Think about this: a company advertises employment vacancies for new graduates. A non-negotiable condition is that applicants must own a vehicle, even if the job is not necessarily in transportation.
In the context of inequality in SA, the likelihood is that successful applicants would be from middle class backgrounds and more likely, white.
Did the company specifically target white or middle class candidates? Not explicitly.
But by design, their criteria discriminates against those from poor backgrounds who may not own a vehicle, even if they may technically qualify to do the work.
This analogy demonstrates that discrimination in SA is often systemic rather than explicit. It is a way of operating that is designed around the ways, preferences and means of those who are privileged.
This week a report into allegations of racial discrimination by medical schemes against black doctors was released. The panel, led by Adv Tembeka Ngcukaitobi, found no explicit evidence of racial discrimination against black practitioners.
However, they did find that black general practitioners were more likely to be identified as having committed fraud, waste or abused the system compared to their white counterparts.
The Government Employees Medical Scheme (Gems), Discovery and Medscheme were found to be biased as far as payment of claims, detecting of fraud and imposing harsher penalties on black practitioners. These sanctions are disproportionate compared to those handed to white practitioners.
The schemes disputed the findings, some arguing that the race of practitioners is not a factor in how they deal with them. They contend that their profiling is conducted by their systemic algorithms rather than human whims.
Only the lived experiences of black doctors show a pattern of discrimination that in many cases may not be overtly based on race itself but on structural challenges that are unique to black people.
Therefore, it is disingenuous for the schemes to point to systems as though they were not designed, some as far back as apartheid days, by people who may have had inherent biases about how our country works.
The schemes have until March to respond to the report.
We hope that they will use this time to honestly reflect on the experience of black practitioners, that they will take responsibility where appropriate, and systemically rid themselves of practices rooted in prejudice.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.