Further Education and Training Colleges Bill: consideration of NCOP Amendments
EDUCATION PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
18 October 2006
FURTHER EDUCATION AND TRAINING COLLEGES BILL: CONSIDERATION OF NCOP AMENDMENTS
Chairperson: Prof S Mayatula (ANC)
Documents handed out:
Further Education and Training Colleges Bill
[B23-2006]
Select Committee
Amendments to Further Education and Training Colleges Bill [B23A-2006]
Further Education
and Training Colleges Bill [B23B-2006] (Select Committee amendments
incorporated)
SUMMARY
The Director General of Education took the Committee through the amendments
proposed by the Select Committee on Education and Recreation to the Further
Education and Training (FET) Colleges Bill. The Employment of Educators Act of
1998 should no longer refer to college lecturers and would be amended also. The
Education Labour Relations Council and the PSCBC would continue as the forum
for collective bargaining for college lecturers until the parties agreed to a
new structure. The remainder of the amendments were minor, but the Committee
did try to anticipate concerns that would be raised during public hearings on
24 October such as removing college staff from the jurisdiction of the
Employment of Educators Act The Committee would meet
again on 31 October and vote formally on 3 November.
MINUTES
Presentation of amendments
The Director General of Education, Mr Duncan Hindle,
drew the Committee’s attention to the amendments proposed by the Select
Committee as follows:
Paragraph (c) in Clause 2, line 1 should be omitted. The Bill differentiates
between private and public FET institutions that offer FET programmes but
excludes schools offering FET programmes.
Replacing “Head of Department” with “Member of the Executive Council” in line
53 of Clause 10 would allow for that person to determine the language policy of
the college.
The amendments to Clauses 15, 17, and 50 were mere language corrections. On
page 12, in line 52, “of” should be inserted after “unfair discrimination”. In
Clause 17, in line 45, “to“ should be substituted for
“and must” and “its” should be substituted for “his or her” in Clause 50, line
30.
In Clause 58 “or amendment” should be inserted in the heading “Repeal of laws”
and in the same clause the following subsection should be added “(3) The
Employment of Educators Act, 1998 (Act No. 76 of 1998) is hereby amended to the
extent set out in Schedule 3.” The new schedule omits any reference to FET
institutions or their governing bodies.
The terms of office of office-bearers of councils were amended to “a period not
exceeding two years” instead of “a period of two years” to enable more
continuity of teams in terms of office.
Discussion
Mr A
Gaum (ANC) commented that the offences specified under
subsection (3) of Disciplinary Measures (clause 15) were tautological: racism
was a form of unfair discrimination but he presumed that it was specified for
emphasis.
Ms C Dudley (ACDP) and Ms M Mentor (ANC) expressed the opinion that drug abuse
and peddling should be specifically mentioned in the Code of Conduct.
Mr Hindle said that the legislation could not spell
out the entire Code of Conduct because every year there would be a different
issue.
The Chair said that it would be safe to assume that an issue like violence
would be important from year to year.
Mr R van den Heever (ANC) asked for clarity: was the
Committee proposing amendments and making insertions or flagging issues for
consultation with their political parties?
The Chair thanked him for this question and agreed that the Committee was
simply flagging issues as public hearings had yet to take place. Ms Mentor said
that the term “learners with disabilities” should be substituted for “disabled
learners” as the former was less offensive to people with disabilities.
Ms Mentor also said that removing college staff from the jurisdiction of the
Employment of Educators Act was not a minor change. She perceived resistance
from educators in letters to newspapers and other media.
Mr Hindle said that the change was not substantive,
but consequential (to the realignment of the FET Colleges in line with national
objectives). He said that unions had initially been concerned and the
Department had met with them and allayed their fears. The Labour Relations Act
of 1995 and the Basic Conditions of Employment Act protected them and the
Minister had categorically stated that no educators would lose their jobs.
Ms Mentor thanked Mr Hindle for this assurance but
felt that the lecturers were concerned about school holidays although they had
not explicitly said so.
Mr Hindle said that in order to be responsive,
college lecturers would definitely have to work in the afternoons and during
school holidays if training was needed at those times.
Ms Mentor asked how the objective of quality was provided for in the Bill and
whether the Bill addressed the needs of the economy.
Mr Hindle answered that Clause 30.(1)
(b) made specific reference to standards and monitoring. The Department had not
relinquished skills training. It was a common misconception that skills training was provided by Sector Education and
Training Authorities (SETAs) but this was not the
case. SETA training was done by institutions. The definition of FET in the Bill
referred to “all learning and training programmes … at levels 2 to 4 of the
National Qualifications Framework…”. Thirteen new
programmes that colleges were pleased to offer had been developed with
industry. Fees in these programmes were capped.
State law advisor, Adv C Boshoff, said that Chapter 7
of the Bill also dealt with the promotion of quality and provided for the
Minister to set norms and standards.
Mr Hindle assured Ms Mentor that credits earned at
FET colleges would be portable to higher education institutions. Ms Mentor said
that in her province, there was no university. How would the single urban and
rural colleges become relevant to the community?
Mr Hindle replied that Clause 43 made provision for a
public college to apply to the Minister to offer higher education programmes.
Relevance to the local community was important. He asked the Committee to
notify him if there were other issues that had not arisen during the course of
the meeting.
The Chair alerted the Committee to the submissions already received. The meeting
was closed.