In search of a landing place for persons with disabilities: A critique of South Africa’s skills development programme
| Published date | 01 June 2023 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/13582291231162315 |
| Author | Michele Botha,Karina Fischer Mogensen,Adèle Ebrahim,Dominique Brand |
| Date | 01 June 2023 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Article
International Journal of
Discrimination and the Law
2023, Vol. 23(1-2) 163–180
© The Author(s) 2023
Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
DOI: 10.1177/13582291231162315
journals.sagepub.com/home/jdi
In search of a landing place for
persons with disabilities:
A critique of South Africa’s skills
development programme
Michele Botha
1
, Karina Fischer Mogensen
2
, Adèle Ebrahim
2
and
Dominique Brand
2
Abstract
South African legislation is viewed as progressive in relation to persons with disabilities.
Policies addressing socio-economic inequality include a focus on promoting skills devel-
opment and employment for persons with disabilities. A predominant instrument for
providing post-school training and work opportunities to disadvantaged youth, including
persons with disabilities, is learnership programmes funded through the Sector Education
and Training Authorities (SETAs). Despite enabling p olicies and investment in learnerships,
persons with disabilities comprise only 1.3% of the workforce, while an estimated 15% of the
population are disabled. This situation opens up the skills development strategy, and
supporting legislation, for some critical review. Using Critical Disability Studies as a lens, this
paper offers three critiques concerning the operation of learnerships for disability inclusion
in South Africa; (1) neglecting to align skills development and market needs holds persons
with disabilities in a cycle of training and poverty; (2)focusing exclusively onproviding hard
skills fails to account for complex challenges faced by personswith disabilities; and(3) viewing
skills developmentand inclusive employment as a charitable endeavourfails to achieve social
justice. This paper argues that the planning and implementation of learnerships should
respond to current debates concerning holistic approaches to inclusive development.
Keywords
Skills development, disability, inclusive development, learnerships, South Africa
1
Centre for Disability and Rehabilitation Studies, Department of Global Health, Stellenbosch University,
Tygerberg, South Africa
2
Division of Disability Studies, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
Corresponding author:
Dominique Brand, Division of Disability Studies, University of Cape Town, F45 Old Main Building Groote
Schuur Hospital, Cape Town 7701, South Africa.
Email: dominique@bfm.org.za
Introduction
South Africa’s post-apartheid legislative framework is often viewed as progressive. It is
based on policies that were designed to address the historical inequality in the country
through a focus on fairness and social justice. However, 25+ years after the end of
apartheid, South Africa remains one of the most unequal societies in the world (Diaz
Pabon et al., 2021). It has been argued that persons with disabilities remain the most
marginalised group in this context, adversely impacted by failing infrastructure and poor
service delivery, and struggling to access and participate in the open labour market
(Watermeyer et al., 2006). South African companies, private and public, reported in
2021 that persons with disabilities comprised 1.3% of their workforce (Commission for
Employment Equity, 2021), despite the disability inclusive employment target of 2% set
in legislation (Department of Trade and Industry, 2014), and while persons with dis-
abilities are estimated to comprise 15% of the population (World Health Organization,
2011). According to international findings, when persons with disabilities are employed,
they are less likely to be in full-time jobs and more likely to be in low-paying jobs with
poor working conditions, and poor prospects for career progression as compared to their
non-disabled peers. Consequently, persons with disabilities have lower relative income
levels and a higher likelihood of living in poverty (Bredgaard and Salado-Rasmussen,
2021).
Contributing to the low levels of formal employment amongst persons with disabilities
is the state of post-secondary education for persons with disabilities in South Africa.
Entrance into degree-level programmes at universities or colleges is extremely low for
persons with disabilities due to lack of quality basic education, lack of funding and
persistent access barriers to the physical environment and learning materials (Howell
2006;Lourens 2015). It has been suggested that, through providing learnership pro-
grammes, the Sector Education and Training Authorities (SETAs) offer a solution to the
challenge of post-secondary education for persons with disabilities in South Africa, and
have potential to increase employment for this group. The SETAs are the South African
government’s main vehicle for transforming the labour market. Figures 1 and 2offer an
overview of how SETAs function and aim to influence the labour market. They are
industry-specific bodies, established in the National Skills Development Strategy of 1998.
The SETAs were established to: (1) address the skills shortage in the South African
workforce through skills development programmes in order to improve the productivity
and competitiveness of the economy; (2) address the challenges of social development
and the eradication of poverty and; (3) expand the post-school landscape for young people
(Department of Labour, 1998). The main target groups of the SETAs are people regarded
as “previously disadvantaged”i.e., Black South Africans (The term “Black”refers to
Coloured, Indian and Black South Africans in the South African legislation.)
1
, women
and persons with disabilities. There is very little research on SETA learnerships in terms of
their long-term impact on the South African workforce and the transformation of the
labour market. Table 1 offers an overview of the number of SETAlearn erships registered
and certificated in 2011–2017, however this data is not disability dissagregated. Re-
garding persons with disabilities, fluctuating disability employment statistics open up
164 International Journal of Discrimination and the Law 23(1-2)
To continue reading
Request your trial