Marcel Golding

HCI was the first ever union-controlled investment company listed on the JSE[2] and was viewed as one of the best managed.[9] The model of union investment pioneered by Golding and Copelyn through HCI was controversial among leftists, and, in some accounts, that model "changed the face of the country's labour movement", promoting the rise of "business unionism".[11][12] In 2007, Golding, in an interview with Ben Turok, said that he viewed himself as a "social entrepreneur".[13] He explained his and Copelyn's union investment model:

You have the union at the top, and the Chinese wall between the union and the business is an investment trust. At the bottom you have the business. The investment trust is not the business. The investment trust is the custodian of the value that is going to be created, which will then be distributed to working people... That’s how I saw my role – to create the wealth, put it into the trust and then the trust decides how it will benefit the community.[13]

Golding pointed out that the unions and their constituencies additionally benefited not only from dividends to the trust but also through HCI's own multimillion-rand philanthropic foundation.[13] Nonetheless, over the next decade, HCI's activities were frequently controversial among unionists, and COSATU made moves to attempt to restrain Golding and Copelyn on several occasions.[14][15][16] After a fallout between MIC and Golding in 1999, Golding was asked to step down from MIC's board,[17] and the NUM ultimately divested from HCI, though SACTU remained a major shareholder.[12] Also controversial was the personal enrichment of Golding and Copelyn as a result of HCI's activities, primarily through black economic empowerment deals that HCI was eligible for because its shareholders were majority black.[14][12] Both men made personal fortunes through share participation rights and directorship fees:[14] in 2005, Golding owned 8.4 per cent of HCI[18] and he held a variety of directorships.[19] In 2006, he was listed 48th on the Sunday Times Rich List, with an estimated net worth of R360-million,[20] and by 2014 he was listed 33rd due to his personal R1.25-billion stake in HCI.[21] Copelyn argued that he and Golding had gotten rich by taking on risk in their personal capacities in defence of investments they believed in.[10] In 2007, Golding responded to criticism by explaining:

You see, the problem we [Golding and Copelyn] grappled with was this: How in a society dominated by capitalism can you create both collective wealth and individual wealth? The debate is not 'I have been made wealthy by the process' but 'can I get wealthy in the right proportion to the collective?'[13]

HCI operated as a private-equity holding company, with particular interests in casinos, hotels, and media, as well as other various interests including Cape Town's Golden Arrow buses and Clover dairy.[14][13] In the media realm, in addition to buying a major share in Yfm,[14] HCI founded Midi Consortium, which formed Midi Television and successfully petitioned the Independent Broadcasting Authority for a broadcasting license in 1998. The resulting television channel was e.TV, South Africa's first privately owned free-to-air channel, and Golding – formerly consortium deputy chairperson[2] – became its chief executive officer from 1999 to 2014.[22][8] During his tenure at e.TV, Golding faced labour-relations issues and disputes with mid-level management.[17][23][24] However, despite the concern of institutional shareholders, by 2003 e.TV was a top performer in the industry, with a growing multi-racial audience and growing profits.[12][24][25]

Golding and Copelyn also became well known for HCI's hostile takeover of Johnnic Holdings in 2005, which led the Mail & Guardian to label HCI as "South Africa's first black economic empowerment predator".[26] By mid-2005, it was clear that HCI was aiming to consolidate its interests in Tsogo Investment Holdings, which controlled the lucrative casino and hotel assets of Tsogo Sun. Johnnic was also a shareholder in Tsogo and HCI's main rival for control. As HCI gradually bought out smaller companies' stakes in Johnnic, Golding denied that it was a hostile takeover attempt, saying, "How can it be hostile when you acquire shares on a willing-buyer, willing-seller basis?".[26] Johnnic was at that time chaired by Golding's former boss in the NUM, Cyril Ramaphosa.[27][28] HCI succeeded in its takeover[29] and Golding succeeded Ramaphosa as Johnnic chairperson in 2006.[30]

On 22 October 2014, HCI announced that Golding had been suspended from his chairmanship pending a disciplinary hearing into gross misconduct charges.[31] The board claimed that he had inappropriately purchased shares in Ellies, on behalf of an HCI subsidiary, without board authorisation.[32] Golding, however, said that he had been suspended as punishment for refusing to yield to political pressure at e.TV: according to Golding, he had been encouraged to ensure favourable coverage of President Jacob Zuma in the run-up to the 2014 general election but had refused. He claimed that Copelyn and HCI executive director Yunus Shaik (brother of Moe and Schabir) were "the driving forces behind the attempts to push me out" because they believed that Golding's recalcitrance harmed HCI's and SACTWU's interests.[32] The Mail & Guardian speculated that both explanations were "red herrings" and that Copelyn and Golding had fallen out over some other, undisclosed matter.[19]

Golding attempted unsuccessfully to challenge his suspension in the Cape Labour Court.[33] On 26 October, the day before his disciplinary hearing, Golding announced his retirement from HCI and its subsidiaries.[34] In an internal statement released the following day, Golding wrote:

You are aware of the reports in the newspapers over the past few days and the fact that I was suspended and expected to face certain charges brought against me by HCI. I deny these charges. I am of the view that the manner in which HCI intended to conduct my hearing as well as the circumstances which led to the decision to bring charges against me has rendered my employment relationship with HCI intolerable. The relationship of confidence and trust between myself and the board of HCI has broken down due to the manner in which the HCI board has conducted itself. In the circumstances, I have been forced to resign and I will in due course be bringing a claim of unfair dismissal on the grounds that I have been constructively dismissed.[34]

In the aftermath, Barbara Hogan, an independent non-executive director at HCI, also resigned,[34] saying that she was uneasy about the board's handling of the dispute and its broader handling of its media interests generally.[10][35] e.TV later acknowledged in a statement that "the boundaries of editorial control were not clear to everyone involved" in certain projects that covered government activities.[36][37]

Golding said that he would leave all employment positions but retain his directorships.[34][38] At the time of his resignation, he had superseded Copelyn as the largest individual shareholder in HCI[31] with an eight per cent stake, which he retained after leaving the company's employment.[19]