This article was updated since it was initially published, by adding further comment from the SA Dental Technicians Council.
More than 500 unemployed black gradua-tes of the Tshwane, Durban and Cape Peninsula universities of technology have complained that unfair discrimination by the South African Dental Technicians Council (SADTC) has all but put paid to their career dreams.
The students, some of whom qualified a dozen years ago and remain unemployed, poured out their hearts in letters to the Presidency and the parliamentary portfolio committee on higher education in April 2022 about being frustrated in the job market.
“Since 2010, the SADTC has not registered black dental technicians from these universities even though they passed. We have even gone as far as approaching the South African Qualifications Authority and Council on Higher Education for help to no avail,” reads the letter in part.
People in the dental profession must be registered by the council before they can be employed in the field for which they have been trained and are qualified.
The students blamed council president and head of the department of prosthodontics (dentistry) at Wits University, Peter Owen for their woes.
“It is painful to have a qualification and have someone render it useless, and more heartbreaking for their parents is that their children have spent 1 095 days in limbo.”
They claim that the profession remains largely skewed in favour of whites, sta-ting that former SADTC president, Mokgatle Makwakwa, tried to register more blacks during her tenure, which ended in 2019, but met resistance from white lab owners.
They stated that dental labs are unable to employ them for fear that Owen would revoke their accreditation for hiring graduates not yet registered with the council.
“The admission to the programme was transformed to cater to most black students from rural areas and margina-lised low-income households but the council decided to gatekeep,” said the students.
Aggrieved graduates’ representative and Free Education activist Kevin Phehla, who was instrumental in writing the letters, asked parliament to intervene and investigate “the sabotage of the dreams of black dental graduates”.
Owen, on Friday, said that the issue has been ongoing for six years, and stated that the Department of Health and minister Aaron Motsoaledi had asked the council to come up with solutions.
“We found solutions which are being put into place… and you should note that as this is a council matter and as we report to the national Department of Health, it is important to communicate with the ministry. Universities did not do things right from the beginning, and based on these solutions, correct measures should be implemented for students to be registered,” said Owen.
SADTC RESPONSE
The SADTC denies that it has unfairly discriminated against any graduates based on race or gender. The SADTC confirms factually that 139 graduates and not 500 graduates, as published by the Sunday World, were unable to find employment because they had not met the standards for Registration with the SADTC.
It is simply false for the Sunday World to state as fact that ‘since 2010, the SADTC has not registered black dental technicians from these universities even though they passed’.
We reiterate that of the 329 technicians registered between 2010 and 2020, 119 technicians that were registered with the SADTC were black African.
The mandate of the SADTC is to register Dental Technicians and Technologists and not persons generally associated with the dental profession. Further, Professor Owen (who was at the time the President of the SADTC), did not have the power to refuse registration for graduates not yet registered with the SADTC. This allegation has no factual basis and is devoid of truth.
The SADTC wrote a detailed response to Parliament in respect of the aggrievances.
Parliament did not follow up with the SADTC on these grievances.
In addition, Professor Owen, in his capacity as president, cannot unilaterally make decisions on behalf of the SADTC in assessing students for professional registration with it.
It is important to note the mere fact that a person is a member of the council, such person is not precluded from other means of employment, provided such employment is not in conflict with their statutory obligations of the SADTC
In response to paragraphs 1 to 4, Professor Owen’s involvement with TUT was always in his personal capacity and at TUT’s request. He was invited at the request of TUT to facilitate a workshop to assist it with the compilation of TUT’s study guide as TUT at the time recognised issues with its accreditation. Professor Owen was at the time not a member of the SADTC.
When he was reappointed to the SADTC in March 2020, he declared his involvement with TUT. He has since conducted workshops to TUT at no cost.
It is therefore not true to state that an ‘unusual meeting‘ took place between TUT and the SADTC involving a ‘strange payment to council president‘, considering that Professor Owen was not a member of SADTC at the time.
The SADTC further denies that it demanded that TUT appoint Professor Owen in February 2020 to assist it. We reiterate that TUT had requested Professor Owen’s assistance because it was experiencing difficulties with the requisite documentation required for accreditation. We reiterate that Professor Owen’s involvement with TUT was in his private and personal capacity.
