4 November 2018

Response to Ms Debbie Schäfer: Western Cape Minister of Education

We recognize that the news regarding Ms Mthembu, and the greater concerns of a hostile schooling
environment at RGJS would predictably become a political football. While unfortunate, it speaks to the
pivotal role education plays, and ought to play in a democratic society.

We are addressing our response to Ms Schäfer, the MEC for Education in the Western Cape in light of
the status of Rustenburg Girls Junior School as a public ordinary school, within the ambit and
responsibility of the Western Cape Education Department.

It is exceptionally worrying that Ms Schäfer has chosen only now to respond to the situation at RGJS,
when the problems at hand, were brought to the attention of Mr Brian Schreuder more than a year
ago (24 October 2017). Ms Mthembu’s ill treatment at the hands of the school and SGB is a direct
symptom of the institutional issues we have raised. Clearly, Ms Schäfer’s response at this point is
driven by a political imperative, rather than addressing the real issues of creating schools where all
children can belong and enjoy equal opportunity.

It is not entirely clear whether Ms Schäfer is not fully informed, or whether she is being selective in
what she chooses to know. We would therefore like to bring the following points to her attention:

1. Ms Schäfer makes the assertion that Ms Mthembu was asked to resign because of ‘ongoing
legitimate concerns’? Ms Mthembu is still unaware of why she was asked to resign. The
‘concerns’ referred to were not shared with Ms Mthembu. We would hope that Ms Schäfer
would support legal and moral due process for any employee at a public school.
2. Ms Schäfer, like the SGB and the school, hides behind supposed ‘respect for her
[Ms Mthembu’s] privacy’, as if their actions can be justified, were they are free to speak
openly. We are aware of the circumstances, and they do not in any way justify the treatment
Ms Mthembu received. Furthermore, neither Ms Mthembu nor her privacy has been
respected. She was subjected to numerous incidents of humiliation by parents without the
school or the SGB intervening. The principal entertained various complaints from parents,
without once addressing any of them directly with Ms Mthembu. In addition, her resignation
was reported to a public meeting of parents and in a school newsletter as being ‘for personal
reasons’ –a commonly used phrase which creates all kinds of uncontrolled innuendo. Ms
Mthembu did not wish to resign and did not agree to the school speaking on her behalf.
3. The RGJS SGB chose to settle in the conciliation phase of the CCMA hearing. The settlement
states that “the school unreservedly apologises to Ms Mthembu for the manner in which her
employment was terminated and the circumstances surrounding such termination.” We urge
Ms Schäfer to read the settlement agreement and speak to the school parent that was present
at the CCMA meeting before further comment. This will spare her and the WCED further
embarrassment. We are comfortable that the CCMA commissioner was clear in her
displeasure at the conduct of the school.
4. Ms Schäfer seems to be sure that no ill treatment was meted out to Ms Mthembu – this,
despite claiming that the WCED had no knowledge of her appointment or of her resignation.
Surely Ms Schäfer has access to Ms Mthembu’s legal complaint against the school, a sworn
statement. Yet, Ms Schäfer has no criticism of the school’s or the SGB’s behaviour. Are we to
understand that Ms Schäfer therefore finds their behaviour acceptable? She is willing to call
the parent’s behaviour unacceptable, even though she can only rely on “rumours”.
 5. Ms Schäfer then states that she will ensure that parents are addressed on the ‘unacceptability
of such conduct’. We hope and trust that she will also address the principal, the SMT and the
SGB on the ‘unacceptability’ of their conduct. We urge Ms Schäfer to ensure that the principal
and SGB in the first instance take responsibility, apologise for their conduct and set acceptable
norms for themselves for future behaviour.
6. Futhermore the principal, SMT and SGB sat in a meeting with Mr Brian Schreuder, and his
team, and intentionally mislead them, when it was proudly announced that the school, after
124 years, had appointed its first Black African class teacher.
7. It is true that we have engaged with Mr Schreuder. While all sorts of promises were made
about using RGJS as a ‘test case’ and drawing in other role-players, none of this has happened
– after more than a year. At the last meeting held on 11 September 2018, Mr Schreuder
described the problems at the school as a ‘governance’ issue, thereby exonerating the WCED
of any responsibility. We would, therefore, need clarity on what Ms Schäfer means by an
‘active role’.
8. Despite all of the above, the most incredulous statement made by Ms Schäfer is when she
leaps to the defence of Ms Natalie Maimane by stating: ‘SGB’s are not experts in HR’.
Ms Maimane voluntarily assumed this position and role. We can only presume that she has
some expertise. She and others on the SGB certainly felt skilled and comfortable enough about
HR when they instructed Ms Mthembu to resign. The real recklessness of Ms Schäfer’s
statement however lies in the implication that anybody who now serves on a SGB can simply
claim not to have the skills when they mess up. So, the next time school funds are embezzled,
the WCED should not be surprised to be met with a response of ‘we are not experts in
finances’.

Finally, we wish to reiterate that the unsavoury events surrounding Ms Mthembu’s resignation is just
one incident. There are numerous unspoken issues of racism, discrimination and humiliation at the
school. The Principal, SMT and SGB have chosen to turn a blind eye. As a group of concerned parents,
we have attempted to solicit the intervention of the WCED. Ms Schäfer’s letter now confirms what we
have suspected for a while – that it is up to parents and civil society to cultivate a socially just society,
and that the WCED is not a partner in this endeavor

Parents for Change’

RGJS