PSG claims it will sue me. Here are extracts from PSG Wealth documents showing they trap youth in an indentured labour model.
PSG Wealth made an unlawful financial claim on a learnership candidate.
He was billed for all expenses related to a fake learnership that was never designed to give him an industry recognised qualification.
PSG Wealth falsely claimed on Facebook that they have never had illegal employment contracts. Yet here it is.
Former employees and learnership candidates who were subjected to this unlawful practice should make contact. Financial claims made on you to return the money you earned selling while selling PSG products are illegal.
Learners were recruited to sell products for a commission and an allowance. If you resigned from your contract all allowances had to be returned.
The Department of Labour equates the term ‘allowance’ with stipends. Stipends are the equivalent of ‘wages’ for learnership candidates.
PSG appears to define an allowance as a loan received in exchange for unpaid labour.
Contact us if your employer threatens you in the same way or if you paid back your pay.
January 31 2017
Victim A writes on Keep Climbing
Recruiting Youth Limiting Their Freedom
PSG was recruiting unemployed candidates on the expectation that they repay all costs, including administration, if they decided to break their 18 month contract.
My Response to Victim A
Victim A Sends Documents
Extracts From Documents
The Bill Issued to Victim A
Meaning of Monthly Advance
Is it legal to make people work for free?
INSETA ensured false claims were dropped against Victim A, however that could have been achieved without them.
The purpose of lodging an official complaint was to ensure justice prevailed for ALL victims throughout PSG or determined that there were none.
In my opinion there are more victims.
- Victim A was part of a group – we can logically assume all learners were on the same contract at least up until the INSETA investigation.
- What settlement are these youngsters entitled to given that they had been contracted for a ‘learnership’ that wasn’t a learnership?
- What about Victim A? Is he not entitled to restitution too?
INSETA obstructs justice for these youth.
- Does PSG pay all employees allowances or only naive youngsters?
- Were any former employees required to pay back ‘allowances?’
- What happens when these youth apply at other companies claiming they completed a learnership? Who can they go to when their learnership qualification doesn’t check out?