Sakeliga and NEASA lodge urgent legal challenge against Employment Equity quotas

On 8 July 2025, Sakeliga and NEASA jointly filed an urgent application for an interdict against the implementation of the 2025 Employment Equity sectoral numerical quotas and accompanying administrative regulations, as well as calling for the judicial review and setting aside thereof.

The application challenges the legality and constitutionality of the newly introduced employment equity framework, which introduces rigid race and gender quotas across 18 economic sectors on the top four occupational levels. These quotas, formally published in April 2025, require employers with 50 or more employees to restructure their entire workforce to reflect national gender and racial demographics of the country, or face dire consequences.

The legal challenge comprises two parts:

1. 1. 1.1

      The first is a judicial review of the procedural acts of the Minister in setting the quotas, which were fraught with irregularities and inadequacies in process.

   2. 1.2

      The second part entails a constitutional challenge of the substance of relevant sections in the Employment Equity Act (EEA), which allow for and facilitate the setting and enforcement of these quotas.

In the founding affidavit, Sakeliga and NEASA argue that the Minister did not act in accordance with the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act (PAJA), as she failed to adhere to the prescriptions of Section 15A of the EEA prior to the setting and publishing of the 2025 sectoral numerical quotas. This renders her actions unlawful and invalid.

The court papers, filed in the Gauteng Division of the High Court, reveal glaring procedural and substantive flaws in the Minister’s process, including but not limited to the following:

• Failure to identify and gazette economic sectors: The first misstep of the Minister was failing to properly identify, and gazette for public comment, the 18 national economic sectors for purposes of setting quotas, as required by Section 15A(1). This firstly had the effect that no sectors existed in law with whom the Minister could consult. Furthermore, this led to various, completely different and unique subsectors, each with their own particular economic circumstances and influences, being lumped together in singular overarching sectors, such as ‘manufacturing’, and arbitrary, one-size-fits-all quotas being set for an entire spectrum of subsectors.
• Improper consultation: Stakeholders across numerous sectors were either not invited or not given adequate notice of virtual “consultations”, all of which were limited to only 1000 attendees. Some stakeholders were given the final quotas only hours before these so-called consultations, with most consultations allowing less than 15 minutes for feedback and discussions. The Minister completely neglected to consult with employees in the economic sectors who will be severely affected by the quotas. Consultation in this manner is woefully inadequate for the Minister to have come to a reasonable, non-arbitrary decision in respect of the quotas.
• No lawful publication: The final 2025 quotas differ drastically from the earlier draft quotas published in 2023 and 2024 respectively. Despite this, they were never published for renewed public comment as required by section 15A(4) of the Act. This is a legal requirement and failure to adhere to it renders the quotas invalid.
• Quotas are arbitrary: The Minister set irrational and arbitrary quotas that do not take into account the nature, circumstances and challenges of each sector. No consideration was given to the pool of skills available in each sector, the natural gender disparity in certain sectors, or the difference in racial demographics across provinces in South Africa.
• No socio-economic impact assessment performed: The Minister failed to obtain and consider a comprehensive socio-economic impact study on the consequences of introducing sectoral quotas. The scheme introduced by these quotas and the impugned regulations are ultimately aimed at compelling the workforce of every single designated employer in South Africa, in every sector, on every occupational level, to conform to the racial and gender demographic profile of South Africa’s economically active population. This cannot be rationally introduced as a legal requirement without a proper assessment of its socio-economic impacts.
• Violation of the Constitution: The quotas disregard South Africa’s constitutional stipulations on non-racialism, equality before the law, and administrative justice. This forms part of the second leg of the legal challenge, questioning the constitutionality and legality of the concept of forced ministerial quotas, which will be comprehensively argued at a later stage.

Unless the Court intervenes and grants the interim relief sought, every employer that employs 50 employees or more, in every sector of the economy, will be required by legislation to prepare and implement employment equity plans to make their workforce conform to the 2025 quotas.

The time and expense incurred by employers in preparing such employment equity plans, or attempting to avoid or preparing for the consequences, with which the state threatens them when they inevitably cannot comply, will be irrecoverably lost to employers and to the economy. From 1 September 2025, employers, their businesses, employees, and prospective employees will suffer irreparable harm and loss when the attempted implementation of the employment equity plans based on unlawful quotas commences.

Individuals will be employed or not employed, and promoted or not promoted, based on unlawful quotas. Employers will restructure and make other permanent changes to their workforce and corporate structuring, employ new employees and forego opportunities and take on the expense that this involves, all based on unlawful quotas.

This filing marks the next important step in preventing these impossible, irrational, and harmful employment quotas for the benefit of employers, employees, and all communities across the country.