated move seemingly timed for political gains in an election year.
The UIF and the Public Investment Corporation (PIC), and consequently the Government Employees Insurance Fund (GEPF), have often become targets for such unconventional schemes by the ruling party. Funds earmarked for specific purposes, such as the UIF, have been redirected to address unrelated challenges, such as bailing out state-owned enterprises. The PIC has experienced instances of workers’ money being lost due to extended loans not being repaid, leading to write-offs.
The UIF, already grappling with issues like the controversial R5 billion job creation deal involving Thuja Capital and the subsequent fallout, has been criticized for its dysfunctional state. Reports indicate that ex-mineworkers presenting their blue cards at UIF offices are being turned away, leaving some to pass away without accessing the benefits of their UIF contributions.
The UIF serves a clear purpose – to provide support and security for South African workers in the unfortunate event of job loss. The practice of diverting funds from entities like the PIC, GEPF, and the UIF for political purposes is being condemned as morally wrong and detrimental to workers’ security.
Calls are now being made for the portfolio committee for labour and South African unions to hold Minister Nxesi accountable for his plans. The United Democratic Movement expresses strong disapproval of Minister Nxesi’s proposal, urging him to halt any plans to use UIF funds for purposes other than its intended mission – assisting those who have contributed to safeguard their employment insurance. The debate surrounding this issue is likely to intensify as stakeholders seek clarity on the minister’s controversial proposal.
