Sasol Form 20-F for the year ended 30 June 2021 - Book - Page 35
prepare a stated case in order to allow the Labour Court
to give guidance in this regard. Despite best endeavours
to do so, the parties abandoned this attempt and to date
the matter which Solidarity has against Sasol has not
been pursued. Solidarity has not succeeded in getting
the three other large employers to participate in the
stated case compilation, the consolidated matter was
not submitted to the Labour Court and since October
2020 it has made no further advances to progress with
the matter. It is, therefore, not a Sasol-only matter in
South Africa and also affects other large companies.
The Sasol Inzalo dispute lodged by the CEPPWAWU
trade union has lost its momentum and been left
dormant by the trade union, and it is no longer regarded
as a major threat to Sasol.
Council’s application for the judicial review of various
aspects of the 2018 Mining Charter. Sasol Mining will
monitor the outcome of this judicial review process
which may either result in the status quo being retained
or certain amendments being made to the 2018 Mining
Charter that may address the Minerals Council’s
concerns. For more information refer to “Item 3.D—
South African mining legislation may have an adverse
effect on our mineral rights”.
On 27 March 2020, the Minister published
amendments to the Mineral and Petroleum Resources
Development Regulations (Amendment Regulations).
The Amendment Regulations may have a negative
impact on our business in terms of uncertainty
regarding the interpretation and higher cost for the
business.
On 6 May 2019, Sasol received a statement of
claim filed by the trade union Solidarity with the
Labour Court in Johannesburg, alleging that the Sasol
Khanyisa Employee Share Option Plan (ESOP) element
of the Sasol Khanyisa transaction is discriminatory as it
does not include white employees in South Africa and
employees working for Sasol outside South Africa.
Sasol Mining applied to the DMR for the recognition of
the Sasol Khanyisa ESOP to meet the ownership
requirements contained in the 2018 Mining Charter.
The DMR declined the request due to the ongoing
litigation as the outcome could possibly have an impact
on the number of employees participating in the scheme
and the resultant ownership percentage. Consequently,
Sasol Mining is unable to fully comply with the 2018
Mining Charter ownership requirements related to new
mining right or mining right renewal applications. At
this stage, all applications submitted prior to the 2018
Mining Charter becoming effective are being processed
based on Sasol Mining’s historic ownership level.
Furthermore, the South African Broad Based Black
Economic Empowerment Commission (B-BBEE)
Commissioner may not recognise that the vendor
financing mechanism allows us to be allocated points
on Enterprise Supplier Development.
The revised Codes of Good Practice for BBBEE (the Revised Codes), which came into effect on
1 May 2015, further amended on 31 May 2019, provide
a standard framework for the measurement of B-BBEE
across all sectors of the economy, other than sectors
that have their own sectorial transformation charters
(e.g. the mining and liquid fuels industries). The liquid
fuels industry and other relevant stakeholders, through
the Petroleum and Liquid Fuels Sector Charter Council,
is developing the “Petroleum and Liquid Fuels Sector
Charter” (PLFSC) which is intended to align the
existing Liquid Fuels Charter adopted in November
2000 with the Revised Codes to regulate B-BBEE in
the liquid fuels and gas sector. The PLFSC has not yet
been published for public comment and it is therefore
not possible to assess its impact. It is anticipated that
the PLFSC will set industry-specific targets that cannot
be more lenient than those in the Revised Codes.
Since our September 2017 announcement of
plans to unwind the Sasol Inzalo B-BBEE transaction
and introduce the Sasol Khanyisa B-BBEE transaction,
we placed specific management focus on engaging with
trade unions on issues pertaining to employee share
ownership levels. Two of the five Sasol trade unions,
Solidarity and the Chemical, Energy, Paper, Printing,
Wood and Allied Workers’ Union (CEPPWAWU),
declared disputes relating individually to Sasol
Khanyisa and the unwind of Sasol Inzalo which, if not
resolved, might result in industrial action, which could
adversely affect our operations and could give rise to
costs which would impact earnings. In the case of the
Solidarity trade union, the Sasol Khanyisa dispute is
similar to disputes the trade union has with three other
large employers in South Africa. The President of the
Labour Court requested the various employers to
However, we expect that the long-term
benefits of Sasol Khanyisa to the company and South
Africa should outweigh any possible adverse effects,
such as dilution to existing shareholders, but we cannot
assure you that future implications of compliance with
these requirements or with any newly imposed
conditions will not have a material adverse effect on
our shareholders or business, operating results, cash
flows and financial condition. For instance, any rights
issue, depending on the uptake ‘appetite’ could possibly
dilute the Khanyisa shareholding and may result in
Sasol not complying with the South African Broad-
34