The purpose of this paper is to present a study that examines the underlying stucture of work/family conflict. Research has shown that reducing work/family conflict is beneficial to both employees and the organization by reducing turnover and increasing satisfction, production and commitment to the organization.

MPM / Oliver Tambo Institute of Governance and Policy Studies

Thesis (MPhil)--Stellenbosch University, 2005. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: HIV-positive employees that receive treatment for HIV/AIDS by having their employers pay for the treatment are being taxed on their lifesaving HIV benefits paid by their employer. This comes after the Commissioner of Inland Revenue (CIR) or South African Revenue Service (SARS) identified the provision of treatment by employers as a “fringe benefit” in terms of paragraphs 2(e), 2(h) and 2(i) of the Seventh Schedule to the Income Tax Act1 and as such is taxable if the treatment is given from the work place. The treatment contribution is included in an employee’s remuneration package as a fringe benefit. Pay-as-you-earn (PAYE) and other assessed taxes are calculated from that. The taxable benefit is included on the employees’ annual IRP5 certificates. In order for the employer’s Human Resources department to affect this on the IRP 5 certificates the affected employee has to disclose his HIV/AIDS status and accordingly pay the PAYE on the fringe benefit. In terms of paragraph 2(e) of the Seventh Schedule to the Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962, any service rendered at the expense of the employer to the employee, whether by the employer or by some other person, which has been utilised by the employee for private or domestic use, such value of the service must be included in the employee’s consideration for remuneration. Paragraph 2(h)2 taxes the employees on debts paid by the employer on behalf of the employees and paragraph 2(i)3 taxes a one third contribution benefit back in the hand of an employee for contributions to medical aids. If the employee were to receive chronic medication from a medical aid for HIV/AIDS treatment this will be included in the fringe benefit tax as a medical contribution.The Employment Equity Act No. 55 of 19984 promotes the elimination of unfair discrimination in the work place and ensures the implementation of Employment Equity to redress the effects of discrimination. Above all it also promotes the constitutional right to equality. In terms of confidentiality of the employees HIV/AIDS status; the Income Tax Act No. 58 of 1962 (Income Tax Act)5 as interpreted seems to be in conflict with the Employment Equity Act No. 55 of 1998. A solution therefore has to be sought where: - The anonymity of an employee in terms of his/her HIV/AIDS status is protected as envisaged by the Employment Equity Act6. - It is also necessary to understand whether there is in fact conflict between the Income Tax Act7 and the Employment Equity Act8. - It is also necessary to establish whether there are any misconceptions in the interpretation of the legislation and - Try to find the best possible solution to minimise the impact of Income Tax and yet protect the confidentiality of the employees concerned. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: MIV-positiewe werknemers wat behandeling vir MIV/VIGS ontvang by hul werkgewers word belas op hul lewensreddende MIV voordele wat deur hul werkgewers betaal word. Hierdie word bepaal nadat die Kommisaris van Binnelandse Inkomste (KBI) of die Suid- Afrikaanse Belastingsdiens (SAB) die voorsiening van behandeling deur werkgewers ag as ‘n belastingbyvoordeel in terme van paragrawe 2(e), 2(h) en 2(i) van die Sewende Skedule van die Inkomste belastingwet9 indien die diens gelewer word buite die werksplek. Die bydrae tot behandeling word ingesluit in die werknemer se vergoedingspakket as ‘n belasbare byvoordeel. Werknemersbelasting of LBS en ander aangeslaande belastings word hiervandaan bereken. Die byvoordeel word op die werknemer se IRP5 sertifikaat aangedui. Om hierdie aan te dui op die IRP5 sertifikaat van die geaffekteerde werknemer moet die werknemer se MIV status aan die werkgewer se Menslike Hulpbron departement bekend wees om die nodige byvoordeel te bereken. In terme van paragraaf 2(e)10 van die Sewende Skedule van die Inkomste Belastingwet nr. 58 van 1962, word enige diens gelewer deur die werkgewer namens die werknemer, of deur die werkgewer of deur sekere ander persone, wat gebruik word deur die werknemer vir privaat en huishoudelike gebruik geag as vergoeding te wees en die diens moet ingesluit wees in die vergoedingspakket. Paragraaf 2(h)11 belas die werknemers op skuld betaal namens die werknemer deur die werkgewer en paragraaf 2(i)12 belas een derde van die bydrae terug in die hand van die werknemer vir bydraes betaal deur die werkgewer aan mediese fondse. Indien die werknemer kroniese medikasie ontvang van die mediese fonds vir MIV/VIGS behandeling sal dié belas word as ‘n belasbare byvoordeel. Die Gelyke Indiensnemingwet nr 55 van 199813 bevorder die eliminasie van ongeregmatige diskriminasie in die werksplek en verseker dat die implementasie van die wetgewing die impak van diskrimasie reg aanspreek. Die wetgewing bevorder die konstitisionele reg tot gelykheid. In terme van die vertroulikheid van die MIV/VIGS status van werknemers bleik die Inkomstebelastingwet in konflik te wees met die Gelyke Indiensnemingswetgewing. ‘n Oplossing moet dus gevind word, waar: - Die anonimiteit van die werknemers in terme van hul MIV/VIGS status beskerm word soos veronderstel word in die Indiensnemingsekwiteitswetgewing - Dit is ook nodig om te verstaan of daar inderdaad konflik is tussen die onderskeie wetgewings, naamlik die Inkomstebelastingwet en die Indiensnemingsekwiteitswetgewing. - Dit is ook belangrik om te bepaal of daar enige miskonspesies in die interpretasie van die wetgewing is en - Om te probeer om die bes moontlike oplossing te vind om die impak van Inkomstebelasting te verminder en terselfdertyd die konfidensialiteit van die werknemers te verseker.

