South African affirmative action law in the workplace is in its infancy. Yet some concepts in this context have already proven to be unclear or in need of interpretation, or are lacking. This thesis focuses on the beneficiaries of affirmative action in employment law. The Employment Equity Act (EEA) creates `designated groups' ─ black people, women and people with disabilities ─ as the beneficiaries of affirmative action. It lays down two requirements for beneficiaries of affirmative action which are investigated: (a) beneficiaries must be from the designated groups - in this regard, the question that arises is whether, having been categorised as disadvantaged, persons are presumed to be de facto disadvantaged and entitled to benefit from affirmative action, or whether further evidence of actual past disadvantage is required; and (b) beneficiaries must be `suitably qualified'. In addition, citizenship as a third requirement for beneficiaries of affirmative action has been mooted in case law. This is evaluated against modern interpretation theory, the Constitution and discrimination law. Against the background of a comparative investigation of the position in the US and Canada, and under international law, specific findings and recommendations are made in respect of South African affirmative action law. These relate to the interpretation of the concept `disadvantage', to a pragmatic and contextualised approach to the notion `degrees of disadvantage', to the recognition of the concept `multiple disadvantage', to the clarification of the meaning and application of the concept `suitably qualified' in a code of good practice, and to a policy decision by government to ensure that affirmative action measures apply mainly to South African citizens who otherwise qualify to benefit. To this end, certain amendments to the EEA, its regulations and codes of good practice are proposed with the aim of ensuring that affirmative action measures in fact benefit those intended by the EEA. Some projections are made to indicate the way forward for affirmative action in South Africa. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.

South African affirmative action law in the workplace is in its infancy. Yet some concepts in this context have already proven to be unclear or in need of interpretation, or are lacking. This thesis focuses on the beneficiaries of affirmative action in employment law. The Employment Equity Act (EEA) creates `designated groups' ─ black people, women and people with disabilities ─ as the beneficiaries of affirmative action. It lays down two requirements for beneficiaries of affirmative action which are investigated: (a) beneficiaries must be from the designated groups - in this regard, the question that arises is whether, having been categorised as disadvantaged, persons are presumed to be de facto disadvantaged and entitled to benefit from affirmative action, or whether further evidence of actual past disadvantage is required; and (b) beneficiaries must be `suitably qualified'. In addition, citizenship as a third requirement for beneficiaries of affirmative action has been mooted in case law. This is evaluated against modern interpretation theory, the Constitution and discrimination law. Against the background of a comparative investigation of the position in the US and Canada, and under international law, specific findings and recommendations are made in respect of South African affirmative action law. These relate to the interpretation of the concept `disadvantage', to a pragmatic and contextualised approach to the notion `degrees of disadvantage', to the recognition of the concept `multiple disadvantage', to the clarification of the meaning and application of the concept `suitably qualified' in a code of good practice, and to a policy decision by government to ensure that affirmative action measures apply mainly to South African citizens who otherwise qualify to benefit. To this end, certain amendments to the EEA, its regulations and codes of good practice are proposed with the aim of ensuring that affirmative action measures in fact benefit those intended by the EEA. Some projections are made to indicate the way forward for affirmative action in South Africa. / Jurisprudence / LL.D.

Racial and gender inequality, as well as other forms of discrimination has been a part of the South African, American and Indian histories for a very long time. Even today racial disparity is still very evident in the South African and American societies whilst discrimination based on caste is still prevalent in the Indian society. This is illustrated by continued racial discrimination and the remaining signs of societal segregation. Due to continuing disparities amongst the people, it became necessary to implement affirmative action programmes. Focusing in particular on education and jobs, affirmative action policies require active measures to be taken to ensure that blacks and other minorities enjoy the same opportunities for career advancement and school admissions that had been the nearly exclusive province of whites in SA and the USA, or for the forward castes in India. Affirmative action has been both praised and denounced, as an answer to racial inequality. One of the key issues that arise when affirmative action is discussed is whether or not affirmative action in fact promotes equality and atones for past prejudices. Another concern is whether the current affirmative action policy is the right policy to use. The issues surrounding affirmative action seems to be universal as are the circumstances. Perhaps the most widespread similarity among the programmes in these very different countries has been that group preferences and quotas are almost always discussed. The debate on affirmative action exists because it is a very divisive issue and it affects different groups of people in different ways, and some groups or persons seemingly benefit more from affirmative action than other persons or groups. In addition, it causes people to be classified into groups, and at the same time, strives to break down group barriers. It is an issue that is difficult to resolve because people have varied ideas about how the problems of racial inequality and historical discrimination should be addressed / Jurisprudence / LLD

Racial and gender inequality, as well as other forms of discrimination has been a part of the South African, American and Indian histories for a very long time. Even today racial disparity is still very evident in the South African and American societies whilst discrimination based on caste is still prevalent in the Indian society. This is illustrated by continued racial discrimination and the remaining signs of societal segregation. Due to continuing disparities amongst the people, it became necessary to implement affirmative action programmes. Focusing in particular on education and jobs, affirmative action policies require active measures to be taken to ensure that blacks and other minorities enjoy the same opportunities for career advancement and school admissions that had been the nearly exclusive province of whites in SA and the USA, or for the forward castes in India. Affirmative action has been both praised and denounced, as an answer to racial inequality. One of the key issues that arise when affirmative action is discussed is whether or not affirmative action in fact promotes equality and atones for past prejudices. Another concern is whether the current affirmative action policy is the right policy to use. The issues surrounding affirmative action seems to be universal as are the circumstances. Perhaps the most widespread similarity among the programmes in these very different countries has been that group preferences and quotas are almost always discussed. The debate on affirmative action exists because it is a very divisive issue and it affects different groups of people in different ways, and some groups or persons seemingly benefit more from affirmative action than other persons or groups. In addition, it causes people to be classified into groups, and at the same time, strives to break down group barriers. It is an issue that is difficult to resolve because people have varied ideas about how the problems of racial inequality and historical discrimination should be addressed / Jurisprudence / LLD