The World Cup is on!

Rightfully does South Africa and the world celebrate this soccer fest. The mood in the country, despite Bafana's defeat against Uruguay, is exhilarating. I can't remember any time since 2002 that people were so friendly, even more than usual, and all the daily strain seems so distant.

This is perhaps what makes this African and South African World Cup: the excitement across the country. There may be glitches with ticket sales, rather a problem of FIFA's greed, and transport, but the happiness factor that comes with soccer is quite unique.

The question remains: is it worthwhile for a developing country to spend obsence sums of money on a soccer fest that benefits Western capitalists and the mafia that is FIFA? It is clearly a problem that we don't know the salaries of the FIFA head honchos and that an organisation with such global importance has not accountability and is a law unto themselves. See the Insititute for Security Studies report at http://www.iss.co.za/pgcontent.php?UID=29940

Can we tally up the expenses for the World Cup with what we could have built in houses, job creation, and other programmes? Or can we say that the gain in happiness for a few weeks across the country was worthwhile the money spent?

I think the answer is yes and no. Remember that South Africa's development problem is not lack of funds - it is the lack of coherence and organisation in delivery, in creating and executing policies that advance the country. Perhaps then, the expenditure is justified and the gain in goodwill and happiness will create a better country which will be able to do things better.

Yet, the FIFA money fest has contributed to more corruption and unjustifiable expenditures. As a mafia organisation, besides the soccer fun, we cannot expect good practice to come from such an organisation. Also, instead of getting light headed through games, should we not focus on what needs to be done to improve the country? Rolling-up the sleeves, not partying should be the order of the day. And then, the World Cup money could have been spent on improving governance and towards sustainable livelihoods.

Perhaps we can say that if we could be assured that the World Cup was a clean business, we would be more understandable of the expenses. Also, if more would go towards supporting poor communities than just celebrating the rich, the fiesta that world soccer is, would gain much.

Tertiary Education - what will the Stakeholder Summit bring?

It is never good to announce bad news, especially when you are new in a place. Nobody likes a Cassandra - the harbinger of bad news. The best example I can think of, and an object lesson in electoral politics that speaking the truth even, and especially if, it is bad news, is never popular, was the contest, after the unification of East and West Germany, between the Social Democrat Oskar Lafontaine and Christian Democrat Helmut Kohl for the Chancellorship.

To punch drunken Germans, still celebrating the newly united country, Lafontaine warned that it will be a very expensive unification and Germany would better think clearly this one through and find ways to mitigate the problems that may emerge.

Not so Kohl. He celebrated the unification, and promised "flowering landscapes" to an eager electorate. And Kohl won, and Germany is still trying today to digest the unification.

I digress.

But as recent graduate students at the University of the Witwatersrand, we faced so many obstacles and so little support, it was indeed a miracle that students managed to finish their degrees. And when we warned that things were not rosy, we were just ignnored and silenced. I do not intend to pick unfairly on Wits, but this is where I got my degree from and where I made my tertiary experience.

Clearly, the university was under enormous strain and faced capacity problems. But what strikes me even today is that all the people, instiutions, and individuals who 'carry' the university were unable to acknowledge and act upon the problems that threaten the health and contintuation of the academic and intellectual endeavour.

In any forum within the university that issues were raised, a stony silence and passive resistance met the complainants. And of course, nothing changed. So it is with no surprise that we learn of the Declaration that the recent Stakeholders Summit of Higher Education had made, and particularly the focus on improving the conditions of studying and ensuring that universities produce new cohorts of graduates who are smart enough to take up teaching and research positions.

The writing is on the wall. University faculty is aging and we are not producing the graduates who can take up their positions.

http://www.mg.co.za/article/2010-04-30-declaration-embracing-the-opportunity

Just to consider a few examples. Graduate students need support and facilities. At one Faculty Meeting, the library asked for more money. The good librarian was told that Faculty would not use the library as its holdings were poor and Faculty would not divert 'their' money to the library. Now, how are graduate students supposed to do cutting edge research which requires books when Faculty says the holdings were so poor that they were not using it?

Another issue is the low level of throughput. A high percentage of students fail. This reflects the poor education that especially undergraduate students, even at formerly white universities, receive. Too many students walk away with a three year BA degree but they can't read and write properly.

This is a dangerous situation for any developing country. When I studied about the causes of the war in the former Yugoslavia, one contribution to the war was the easy mobilization of young men ready for war and highly gullible, somewhat educated but not quite, yet easily seduced by the facile explanations of populist leaders. The authoritarian university system had produced graduates who had certain skills but were in fact only semi-educated.

Now, if South African universities continue to churn out half-baked graduates, we create cohorts of young men and women with high aspirations but little chances to make it into well-paying jobs and into a better life.

