The government appears to be moving forward with the SAA business rescue process and says it has put motions in place that will enable the distribution of the remainder of the R10,5bn (€585m) of business rescue funding.

On January 20 President Ramaphosa signed an Appropriation Act, which allows the appropriation of money from the National Revenue Fund for the 2020/21 financial year.

This, said the Department of Public Enterprises at a Wednesday parliamentary committee meeting, would pave the way for the remainder of the R10,5bn to flow to the airline. “We are expecting that, during the course of this month, the business rescue practitioners should be exiting the business. We have agreed to set up a receivership to take care of the remaining liabilities,” said DPE Director General, Kgathatso Tlhakudi, according to a report in Daily Maverick.

In the Wednesday meeting, all signs were that the airline would be handed back to its shareholder (the DPE) by the end of February, and that a decision on a strategic equity partner would be made by the end of March.

However, spokesperson for SAA’s business rescue practitioners, Louise Brugman, told Tourism Update  that the remaining funds had not been received and that they had not even been given a planned date for the payment yet.

Brugman confirmed that no ruling had been made by Judge Andre Van Niekerk about the ongoing SAA labour issues but said a ruling was expected later this week. Trade unions Numsa and SACCA’s case against the BRPs and the DPE was heard in court earlier this week. The unions asked the BRPs to pay those of their members who had not yet accepted a three-month back pay offer by the DPE, within seven days.

“The shareholder that committed to that plan and to the funding cannot unilaterally come in after the event without taking the matter to the creditors’ committee. That is unlawful in terms of the Companies Act. We do not agree that SAA and the rescue process will fail if the court grants the application. A creditors’ meeting can decide if the rescue process should continue or if SAA should be liquidated. It is inappropriate the way the Minister wants to intervene here,” stated Numsa and SACCA’s lawyer, Minnaar Niehaus, in court on Monday.

Niehaus further argued that Numsa and SACCA members, who did not sign the three-month full settlement agreement, should also get paid what other SAA employees, who did sign the agreement, received in December but without waiving their rights for the rest of the back pay.

“The belated demand that employees must waive the right to remuneration was never part of the rescue plan. The employees have a legitimate claim,” he added.

However, Advocate Andrew Redding, on behalf of SAA and the rescue practitioners, said the money made available to the BRPs came with strict instructions that required employees to compromise in terms of full settlement of back pay. There was no further funding available outside of what was offered. He added that the matter also lay outside the jurisdiction of the Labour Court, as the business rescue process fell within the jurisdiction of the Companies Act.

The business rescue process, which has dragged on for more than a year now, has faced criticism this week. A Pretoria News report claimed that the SAA business rescue process had cost taxpayers R200m (€11m) to date. The BRPs did not respond to Tourism Update’s questions relating to these fees.