The month of May commemorates the struggles and achievements of workers and reaffirms SA’s commitment to protecting their rights, dignity and well-being.
The preamble of the amended Competition Act 89 of 1998 took this further when it envisioned that the country’s economy rooted in “an efficient, competitive economic environment, balancing the interests of workers, owners and consumers and focused on development, will benefit all South Africans”.
Endorsing the commission’s annual performance plan for the 2026/27 financial year, the minister of trade, industry and competition, Parks Tau, said that “through its enforcement against anti-competitive conduct, its merger regulation, and its market enquiries, the commission is working to open up markets, reduce barriers to entry, and ensure that economic opportunities are more widely shared. This is particularly important in enabling SMEs and firms owned by historically disadvantaged persons to participate meaningfully in the economy”.
Some would ask what “meaningful” means when the real value is not realised in real time.
So, when workers are told they are “shareholders” in the companies they work for, it sounds like a breakthrough. A chance to finally share in the wealth they help create.
But owning shares on paper does not always mean money in your pocket.
A newly published study by the Competition Commission reveals a hard truth behind employee share ownership plans, better known as ESOPs. While these schemes are meant to give workers a real stake in their employers, many fail to deliver meaningful financial benefits, even years after they are set up.
In some cases, workers are told they are owners but wait years to see any real reward. For workers already stretched to the limit, that gap between promise and reality matters.
In our study, we looked at 15 worker share schemes created through merger conditions between 2019 and 2023. The findings are sobering. In many cases, workers technically “own” part of the company but receive little or no financial benefit for years.
Why? Because most of the shares are funded through debt.
Instead of the company giving workers shares outright, the shares are bought on credit. The debt, often worth hundreds of millions of rands, is meant to be paid off using dividends before workers see the full benefit. In some schemes, interest is charged on this debt. When companies don’t declare dividends, or when interest keeps piling up, the debt escalates.
This means workers can wait years without seeing meaningful payouts. In some cases, dividends paid to workers were as little as a few hundred rand a year. That is hardly life‑changing for someone already under financial pressure.
The study found that in 2025, only seven of the 15 ESOPs paid dividends at all. Even then, the money was split between repaying debt and paying workers, leaving most workers with a modest payout.
Another major problem is that many workers don’t fully understand how these schemes work. They hear they are “owners” but are not told clearly when, how, or even if they will benefit. This creates confusion and disappointment and, in some cases, mistrust.
Well, our message is clear: if worker ownership is to mean anything, it must be designed differently.
The study recommends that companies stop charging interest on ESOP debt, offer shares at a discount to workers, and ensure that workers do not pay to participate. It also calls for proper training, worker representation on boards, and real consultation with workers and unions before these schemes are finalised.
Most importantly, employee share ownership plans must deliver real value and a life-changing experience for workers.
In a country still battling inequality and exclusion, worker ownership should be a tool for restoration of human dignity and shared prosperity, not another promise deferred. Workers, too, deserve to share in the wealth of this country.
- Makunga is the spokesperson for the Competition Commission of South Africa
