- Title
- Critical analysis of the 2007 public service strike and its impact on the evolution of formalised collective bargaining in South Africa
- Creator
- Bhe, Vuyisile
- Subject
- Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Subject
- Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa
- Subject
- Strikes and lockouts -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Subject
- Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Subject
- Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Date Issued
- 2009
- Date
- 2009
- Type
- Thesis
- Type
- Masters
- Type
- LLM
- Identifier
- vital:10192
- Identifier
- http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1043
- Identifier
- Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Identifier
- Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa
- Identifier
- Strikes and lockouts -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Identifier
- Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Identifier
- Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Description
- Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act defines ’strike’ as the partial or complete concerted refusal to work, or the retardation or obstruction of work, by persons who are or have been employed by the same employer or by different employers, for the purpose of remedying a grievance or resolving a dispute in respect of any matter of mutual interest between the employer and employee, and any reference to “work” this definition includes overtime work, whether it is voluntary or compulsory. According to Mcllroy: “As long as our society is divided between those who own and control the means of production and those who only have the ability to work, strikes will be inevitable because they are the ultimate means workers have of protecting themselves.” 1 The Constitutional Court justified the exclusion of a constitutional right to lock out and the inclusion of a constitutional right to strike by indicating that the right to strike is not equivalent to a right to lock out and is essential for workplace democracy. 2 The right to strike is essential to bolster collective bargaining and thereby to give employees the power to bargain effectively with employers. The employers on the According to the Constitutional Court employers enjoy greater social and economic power compared to individual workers and may exercise a wide range of power against workers through a range of weapons, such as dismissal, the employment of alternative or replacement labour, the unilateral implementation of new terms and conditions of employment, and the exclusion of workers from the workplace. To combat this and have a say in the workplace, the Constitutional Court held that “employees need to act in concert to provide them collectively with sufficient power to bargain effectively with employers and exercise collective power primarily through the mechanism of strike action”. The importance of the right to strike in creating workplace democracy is also reflected in a number of Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court judgments. other hand have economic strength that is used to bargain effectively. That is why the strike enjoys constitutional protection, whereas the lock-out does not.
- Description
- Abstract
- Format
- iv, 71 leaves
- Format
- Publisher
- Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
- Publisher
- Faculty of Law
- Language
- English
- Rights
- Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
- Hits: 3452
- Visitors: 3479
- Downloads: 154
Collections
NMMU Department of Mercantile Law
| Thumbnail | File | Description | Size | Format | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| View Details Download | SOURCEPDF | 278 KB | Adobe Acrobat PDF | View Details Download |