How the Competition Commission is keeping school uniform prices in check

You can also listen to this podcast on iono.fm here.

JEREMY MAGGS: South African parents are heading into the new school year with that familiar financial shock: soaring prices for uniforms and basic stationery.

A new investigation shows parents paying premium mark-ups for branded school items, from blazers to simple pens, often because exclusive supply agreements limit where they can shop.

Listen/read: CompCom cracks down on school uniform price fixing [2024]

The Competition Commission says these restrictive practices inflate costs, reduce competition and hit poorer families the hardest. Let’s explore this in a little more detail.

I’m in conversation with Mpho Moate, who’s an analyst at the Competition Commission. Mpho, your investigation – and welcome to you – shows branded uniforms cost significantly more. Do you have a sense of how much more?

MPHO MOATE: Thanks, Jeremy. We are not able to give an exact price of how much or how excessive these school uniforms are.

But from the complaints that we have received from the parents, since we started the investigations in 2010, the investigation has revealed that indeed, the prices that these schools charge for school uniforms is indeed excessive.

It is not easy to then give you an exact number, but the outcome of the investigation is, in fact, that the prices are excessive.

When we do find that the prices are excessive, this is often also coupled with the finding that the school would have had an exclusive supply agreement with a particular supplier.

JEREMY MAGGS: Which I suppose begs the obvious question: why schools then are still signing exclusive supplier deals, despite warnings from the Competition Commission?

MPHO MOATE: Yeah, that is interesting, Jeremy. We have had complaints and suggestions from parents indicating that perhaps the schools get some money back from the suppliers. But we haven’t got to that point yet. But yes.

After we had received those complaints, at some point, I think in December 2025, when we calculated, we had come to a number of 490 complaints that we have received within the last five years.

Read: School uniform policy revisited [2018]

Luckily, within that period, we managed to resolve 465 of those complaints. But these complaints keep coming, and we do welcome our parents to bring them forward to the Commission.

JEREMY MAGGS: The point that you’re making about the complaints keep coming is disturbing, though, because the Competition Commission has flagged anti-competitive behaviour for years, and yet it still perpetuates.

MPHO MOATE: Yes, it is. One of the mitigating things that we have done, interventions that we have done, following these complaints, was to issue guidelines on school uniform to basically inform other schools or make them aware of the benefits that arise from competition, and also encourage the SGBs (School Governing Bodies) to implement and adopt policies that are more competitive.

Read: CompCom continues with school uniform investigation [2018]

For example, if they are going to appoint a supplier, they should do so following a procurement process where they would have issued a tender and selected suppliers from that.

JEREMY MAGGS: The sense I’m getting, though, is that often those guidelines are simply ignored.

MPHO MOATE: Not entirely. Despite the number of complaints that we have received, we have noted some compliance with the guidelines.

In 2022, the Commission conducted a survey with schools around the country, and a majority of those schools did respond and indicate that they were aware of the guidelines and that they were implementing the guideline.

But it becomes a bit difficult for the Commission to also continue monitoring, considering where we are based and the large number of schools that we have across the country.

But we continue to monitor the schools.

So what we have done, Jeremy, is that we have now developed a tool that will help us to monitor the challenge with schools, insofar as the guidelines are concerned.

We are hoping that we will issue this tool sometime in 2026. We are also banking on the relationship and the collaboration that we have with the Department of Basic Education to assist us in this regard.

JEREMY MAGGS: How many schools or suppliers have actually faced penalties for restrictive practices?

MPHO MOATE: We haven’t really penalised any school, Jeremy, per se, in the sense that we may have requested a school to pay a fee. We haven’t done that yet and this is really because we don’t want to embroil schools with litigious processes due to non-compliance.

What we have done is we have had instances where we settled with some schools, and some prominent independent schools, and large school uniform suppliers, following investigations in 2017.

What we have done is we have entered into this settlement agreement and requested them to comply with the guidelines and the Competition Act.

That is really because, as I have indicated, we don’t want to get entangled in litigious processes. We want the schools to comply above everything else.

ADVERTISEMENT:

CONTINUE READING BELOW

But given the number of outreaches and initiatives that we have done with the schools and within the school uniform market, unfortunately the Commission now is at a point where we are going to prosecute schools and suppliers who do not comply with the guidelines as well as the Competition Act.

JEREMY MAGGS: What I’m also hearing you saying – correct me if I’m wrong – that even though some schools have maybe reached a settlement with the Commission, the practice continues. They’ve ignored what you’ve said and continue to overcharge.

MPHO MOATE: Not necessarily the ones that have settled. We do have an instance or two from the ones that we have settled with, and they seem to not adhere to the agreement and the guidelines and the Act at large.

But we are monitoring those and we will engage with those going forward.

But with regard to the other schools in general – and this then goes to most of the public schools that we have had complaints from in the last year – what we have done is we have settled with them on the basis that they will send an undertaking – and they have – the undertaking then says that they will ensure that they will limit the contracts that they have with their suppliers to a period of five years or less, and that in the next appointment phases, they will ensure that they follow the competitive procurement processes.

JEREMY MAGGS: What does the Commission say to the argument from some schools that exclusivity ensures quality and consistency? Is there any evidence that this justification holds up?

MPHO MOATE: We have had those justifications. But I think what we then say is that the schools should not have as many specific uniforms in their list. They should have as many generic items as possible. This then enables parents to have a choice where they can source from suppliers.

So schools should also adopt or designate as many suppliers as possible to then give parents a choice in product and pricing.

We have had that justification, but we do assess it as and when we get those, Jeremy.

JEREMY MAGGS: Speaking to me from the Competition Commission, analyst, Mpho Moate, thank you very much indeed. I appreciate your time.

Follow Moneyweb’s in-depth finance and business news on WhatsApp here.