One battle against South Africa’s new employment equity targets is over, but the war is just starting
Business lobby group Sakeliga and the National Employers Association of South Africa (Neasa) say they will appeal directly to the Constitutional Court to try and stop the government from implementing Employment Equity targets in South Africa.
This follows a loss in the Pretoria High Court this week, where the urgent bid to interdict the implementation of the policy from 1 September 2025 was dismissed.
“We will appeal directly to the Constitutional Court to set aside a deeply flawed judgment by the Pretoria High Court,” the groups said, adding that they will pursue “further countermeasures”.
“We will not stop until this harmful and unjustified state intervention is reversed or rendered moot.”
The groups had attempted to interdict and suspend the implementation of the sectoral numerical targets issued by the Minister of Employment and Labour under section 15A of the Employment Equity Act (EEA).
The targets, pronounced by the minister in April 2025, set the racial and demographic targets that businesses with over 50 employees would have to work towards over the next five years.
This is in a bid to make workforces in South Africa more demographically representative along racial and gender lines, as well as factoring in disability.
Sakeliga and Neasa have been pushing back against the laws, arguing that they are impossible to achieve without directly and intentionally disrupting business operations, while also characterising the targets as racial quotas.
Its legal action was presented in two parts, Part A and Part B.
The High Court dismissed Part A of the case, which sought to interdict the implementation of the laws, stating that the minister had already exercised her powers under the Act back in April, and that an interdict now would be like trying to unscramble an egg.
The judgement also found that the regulations were published with the required consultation process, and that the targets themselves were not arbitrary, being based on Statistics SA data and advice from the Commission for Employment Equity.
Part B of the case, challenging the constitutionality of the EEA and seeking to have parts of it set aside, is proceeding.
The Department of Employment and Labour welcomed the court ruling, saying that it affirmed “the legality and procedural integrity of the Employment Equity Regulations”.
It said that the regulations are designed to promote equitable representation across all sectors of the economy.
“The judgment is a significant affirmation of the department’s commitment to fostering inclusive and fair labour practices in South Africa,” it said.
Taking it to the ConCourt

According to Sakeliga, the groups will appeal directly to the Constitutional Court to set aside the High Court’s decision and grant the interdict requested in Part A of the application.
The lobby group argued that the High Court ruling erred by “not appreciating the constitutional nature of the matter” and not considering the unlawfulness of the regulations.
For procedural reasons, the direct appeal will be supplemented with a parallel appeal to the Supreme Court of Appeal, it said.
While it pursues legal action, it said it would be working with Neasa to assist employers with “maximising resistence and minimising the harm of the regulations”.
This will be a multi-year effort, it said, repeating that implementing the laws is impossible.
“No serious businesses anywhere can be expected to run their hiring off a government spreadsheet,” Sakeliga said.
“The roughly 50% quotas for men and women, regardless of their differences, are obviously impossible to meet, and the racial quotas are even more far-fetched and disruptive to businesses, workplace harmony, and staff relations.”
Despite the legal proceedings, the department warned employers that the reporting period for the 2025 EE submissions will open on 1 September 2025 and close on 15 January 2026.
Legal experts have advised employers to proceed on the basis that the 15 April 2025 targets are valid and binding unless and until set aside on review.