Thesis (M.S., Strategic Studies) -- Army War College (Carlisle Barracks, Pa.) / Title from title screen (viewed June 10, 2009). "25 March 2008." "ADA479725"--URL. APPROVED FOR PUBLIC RELEASE. Includes bibliographical references (p. 20-24). Also issued in paper format.

The inadequate housing allowance, rental allowance, taxable subsidies and housing shortages in developing countries are some of the challenges of the 21st century. Namibia is no exception. The study is aimed at figuring out whether government actions and interventions are meant to address homelessness challenges for low-income households. Furthermore, the research problem is broadened to gain insight on the effects from four countries’ housing policies as covered in the study; namely Namibia, Botswana, Nigeria and South Africa. The literature review undertaken proved that Botswana and South Africa have the best housing allowance schemes for public servants below management cadres, and have already successfully addressed public housing problems in their respective countries. Other findings of the study are; land shortage for housing development, housing affordability problems, escalating prices for building materials, lack of intergovernmental relations systems, unemployment and low incomes. Several recommendations include; to assist the Namibian government to emulate good examples of Botswana and South Africa, especially by providing land free of charge to its citizens (in the case of Botswana), solve financial institutions’ attitude of denying low-in-come earners loans, review housing allowances, rent allowances and subsidies every two years, increase government/member contribution ratios to either 50 percent or 100 percent due to high inflation rates. Stop distorting housing market prices by property developers and come up with a housing pricing policy for Namibia. / Public Administration / M.A. (Public Administration)

In any given week glance through the nation's leading newspapers and popular magazines and chances are you will find an article on the nation's medically uninsured. In chiding a country that allows 16% of its citizens to suffer the risks associated with that lack of insurance, reference is frequently given to the exemplary coverage provided to federal government employees by the Federal Employees Health Benefits Program. What of the benefits provided to state government employees? How good is the coverage, and, of particular interest, are there significant variations across states and what factors might contribute to those differences? This study assesses the level of health care benefits afforded to state government employees in all fifty states and considers the potential impact of political ideology, political culture, economic conditions and public employee union membership in influencing variations in those benefits across the states. The state paid portion of a family’s health care premium was adjusted to allow for differences in health care costs across the states resulting in a range of the level of benefits from $318 per month in Mississippi to $1834 per month in New Hampshire. A state’s economic condition, the level of public union membership, and a moralistic political culture were all shown to have a positive association with the level of benefits. Political ideology, defined as the degree of liberalism, was, however, not shown to have a statistical association. Understanding health care benefit differences between states and the factors that drive those differences has the potential of improving lives and the functioning of state governments. Scant information on those differences exist in the current literature; this study has developed a baseline of information and an assessment of driving influences that will, hopefully, stimulate additional approaches and research efforts. Benefits, in general, have been shown in the literature to impact the ability of state governments to attract and maintain employees of merit. Advocates of increased benefits can utilize these study results to place their requests in a broader context.