The dismissal of employees for a group or team misconduct
- Authors: Mnisi, Daphney Sibongile
- Date: 2021-04
- Subjects: Gqeberha (South Africa) , Eastern Cape (South Africa) , Unfair labor practices
- Language: English
- Type: Master's theses , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/51184 , vital:43226
- Description: South African labour law is founded on the fundamental constitutional right of fair “labour practices”. This fundamental right is afforded to both the employer and workers. This means that in the employment relationship, there are two competing rights involved which necessitate the need to strike a balance when each party’s rights are exercised. Therefore, this right is not absolute, and it is subject to limitations as per the provisions of section 36 of the Constitution. The Labour Relations Act, amongst other labour law resources considered in this research, give effect to those competing rights and seek to strike the necessary balance by establishing guidelines to protect the individual employee against unfair dismissals, amongst other things. It requires that the dismissal of an employee be fair. This requirement is met where two elements are fulfilled: (1) substantive fairness and (2) procedural fairness. The purpose of this study is to focus on “misconduct” as a valid reason for dismissal, as well as “group or team misconduct” which is included in the notion and ambit of “misconduct”. This type of misconduct involves a group or team who the employer has identified as having committed a misconduct, but the employer, due to different reasons explored in this research, is unable to identify the specific individual employees directly involved in the primary misconduct it wishes to prosecute. Therefore, the employer formulates a disciplinary charge of “group or team misconduct” to discipline the entire group or team. This group or team may form part of the entire workforce or a team within a department of the employer’s business. , Thesis (LLM) -- Faculty of Law, Mercantile Law, 2021
- Full Text: false
- Date Issued: 2021-04
- Authors: Mnisi, Daphney Sibongile
- Date: 2021-04
- Subjects: Gqeberha (South Africa) , Eastern Cape (South Africa) , Unfair labor practices
- Language: English
- Type: Master's theses , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/51184 , vital:43226
- Description: South African labour law is founded on the fundamental constitutional right of fair “labour practices”. This fundamental right is afforded to both the employer and workers. This means that in the employment relationship, there are two competing rights involved which necessitate the need to strike a balance when each party’s rights are exercised. Therefore, this right is not absolute, and it is subject to limitations as per the provisions of section 36 of the Constitution. The Labour Relations Act, amongst other labour law resources considered in this research, give effect to those competing rights and seek to strike the necessary balance by establishing guidelines to protect the individual employee against unfair dismissals, amongst other things. It requires that the dismissal of an employee be fair. This requirement is met where two elements are fulfilled: (1) substantive fairness and (2) procedural fairness. The purpose of this study is to focus on “misconduct” as a valid reason for dismissal, as well as “group or team misconduct” which is included in the notion and ambit of “misconduct”. This type of misconduct involves a group or team who the employer has identified as having committed a misconduct, but the employer, due to different reasons explored in this research, is unable to identify the specific individual employees directly involved in the primary misconduct it wishes to prosecute. Therefore, the employer formulates a disciplinary charge of “group or team misconduct” to discipline the entire group or team. This group or team may form part of the entire workforce or a team within a department of the employer’s business. , Thesis (LLM) -- Faculty of Law, Mercantile Law, 2021
- Full Text: false
- Date Issued: 2021-04
Implications of the protection of state information bill on government accountability: a critical analysis of governance in post-apartheid South Africa
- Authors: Obi, Maryjane Chukwunyem
- Date: 2015-01
- Subjects: Government accountability , Transparency in government , Post-apartheid era -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Master's theses , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10353/25874 , vital:64560
- Description: The study explores the following research questions; the nature of State access to and restriction of information during the apartheid era, the tenets of democratic leadership and good governance in the new dispensation in South Africa and the possible consequences of the Bill in its present form on democratic principles of accountability and transparency in South Africa. In terms of the methodology, the study critically analysed some sections of the Protection of State Information Bill-B6-2010 in relation to the principles of accountability and transparency in a democratic South Africa in accordance to the Bill of Rights enshrined in the Constitution section 32. The study recommends that government could include “public interest clause to the current Bill. This is to ensure that the public are able to play their Constitutional role, in which they are able to hold government accountable for the decisions taken and also help foster a system of government that is accountable, transparent, open, efficient and responsive to the Constitutional needs of the public. In addition, the study also recommends that government should consider the reduction of the period within which information may be declassified. It suggests that it should be reduced from 20 to 10 years in order to ensure that democratic government provides its citizens with information that is timely in making an informed decision in relation to governance. The study further recommends that the appeal process for information before the court of law should be done by an independent judge. This is to ensure that the court of law performs its duties without interference from government representatives and that it carries out its duties in a fair manner as envisaged or enshrined in section 34 of the Constitution in the Bill of Rights. The study further recommends that government should ensure that the current information Bill in the new dispensation should hold the elected delegates appointed by the Head of State accountable. This is to ensure that transparency and accountability is promoted at all level in government. , Thesis (MA) -- Faculty of Management and Commerce , 2015
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015-01
- Authors: Obi, Maryjane Chukwunyem
- Date: 2015-01
- Subjects: Government accountability , Transparency in government , Post-apartheid era -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Master's theses , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10353/25874 , vital:64560
- Description: The study explores the following research questions; the nature of State access to and restriction of information during the apartheid era, the tenets of democratic leadership and good governance in the new dispensation in South Africa and the possible consequences of the Bill in its present form on democratic principles of accountability and transparency in South Africa. In terms of the methodology, the study critically analysed some sections of the Protection of State Information Bill-B6-2010 in relation to the principles of accountability and transparency in a democratic South Africa in accordance to the Bill of Rights enshrined in the Constitution section 32. The study recommends that government could include “public interest clause to the current Bill. This is to ensure that the public are able to play their Constitutional role, in which they are able to hold government accountable for the decisions taken and also help foster a system of government that is accountable, transparent, open, efficient and responsive to the Constitutional needs of the public. In addition, the study also recommends that government should consider the reduction of the period within which information may be declassified. It suggests that it should be reduced from 20 to 10 years in order to ensure that democratic government provides its citizens with information that is timely in making an informed decision in relation to governance. The study further recommends that the appeal process for information before the court of law should be done by an independent judge. This is to ensure that the court of law performs its duties without interference from government representatives and that it carries out its duties in a fair manner as envisaged or enshrined in section 34 of the Constitution in the Bill of Rights. The study further recommends that government should ensure that the current information Bill in the new dispensation should hold the elected delegates appointed by the Head of State accountable. This is to ensure that transparency and accountability is promoted at all level in government. , Thesis (MA) -- Faculty of Management and Commerce , 2015
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015-01
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »