REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA COMBINED SECOND PERIODIC REPORT UNDER THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON HUMAN AND PEOPLE`S RIGHTS and INITIAL REPORT UNDER THE PROTOCOL TO THE AFRICAN CHARTER ON THE RIGHTS OF WOMEN IN AFRICA 166 167 270. In terms of employment equity, the following Labour Court judgments are highlighted as they have direct policy implications that have been addressed through the amendments to the Employment Equity Act and its regulations. In Director-General of the Department of Labour v Comair Limited166 Comair was referred to the Labour Court for failure to comply with the Director-General’s recommendations pertaining to the preparation of the Employment Equity Plan. However, the decision of the DG to refer Comair to Court for noncompliance was reviewed and set aside in terms of Section 50(h) of the Employment Equity Act, 1998. The reasons for the review was due to the fact that the DG failed to take into account during the assessment process, all factors listed under Section 42 before referring non-compliance to Court. These factors included: (1) no consideration was made to the pool of suitably qualified people from designated groups from which the employer may reasonably be expected to promote or appoint employees, (2) economic and financial factors relevant to the sector in which the employer operates, and (3) present and anticipated economic and financial circumstances of the employer; etc. The gaps in these sections highlighted by the judgment have now been amended in the Act and further guidance will be provided in the regulations in order to strengthen the implementation and enforcement mechanisms of the Act to improve compliance. 271. In the case of Solidarity v Department of Correctional Services167 Solidarity sought relief on behalf of the Western Cape Correctional Services’ officials that were denied promotion, despite having acted in those positions for a long time and also having been recommended for promotion after interviews. These officials lodged an unfair discrimination case in relation to the Department’s employment equity (EE) targets reflected in the EE Plan, which were geared towards Africans and not Coloureds for those particular positions. The Department’s EE targets were formulated utilising only the demographics of the national economically active population and not taking into account both the national and regional demographics as required by Section 42 (a)(i) of the Act. The Court ruled that the Department of Correctional Services is required to take immediate steps to ensure that both national and regional demographics are taken into account in respect of members of the designated groups, i.e. black people, women and people with disabilities when setting targets at all occupational levels of its workforce. In order to provide guidance as to how designated employers should take into account both national and regional EAP, new provisions have been inserted under section 42(2) and 42(3) of the Act to empower the Minister to issue regulations that provide implementation guidelines on this matter. [2009] 11BLLR 1063 (LC) [2013] ZALCCT 38 79