Cricket bonuses ‘would not have been approved’

2012-01-17 10:56

Cricket South Africa’s remuneration committee would not have approved millions of rand in bonus payments if it knew staff had already received money for the same work, according to former CSA finance committee chairperson Hentie van Wyk.

Van Wyk told the ministerial inquiry into CSA that its chief executive Gerald Majola should have disclosed details of bonuses paid by the International Cricket Council (ICC) and the Indian Premier League (IPL) to either the CSA board or the remuneration committee.

“The biggest cloud around the IPL and ICC bonuses was that they were not revealed,” Van Wyk said.
“It was not disclosed anywhere, because when we decided on the bonuses we included the organisational performances of the IPL and ICC tournaments. We see it as a double payment.

“If we knew at that stage, when we had the remuneration committee meeting, that they had already received these bonuses, we would not have given them eight times the monthly salary.

“That is how we viewed it. We also said that the money should be paid back to finalise the financial statements for that year.”

The inquiry heard earlier that Majola was among 40 CSA staff members who received significant bonuses in May 2010, despite having been paid by the ICC and IPL for hosting cricket tournaments in 2009.

Van Wyk said the bonuses from the ICC and IPL were made known only two months later in July 2010 through an internal audit process conducted by the CSA audit committee.

Judge Chris Nicholson, who heads the inquiry, asked Van Wyk about a meeting held on July 10 2009, when it was believed Majola verbally disclosed the bonuses.

Van Wyk said Majola was asked by a member at the conclusion of the meeting whether CSA staff had received bonuses.

According to Van Wyk, Majola said he had negotiated with the IPL for bonuses for his staff.

However, Van Wyk said this declaration had not been sufficient, particularly with regards to the substantial amounts involved.

“With the whole statement there is something fishy,” he said.

“It should be declared with names. And, to my mind, seeing that the amounts are substantial, it should have been declared.

“I don’t think a verbal statement is adequate.”

Join the conversation! encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

We reserve editorial discretion to decide what will be published.
Read our comments policy for guidelines on contributions. publishes all comments posted on articles provided that they adhere to our Comments Policy. Should you wish to report a comment for editorial review, please do so by clicking the 'Report Comment' button to the right of each comment.

Comment on this story
Comments have been closed for this article.

Inside News24

Traffic Alerts
There are new stories on the homepage. Click here to see them.


Create Profile

Creating your profile will enable you to submit photos and stories to get published on News24.

Please provide a username for your profile page:

This username must be unique, cannot be edited and will be used in the URL to your profile page across the entire network.


Location Settings

News24 allows you to edit the display of certain components based on a location. If you wish to personalise the page based on your preferences, please select a location for each component and click "Submit" in order for the changes to take affect.

Facebook Sign-In

Hi News addict,

Join the News24 Community to be involved in breaking the news.

Log in with Facebook to comment and personalise news, weather and listings.