Back-handed Support for New South African Labor Law?

Given the fact she is an attorney and head of the labour law department at a large firm, we'll give Susan Stelzner's motivation the benefit of the doubt in an article she wrote for the Sunday Times in South Africa "Disability in the Workplace - Restrain that Axe-hand and Stay Legal," http://www.suntimes.co.za/2003/03/23/business/news/news12.asp.

Attempting to educate South African businesses of new rights in the workplace for people with disabilities, she seems more intent on protecting businesses from a new form of pesky lawsuits than educating businesses on the beneficial aspects of providing equal rights to persons with disabilities.

"The disabled enjoy new rights," Stelzner warns. "Changes to various laws have created rights and opportunities for people who suffer (my italics) from disabilities . . . It is only a matter of time before cases involving disability rights start hitting the headlines . . . ."

Though she does provide guidelines on resources necessary for businesses to implement and provide protection of rights for people with disabilities in the work place, the tone of Stelzner's article is defensive - businesses must protect themselves from the threat of litigation.

For someone who seems so concerned about being "proactive," her article could have been more constructive if she had approached the matter as supporting rights of individuals rather than the more adversarial tone of protecting businesses from lawsuits.

One illustration used is that of an employer who is faced with an employee who becomes "incapacitated: (hurt, or ill) and can no longer function according to the standards required by the employer. "The employers aim," Stelzner concedes ". . . is generally to terminate the employment of that person by reason of his incapacity - a ground for dismissal recognized as valid by the [Labour Relations] Act."

Good grief.

Individual rights are couched in such terms as "reasonable accommodation can only be avoided," and "a disability is a long-term or recurring physical or mental impairment . . ." Only once does she even sound the least bit open-minded (and rather poetic) when she starts the last paragraph by saying, "Far rather be proactive and seek to maximize the benefits that can be obtained from creating an equal-opportunity environment in relation to people with disabilities," but then she adds the warning "than be the employer of whom an example is made in newsworthy litigation."

 printer-friendly format