Pseudo-education and resentment create individuals who may easily fall for a populist leader, promising easy solutions to complex problems.

Yet universities, given their limited capacities, ignored the problem. But I still don't understand how come that all the issues that students had raised about 10 years ago, internally, are only now recognized at a high-level university forum as pressing?

If the stakeholder summit reflects a change in thinking, maybe university education can still live up to the needs of a modern and developing society.

Are South Africa's business ethics Wild West?

On Monday 4 January 2010 I bought Gillette Razor blades with a value of R 185.00 at the Clicks store at Campus Square shopping centre, Johannesburg. I realized that I had bought the wrong blades after I had opened the packet at home. Gillette has two razor shaving systems that look quite similar but that require different and specific razor blades.

I had merely cut the cover paper of the razor blades but I did not take the blades out of their plastic covers.

The next day, 5 January 2010, I was told by the store manager that he would not refund the blades as I had opened the packet. I told him that I had no use for the blades and that I would have to throw them away. He told me that I should have consulted properly with staff in order to buy the right blades. I accepted that I had bought the wrong blades by mistake but since I had no use for these blades, I required a refund. He refused.

I then called the Clicks Customer Centre. The agent repeated the same argument from the store manager: it was my mistake as the packet had been opened and the hygiene of the packet was compromised. The agent even asked me if I would buy blades from an open packet. Then, I was told that they would call the store manager to convince him to refund the blades. I told the agent that I would like to speak to the Regional Manager as it seems to me Clicks has a policy of refusing refunds. I was not called back the same day as I had requested.

On 6 January 2010, I called them again. No progress was reported. One hour after my call, another agent called to tell me that the Regional Manager would call me within the hour. He duly called and repeated the same: how thankful I should be that they refund the blades as they were wasted for them. Clicks would carry a loss from the refund. When I asked if Procter and Gamble, the owner of Gillette, would refund them, he said no. He denied that it was Clicks policy to discourage refunds.

I find this statement, that Procter and Gamble, would not refund Clicks hard to believe. I had contacted their Customer Care Line and they agreed without any questioning to refund me. All I had to do was to send them the purchased blades. If Procter and Gamble refunds an individual consumer, would they not refund a much more powerful retail company?

On 7 January 2010, I went back to the Campus Square Clicks and my purchase was refunded. Which raises the question: why could the store manager issue a refund only once I had contacted the Clicks Customer Centre? Why would he agree to do something three days later which he had previously refused?

Or has Clicks so little confidence in their store managers that they require these safety measures as to avoid internal corruption? Is it then a safety measure in order to avoid abuse? Or is this an administrative system that tries to make it as cumbersome as possible for Clicks clients to receive a refund?

If you look up Clicks on the ‘Hello Peter’ consumer complaints website, you will see that there are a high number of cases that individuals report and in which store managers refuse refunds for all kinds of reasons.

A colleague of mine had purchased in November 2009 prescription glasses with a value of R 400.00 at the Clicks store in Pretoria CBD. When she realized that they had the wrong strength, she brought them back. The store manager refused a refund on the grounds that the security label had been removed and hence she would not refund the glasses. My colleague accepted this and she had to buy another pair without the benefit of a refund.

The Consumer Protection Act of 2009 makes it quite clear that consumers are entitled for refunds under certain conditions. In the case of the razors, since the goods were in a packet, and I could not clearly establish that these were the correct blades I required, I should be legally entitled to a refund. The store may deduct a certain amount of the purchasing price for repackaging, but to claim that since the packet had been opened, no refund could be given, appears to be a contravention of the Act. In the case of the prescription glasses, the contravention of the Act seems to be even more blatant.

I find it quite unacceptable that a national retail chain seems to have instructed store managers to refuse refunds. Only when going through the call centre will a refund be granted. Clearly, this is highly consumer unfriendly, probably illegal and if they would state this refund policy openly, customers would be more careful when making a purchase at Clicks.

I wonder how many people have the means and the stamina to follow up on a mere refund. Most other retail stores accept refunds in the store with a receipt without having to go through a call centre. I wonder how many people have accepted the ‘no’ from the store manager and how much money has been taken out of South African consumers pocket and transferred to Clicks without any merit, any service rendered, and without any benefit to the consumer.

I have contacted The Star newspaper, the Sowetan, and the Speak Out tv program and hope their consumer reporters will pick the story up. Also, I have launched a complaint with the South African Consumer Protector at the local government call centre.

While I did eventually receive a refund, Clicks policy that renders getting a refund very cumbersome reflects poor business ethics. It is about time that South African business steps out of its Wild West attitude and lives up to the high moral values of a Nelson Mandela for which our country reached world-wide fame.