Many companies, given the Competition Commission’s antipathy, appear unaware that the lack of transparency in job adverts coupled with pay history questions and payslip demands, are unlawful in terms of the Constitution and the Competition Act.
Law Requires Firms To Compete for Talent
With a back peddling Public Protector, the Competition Commission refuses to engage with us regarding their unlawful conduct. #PayslipbanSA will continue to pursue action against them and add the Public Protector, after all, there’s more of us than them!
The opening statement of the Competition Act says:
To provide for the establishment of a Competition Commission responsible for the investigation, control and evaluation of restrictive practices, abuse of dominant position, and mergers; and for the establishment of a Competition Tribunal responsible to adjudicate such matters; and for the establishment of a Competition Appeal Court; and for related matters.
COMPETITION COMMISSION SOUTH AFRICA
South Africa’s labour market cartel chief, by their own definition, is the CCSA.
The Competition Commission advertises vacancies that are secretive about pay and make applicants submit current cost to company information. The CCSA sets labour market competition conditions at the lowest levels possible.
It’s confusing to understand why the current CCSA exits. Though they make busts, they break laws and money claimed from busts appears lost at treasury. Who knows what’s really going down there?!
When asked why they spy on rivals competing for talent, CCSA ignored us. Here’s CCSA’s description of a cartel, they could use this in their bio to describe how they champion the defeat of fair labour market principles in order to make inequality and espionage an ongoing reality.
CCSA enables restrictive practices: Nuturing Futures
- endorses pay secrecy in job adverts and <obviously> refuses to investigate complaints lodged against them and their dirt bag cronies
- embraces asymmetric information advantages, shamelessly demanding CTC information thus depriving applicants of an opportunity to pursue a better economic opportunity as enshrined in the Competition Act and the Constitution.
- endorses disregard for dignity by allowing a pay slip culture to perpetuate and used as a selection criteria by recruiters. This practice, reported by the public and visible on social media, discriminates against the unemployed who often fail to provide current records. Given that employer pay is kept secret during recruitment, the wages offered these candidates could be lower than those with current salary information.
- endorses the use of pay slips as a wage determinant and to unfairly price-fix rates, particularly those of women and black people
- endorses spying on rival firm pay slips prevents a fair competition for talent among firms
CCSA maintains abuse of dominant position
- Recruiters force job applicants to surrender this information or not be considered for the job
- Applicants usually submit out of fear or ignorance regarding the implications of disclosing pay information to a firm not transparent about remuneration
- Applicants who have been unemployed and fail to provide pay slips can be dropped from the recruitment process
- Firms force recruiters to obtain this information or there are no business agreements
- Firms place restrictions on wage offers based on information contained in pay slips, this is a breach of the applicants confidentiality as the firm is using information provided by the applicant – against the applicant. This is illegal and has been cross referenced with an legal case in South Africa, Dun and Bradstreet.
- Firms assume a position of dominance by unfairly forcing applicants to surrender pay expectations or pay slips
- Firms can use pay slips to poach staff from rival firms
- Firms can use pay slips to collude and agree to fix wage rates