An assessment of the application of the internal dispute resolution in resolving disputes relating to unfair labour practice in the workplace
- Rasivhetshele, Aswindine Modystar
- Authors: Rasivhetshele, Aswindine Modystar
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Labor disputes
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/43036 , vital:36726
- Description: When grievances do not get resolved in the workplace, they can turn into disputes of unfair labour practices. The use of an internal dispute resolution mechanism, the grievance procedure, is not a new method for resolving disputes of unfair labour practices within the jurisdiction of the workplace. While some organisations benefit from effectively using the internal dispute resolution mechanism, other organisations seem not to yield positive results when applying the very same internal mechanism. This, therefore, raises the question whether the internal grievance procedures effectively used to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices. The main aim of this research study, therefore, is to assess the application of the internal dispute resolution mechanism in order to determine whether the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality in Pretoria, Gauteng Province of the Republic of South Africa, is effectively applying the internal dispute resolution mechanism to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices in the workplace. To answer the research questions, a literature study was conducted. A literature study was done to find out what other studies have discovered regarding the internal dispute resolution mechanism and unfair labour practices. Deficiencies found in the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the LRA), the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996; and the intertwine between the application of the common law and labour law further complicate resolutions of disputes of unfair labour practices. As a result, organisations may not be certain which specific law should mainly be taken into account when dealing with labour matters concerning unfair labour practices. As such, the internal dispute resolution mechanism may not be effectively applied in the workplace to minimise or prevent disputes of unfair labour practices from having a negative impact on the organisation. Once an organisation fails to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices inside the workplace, the efficiency of the organisation is compromised. The organisation is at risk of spending more time and possibly more money when disputes of unfair labour practices are referred to external dispute resolution institutions. An empirical research study using a quantitative research method was used to collect data. A structured online questionnaire was used to collect data from research respondents. A purposive sampling technique was used to obtain data from the personnel who are tasked with the duties and responsibilities of dealing and managing labour relations in the organisation. Respondents consisted of labour relations and human resources practitioners and labour relations and human resources managers. Data was obtained from 16 out of 23 respondents, which resulted in a 69% response rate. Findings of the study indicated that the internal dispute resolution mechanism of the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality was perceived to be ineffective in resolving disputes hence disputes were referred to external dispute institutions. In the process, the organisation incurred costs in terms of time and money. Furthermore, the time it took to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices negatively affected the morale of employees and productivity in the workplace. Although the majority of respondents had the competencies and skills, some individuals felt that the competencies and skills they had were not sufficient to enable them to deal with dispute resolution effectively. As a result, the lack of required competencies and skills affected the process of the dispute resolution of the organisation by causing delays in resolving unfair labour practices in the workplace. The research indicated that there were inconsistencies in the application of procedures regarding resolving disputes relating to unfair labour practices. As such, respondents perceived the grievance procedure as not being effectively used to reduce the number of disputes from escalating to external dispute resolution institutions. Respondents perceived that human resources and labour relations personnel did not apply fairness consistently when dealing with disputes of unfair labour practices. The research study concluded by revealing that the success of the internal dispute resolution mechanism in resolving disputes of unfair labour practices is achieved, and handicapped, by persons who are tasked with the responsibility of dealing and managing labour relations in the workplace.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
- Authors: Rasivhetshele, Aswindine Modystar
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Labor disputes
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/43036 , vital:36726
- Description: When grievances do not get resolved in the workplace, they can turn into disputes of unfair labour practices. The use of an internal dispute resolution mechanism, the grievance procedure, is not a new method for resolving disputes of unfair labour practices within the jurisdiction of the workplace. While some organisations benefit from effectively using the internal dispute resolution mechanism, other organisations seem not to yield positive results when applying the very same internal mechanism. This, therefore, raises the question whether the internal grievance procedures effectively used to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices. The main aim of this research study, therefore, is to assess the application of the internal dispute resolution mechanism in order to determine whether the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality in Pretoria, Gauteng Province of the Republic of South Africa, is effectively applying the internal dispute resolution mechanism to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices in the workplace. To answer the research questions, a literature study was conducted. A literature study was done to find out what other studies have discovered regarding the internal dispute resolution mechanism and unfair labour practices. Deficiencies found in the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the LRA), the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996; and the intertwine between the application of the common law and labour law further complicate resolutions of disputes of unfair labour practices. As a result, organisations may not be certain which specific law should mainly be taken into account when dealing with labour matters concerning unfair labour practices. As such, the internal dispute resolution mechanism may not be effectively applied in the workplace to minimise or prevent disputes of unfair labour practices from having a negative impact on the organisation. Once an organisation fails to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices inside the workplace, the efficiency of the organisation is compromised. The organisation is at risk of spending more time and possibly more money when disputes of unfair labour practices are referred to external dispute resolution institutions. An empirical research study using a quantitative research method was used to collect data. A structured online questionnaire was used to collect data from research respondents. A purposive sampling technique was used to obtain data from the personnel who are tasked with the duties and responsibilities of dealing and managing labour relations in the organisation. Respondents consisted of labour relations and human resources practitioners and labour relations and human resources managers. Data was obtained from 16 out of 23 respondents, which resulted in a 69% response rate. Findings of the study indicated that the internal dispute resolution mechanism of the City of Tshwane Metropolitan Municipality was perceived to be ineffective in resolving disputes hence disputes were referred to external dispute institutions. In the process, the organisation incurred costs in terms of time and money. Furthermore, the time it took to resolve disputes of unfair labour practices negatively affected the morale of employees and productivity in the workplace. Although the majority of respondents had the competencies and skills, some individuals felt that the competencies and skills they had were not sufficient to enable them to deal with dispute resolution effectively. As a result, the lack of required competencies and skills affected the process of the dispute resolution of the organisation by causing delays in resolving unfair labour practices in the workplace. The research indicated that there were inconsistencies in the application of procedures regarding resolving disputes relating to unfair labour practices. As such, respondents perceived the grievance procedure as not being effectively used to reduce the number of disputes from escalating to external dispute resolution institutions. Respondents perceived that human resources and labour relations personnel did not apply fairness consistently when dealing with disputes of unfair labour practices. The research study concluded by revealing that the success of the internal dispute resolution mechanism in resolving disputes of unfair labour practices is achieved, and handicapped, by persons who are tasked with the responsibility of dealing and managing labour relations in the workplace.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
