Blank










Racial slur not discriminatory - lawyer
by A'eysha Kassiem

http://www.int.iol.co.za/index.php?set_id=1&click_id=15&art_id=vn20051104090440985C108706

Is overhearing someone refer to a black colleague as a
"k" discrimination? This is one of the many questions
that still abound in the matter between the South African
Transport and Allied Workers Union and the Old Mutual
Life Assurance Company (SA) Limited that resumed in
the Labour Court in Cape Town on Thursday.

The case sees the union punted against the life insurance
giant after a white employee, Jenny Burger, was allegedly
overheard asking head of department, Barbara van Zyl,
"Hoekom sit jy my langs aan die k (Why did you put me
next to the k?)" or "words substantially similar thereto". The
incident took place in 2003. Burger, who was also being
sued, has since withdrawn her opposition, indicating that
she would abide by the ruling of the court.

The union is representing Xolile Finca as well as all its
other members at Old Mutual. Finca wants R100&nbps;
000 in compensation for breach of his constitutional rights.

At the time, Van Zyl, following an informal disciplinary
hearing is believed to have issued Burger with an "oral
warning". She was later dismissed but then reinstated
after an appeal that Satawu wants to see overturned.

Burger claims she used the word "Khayelitsha" and not "k".
But Old Mutual's attorney, Mike Wagener argued that based
on the Employment Equity Act, overhearing someone
refer to a colleague as a "k" could not be construed as
discriminatory.

The act did not relate to "hurt feelings" but to equity practises such as equal
working conditions for all races. They want Satawu's application to be dismissed.

"There needs to be a distinction between racial prejudice and racial discrimination.

"It is not, however, our intention to diminish the seriousness (of the matter)," he
said.

He said that when someone said something to a manager in private, it was not
anticipated that the conversation would be overheard.

Justice Elna Revelas put it to Wagener that his argument appeared to be "sweeping
(the matter) under the carpet".



--
_____________________________________________________

I intend to last long enough to put out of business all *****-suckers
and other beneficiaries of the institutionalized slavery and genocide.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"The army that will defeat terrorism doesn't wear uniforms, or drive
Humvees, or calls in air-strikes. It doesn't have a high command, or
high security, or a high budget. The army that can defeat terrorism
does battle quietly, clearing minefields and vaccinating children. It
undermines military dictatorships and military lobbyists. It subverts
sweatshops and special interests.Where people feel powerless, it
helps them organize for change, and where people are powerful, it
reminds them of their responsibility." ~~~~ Author Unknown ~~~~
___________________________________________________