Thesis (Ph. D.)--Illinois State University, 1986. / Title from title page screen, viewed July 14, 2005. Dissertation Committee: Ronald S. Halinski, Mary Ann Lynn (co-chairs), Charles E. Morris, Jeanne B. Morris, Thomas W. Nelson. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 90-93) and abstract. Also available in print.

Thesis (M.S.)--Michigan State University. Dept. of Agricultural Economics, 2008. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed on Aug. 4, 2009) Includes bibliographical references (p. 121-127). Also issued in print.

Thesis (M. Phil. (Communication Management))--University of Pretoria, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references. Available on the Internet via the World Wide Web.

Thesis (M.S.)--Wisconsin. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 67-72).

Thesis (Ph. D.)-University of Queensland, 1999. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed Nov. 13, 2009). Includes bibliographical references and index.

Although affirmative action is a beacon of hope for millions of South Africans, it is unfortunately also a source of potential unrest amongst the minority groups, since personal security and integrity in interpersonal relationships between races are being threatened. In light of this it seems as if the government of the day is challenging universal principles by means of their affirmative action policy which may lead to distrust and broken relationships. The aim of this study is to investigate the potential impact of affirmative action on characteristics of interpersonal relationships by means of a Personal and Professional Leadership perspective. In order to accomplish the aim and objective of this study, the following specific goals are set for this research essay: § to identify and describe characteristics of interpersonal relationships by means of a Personal and Professional Leadership perspective; § to identify and describe features of discrimination; § to identify and describe features of affirmative action; § to investigate possible implications of affirmative action for characteristics of interpersonal relationships. / Prof. D.P.J. Smith

South Africa’s history as a nation is replete with examples of inequality and unfair discrimination. The working arena was no exception to the rule. In fact, it was one of the areas where inequality was most prevalent. Discriminatory legislation was promulgated under the Apartheid regime. These laws enforced differential treatment of employees along racial lines. After 1994, the newly democratic South Africa, through the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Constitution”), regarded all people as equal before the law and entitled to equal benefit and protection under the law. National legislation was subsequently promulgated to give effect to this constitutional objective. The Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the “EEA”), specifically, gave effect to all employees’ constitutional right to equality in the workplace. Under the EEA, unfair discrimination was forbidden. The EEA also required employers to implement measures to eradicate the injustices of the past. Subsequent to the enactment of the EEA, the Courts reiterated two tests to determine whether unfair discrimination had taken place in the workplace. It also tested whether an affirmative action measure could justify such unfair discrimination. These two tests, referred to in Harksen v Lane NO and others (CCT9/97) [1997] ZACC 12 (11) BCLR 1489 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Harksen test”) and Minister of Finance v Van Heerden 2004 (11) BCLR 1125 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Van Heerden test”), were unfortunately applied by the Courts in an inconsistent manner. This created confusion about which test found application in specific circumstances. The Constitutional Court then clarified the confusion through the South African Police Service v Solidarity obo Barnard (2014) ZACC 23 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Barnard” decision”). It is important to note that this study does not seek to evaluate the correctness of the Barnard decision, nor does it consider the cases prior to the Barnard decision. Rather, this study considers the extent to which the Barnard decision informed later cases dealing with unfair discrimination and affirmative action. In the remaining chapters of this treatise the writer will attempt to answer this question as follows: In chapter two, the legislative framework applicable to issues of unfair discrimination and the application of affirmative action is discussed. Chapter three comprises of a detailed analysis of the Barnard decision. In chapters four and five the writer investigates how the Barnard decision informed four recent cases concerning affirmative action and unfair discrimination in the workplace. These discussions enabled the writer to, in the final chapter; conclude that all four cases were indeed informed by the Barnard decision. The Department of Correctional Services case, however, reiterated the Barnard decision to its fullest extent.

D. Lit. et Phil. / The process of change can be complex and the introduction of affirmative action in South Africa against an apartheid backdrop is undoubtedly one such change. In 1998 the Employment Equity Act was passed. The purpose of the Act was to achieve equity in the workplace by promoting equal opportunity and fair treatment in employment through the elimination of unfair discrimination and; implementing affirmative action measures to redress the disadvantages in employment experienced by designated groups, in order to ensure their equitable representation iIi all occupational categories and levels in the workforce (Government Gazette, 1998). Whilst the concept is not new and has been extensively researched in several countries, it was introduced under unique circumstances in South Africa (Luhabe, 1993). There is therefore, a need for the generation of additional theories that are relevant and applicable to South Africa's unique circumstances -theories that are grounded in, and account for this area in South Africa. As Stamp (1999) put it, a grounded theory that is generated form the ground up". The present study aimed to generate theory from the lived experiences of black affi'rmative action participants in South African organisations. The study intended to look at how affirmative action is experienced by beneficiaries without prior judgement from previous literature on the subject. It aimed not to verify past theories but to understand the situation as it is experienced. Hence, the grounded theory method of analysis was chosen by the researcher. Grounded theory is a qualitative method that generates theory by the systematic collection and analysis of data (Glaser,1992). The grounded theory method of research aims to generate new theory that is grounded in the data of a substantive area. It therefore aims to create theory from the central themes and categories that emerge form the data.

No description available.

No description available.