A comparison of the Botswana and South African labour dispute: resolution systems
- Koorapetse, Michael Moemedi Sean
- Authors: Koorapetse, Michael Moemedi Sean
- Date: 2011
- Subjects: Labor disputes , Labor relations , Conflict management , Dispute resolution (Law)
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:9429 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1010556 , Labor disputes , Labor relations , Conflict management , Dispute resolution (Law)
- Description: The purpose of this study was to compare the dispute resolution systems of Botswana and South Africa. As far as the South Africa dispute resolution system is concerned extensive literature on the system was carried out to describe its functioning. As for the Botswana dispute resolution system there was not much written about it in the literature, so in order to find out more about this system semi-structured interviews with labour relations experts which include mediators, arbitrators, lecturers, labour lawyers, trade unionists, employers and government officials held. The framework of comparison was developed to compare the elements of dispute resolution systems against each other and secondly to compare each system against the criteria of performance to the system. The two labour relations systems were compared in terms of elements of the system and the performance of the two systems. In the comparisons of the elements of the systems it was found out that in both systems the nature of disputes was collective and individual disputes both of which can be referred to the initial process of mediation or conciliation. However, in Botswana collective disputes can only be referred to arbitration if they remain unresolved in mediation while in South Africa only collective disputes on essential services go to arbitration while others lead to a strike or lockout if unresolved at conciliation. As for coverage both systems have incorporated public service sector employees in the systems after being excluded from the system for a very long time. The only difference is that in Botswana the Police force is not included while in South Africa they are included in the system. Differences in the avenues of disputes in the two countries were noted, in Botswana the rights/individual disputes go to either arbitration or Industrial Court if unresolved at mediation, inter-est/collective disputes can only go to arbitration while in South Africa the route of disputes is specified in the legislation. As for the human resources of the two countries it was found that the South African system has more qualified, trained and sufficiently experienced staff than the Botswana system. As for the processes it was found that for South Africa the initial process is conciliation while in Botswana it is mediation but these two processes were similar in many ways, from mediation/conciliation the next step in both systems is arbitration and just like the conciliation/mediation, arbitration in both countries was found to be similar except that in South Africa it is a public hearing. The two systems were also compared in terms of their performances and the research has established that between the two systems the South African system proved to be more superior on three of the criteria; efficiency, accessibility and legitimacy than the Botswana system. Therefore, the research proposes a number of recommendations for Botswana to implement namely; establishment of a legislated mixed process of mediation-arbitration, making the dispute resolution system independent from government, recruitment of high qualified and experienced staff for mediation and arbitration, accreditation to private agencies, effective case management system and proper routing of disputes.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011
- Authors: Koorapetse, Michael Moemedi Sean
- Date: 2011
- Subjects: Labor disputes , Labor relations , Conflict management , Dispute resolution (Law)
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:9429 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1010556 , Labor disputes , Labor relations , Conflict management , Dispute resolution (Law)
- Description: The purpose of this study was to compare the dispute resolution systems of Botswana and South Africa. As far as the South Africa dispute resolution system is concerned extensive literature on the system was carried out to describe its functioning. As for the Botswana dispute resolution system there was not much written about it in the literature, so in order to find out more about this system semi-structured interviews with labour relations experts which include mediators, arbitrators, lecturers, labour lawyers, trade unionists, employers and government officials held. The framework of comparison was developed to compare the elements of dispute resolution systems against each other and secondly to compare each system against the criteria of performance to the system. The two labour relations systems were compared in terms of elements of the system and the performance of the two systems. In the comparisons of the elements of the systems it was found out that in both systems the nature of disputes was collective and individual disputes both of which can be referred to the initial process of mediation or conciliation. However, in Botswana collective disputes can only be referred to arbitration if they remain unresolved in mediation while in South Africa only collective disputes on essential services go to arbitration while others lead to a strike or lockout if unresolved at conciliation. As for coverage both systems have incorporated public service sector employees in the systems after being excluded from the system for a very long time. The only difference is that in Botswana the Police force is not included while in South Africa they are included in the system. Differences in the avenues of disputes in the two countries were noted, in Botswana the rights/individual disputes go to either arbitration or Industrial Court if unresolved at mediation, inter-est/collective disputes can only go to arbitration while in South Africa the route of disputes is specified in the legislation. As for the human resources of the two countries it was found that the South African system has more qualified, trained and sufficiently experienced staff than the Botswana system. As for the processes it was found that for South Africa the initial process is conciliation while in Botswana it is mediation but these two processes were similar in many ways, from mediation/conciliation the next step in both systems is arbitration and just like the conciliation/mediation, arbitration in both countries was found to be similar except that in South Africa it is a public hearing. The two systems were also compared in terms of their performances and the research has established that between the two systems the South African system proved to be more superior on three of the criteria; efficiency, accessibility and legitimacy than the Botswana system. Therefore, the research proposes a number of recommendations for Botswana to implement namely; establishment of a legislated mixed process of mediation-arbitration, making the dispute resolution system independent from government, recruitment of high qualified and experienced staff for mediation and arbitration, accreditation to private agencies, effective case management system and proper routing of disputes.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »