The relationship between perceived ethical leadership and employee life-satisfaction in South Africa
- Authors: van Rooyen, Uné
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Leadership -- Moral and ethical aspects , Leadership Business ethics Social responsibility of business
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/44100 , vital:37110
- Description: Leadership behaviour has a significant impact on follower outcomes. How leaders are perceived in terms of ethical leadership and integrity may have an impact on follower well-being. This non-experimental, correlational study aimed to determine the relationships between Ethical Leadership, employee Life-satisfaction and Job-satisfaction in South Africa. Perceived Leader Integrity was used as an indicator of Ethical Leadership. Employing the survey method, Ethical Leadership was measured with the Perceived Leadership Integrity Scale (PLIS), Life-satisfaction was measured with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and Job-satisfaction was measured with the Michigan Organisational Assessment Questionnaire Jobsatisfaction Subscale (MOAQ-JSS). The sample consisted of lower and middle managers in various organisations across different geographical locations in South Africa. Data was analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including Cronbach’s alpha testing, Person Product Moment correlation calculations as well as Independent samples T-tests and ANOVA statistics. The results indicated a positive, yet negligible relationship between Perceived Leader Integrity and Life-satisfaction, and a fair positive relationship between Perceived Leader Integrity and Job-satisfaction, as well as between Lifesatisfaction and Job-satisfaction. Despite several limitations, the study contributes to the current body of knowledge regarding leadership and well-being, specifically in a South African context. Recommendations for future research include cultural considerations, and more specific populations groups, among others.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
The relationship between perceived ethical leadership and employee life-satisfaction in South Africa
- Authors: van Rooyen, Uné
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: Leadership -- Moral and ethical aspects , Leadership Business ethics Social responsibility of business
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MCom
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/44100 , vital:37110
- Description: Leadership behaviour has a significant impact on follower outcomes. How leaders are perceived in terms of ethical leadership and integrity may have an impact on follower well-being. This non-experimental, correlational study aimed to determine the relationships between Ethical Leadership, employee Life-satisfaction and Job-satisfaction in South Africa. Perceived Leader Integrity was used as an indicator of Ethical Leadership. Employing the survey method, Ethical Leadership was measured with the Perceived Leadership Integrity Scale (PLIS), Life-satisfaction was measured with the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS) and Job-satisfaction was measured with the Michigan Organisational Assessment Questionnaire Jobsatisfaction Subscale (MOAQ-JSS). The sample consisted of lower and middle managers in various organisations across different geographical locations in South Africa. Data was analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics, including Cronbach’s alpha testing, Person Product Moment correlation calculations as well as Independent samples T-tests and ANOVA statistics. The results indicated a positive, yet negligible relationship between Perceived Leader Integrity and Life-satisfaction, and a fair positive relationship between Perceived Leader Integrity and Job-satisfaction, as well as between Lifesatisfaction and Job-satisfaction. Despite several limitations, the study contributes to the current body of knowledge regarding leadership and well-being, specifically in a South African context. Recommendations for future research include cultural considerations, and more specific populations groups, among others.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
Property development in Mthatha: an interactive framework
- Authors: Bavu, Sonwabile
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Real estate development -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape Land use -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Sustainable development -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/14553 , vital:27761
- Description: Property development (PD) is basically driven by the need or demand from the people. Sustainable property development has emerged in response to a global problem – and the need to maintain environmental integrity, according to Gurry (2011) cited by Botha (2013: 7). Keeping and Shiers (2004) state that property development, as a whole, has to balance social, economic and environmental needs. Emanating from the above, any successful development project must offer investors security, infrastructure and efficiency and should also put the needs of citizens at the forefront of all its planning activities. Availability of land, existing infrastructure, availability of finance, economic conditions, political influence and corruption always influence growth of property development in any area. This study aims to identify factors that contribute to lack of property development in Mthatha. Data collected shows that the challenges sometimes lead to failure and delays of the development. The purpose of this study is to identify these challenges, investigate the available literature, consider what has been done so far to address these challenges and make recommendations. It is essential to understand the state of the town and perceptions of the people in the area dealing with Property Development. Mthatha is the main focus of the study because of the perceived number of failed and delayed property development initiatives. The primary and secondary data collected provide the basis for understanding challenges that lead to such failures and delays. This research was conducted by means of a review of the related literature and an empirical study. The empirical study was conducted using a quantitative statistical approach by distributing research questionnaires to members falling within the sample population. The primary objective of the study is to develop a framework for successful implementation of property developments in Mthatha. The study’s findings reveal shortcomings which contribute to the study’s identified problems relating to property development in Mthatha, namely: decaying infrastructure, shortage of land, implementation of the IDP, availability of finance to promote real estate developments, political influence and corruption. Wikipedia defines Property Development as a “multifaceted business encompassing activities that range from the renovations and release of existing buildings to the purchase of land and the sale of improved land or parcels to others”. Harvey and Jowsey (2004), as cited by Botha (2013: 5), define Property Development as a process that involves changing or intensifying the use of land to produce buildings for occupation.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Bavu, Sonwabile
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Real estate development -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape Land use -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape , Sustainable development -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSc
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/14553 , vital:27761
- Description: Property development (PD) is basically driven by the need or demand from the people. Sustainable property development has emerged in response to a global problem – and the need to maintain environmental integrity, according to Gurry (2011) cited by Botha (2013: 7). Keeping and Shiers (2004) state that property development, as a whole, has to balance social, economic and environmental needs. Emanating from the above, any successful development project must offer investors security, infrastructure and efficiency and should also put the needs of citizens at the forefront of all its planning activities. Availability of land, existing infrastructure, availability of finance, economic conditions, political influence and corruption always influence growth of property development in any area. This study aims to identify factors that contribute to lack of property development in Mthatha. Data collected shows that the challenges sometimes lead to failure and delays of the development. The purpose of this study is to identify these challenges, investigate the available literature, consider what has been done so far to address these challenges and make recommendations. It is essential to understand the state of the town and perceptions of the people in the area dealing with Property Development. Mthatha is the main focus of the study because of the perceived number of failed and delayed property development initiatives. The primary and secondary data collected provide the basis for understanding challenges that lead to such failures and delays. This research was conducted by means of a review of the related literature and an empirical study. The empirical study was conducted using a quantitative statistical approach by distributing research questionnaires to members falling within the sample population. The primary objective of the study is to develop a framework for successful implementation of property developments in Mthatha. The study’s findings reveal shortcomings which contribute to the study’s identified problems relating to property development in Mthatha, namely: decaying infrastructure, shortage of land, implementation of the IDP, availability of finance to promote real estate developments, political influence and corruption. Wikipedia defines Property Development as a “multifaceted business encompassing activities that range from the renovations and release of existing buildings to the purchase of land and the sale of improved land or parcels to others”. Harvey and Jowsey (2004), as cited by Botha (2013: 5), define Property Development as a process that involves changing or intensifying the use of land to produce buildings for occupation.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
Establishing a fair sanction in misconduct cases
- Authors: Grigor, Francois
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10261 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1021217
- Description: It is the right of every employee in South Africa not to be unfairly dismissed. According to the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on the grounds of conduct, capacity or operational requirements. In addition, the employer is required to also comply with a fair procedure before effecting a dismissal. The requirement of procedural fairness is, however, not as stringent as it was under the previous dispensation established by the former Industrial Courts in terms of the earlier Labour Relations Act. The question as to whether or not a reason for dismissal is fair, is to be established by the facts of each individual case, and the suitability of dismissal as an appropriate remedy. It remains a challenge to establish if dismissal would be an appropriate sanction in a particular case of misconduct. The test is whether the award is one that a reasonable decision-maker could arrive at taking into account the evidence to be considered. It is no longer the employer’s view that is dominant, but “[u]ltimately, the commissioner’s sense of fairness is what must prevail”. The notion of fairness however applies equally to employer an employee and it involves balancing the competing and, every so often, inconsistent, interests of the employer on the one side, and the employee on the other side. The relative weight afforded to the particular interests creates very specific challenges, but nonetheless depends essentially on the overall circumstances of each individual case. Whether dismissal for misconduct is for a fair reason would established by the facts of the case, coupled with the appropriateness of dismissal as a sanction. Dismissal as a penalty should be reserved for cases involving serious misconduct and repeated disciplinary infractions. A crucial question would be whether the misconduct is of such a serious nature that it goes to the core of the employment relationship and makes any possible continued employment relationship intolerable. Additionally, apart from aspects like the importance of the rule breached and the harm caused by the employee’s breach, certain considerations should also be accounted, like length of service disciplinary history, and the employee’s personal circumstances, as well as the particular circumstances surrounding the infringement. Dishonest conduct by an employee that destroys the goodwill, trust and confidence an employer holds towards an employee, would normally be deemed as a significant breach which may justify a sanction of dismissal. The test is whether or not the misconduct was of such serious nature that it would make a continued employment relationship intolerable; “whether or not respondent’s actions had the effect of rendering the continuation of the relationship of employer and employee intolerable”. It still remains for the employer to present evidence that a continued relationship would be intolerable and not to merely liken serious misconduct with such a finding. Relatively recent case law seems to suggest that employers are entitled to a strict attitude towards dishonesty as a ground for dismissal. The objective of the CCMA Guidelines on Misconduct Arbitrations, effective from 1 January 2012, is to ensure that arbitrators issue consistent awards on dismissals involving misconduct. The questions that the guidelines seek to address are, inter alia, (i) how an arbitrator should conduct the proceedings; (ii) the valuation of evidence for the purpose of making an award; (iii) assessing the procedural fairness of a dismissal; (iv) assessing the substantive fairness of a dismissal; and (v) determining the remedy for an unfair dismissal. The Guidelines are peremptory in that arbitrators will have to take them into account and will have to provide an explanation if they deviate. It is undoubtedly a useful tool in guiding employers on what they need to present to commissioners at arbitration.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Grigor, Francois
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10261 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1021217
- Description: It is the right of every employee in South Africa not to be unfairly dismissed. According to the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on the grounds of conduct, capacity or operational requirements. In addition, the employer is required to also comply with a fair procedure before effecting a dismissal. The requirement of procedural fairness is, however, not as stringent as it was under the previous dispensation established by the former Industrial Courts in terms of the earlier Labour Relations Act. The question as to whether or not a reason for dismissal is fair, is to be established by the facts of each individual case, and the suitability of dismissal as an appropriate remedy. It remains a challenge to establish if dismissal would be an appropriate sanction in a particular case of misconduct. The test is whether the award is one that a reasonable decision-maker could arrive at taking into account the evidence to be considered. It is no longer the employer’s view that is dominant, but “[u]ltimately, the commissioner’s sense of fairness is what must prevail”. The notion of fairness however applies equally to employer an employee and it involves balancing the competing and, every so often, inconsistent, interests of the employer on the one side, and the employee on the other side. The relative weight afforded to the particular interests creates very specific challenges, but nonetheless depends essentially on the overall circumstances of each individual case. Whether dismissal for misconduct is for a fair reason would established by the facts of the case, coupled with the appropriateness of dismissal as a sanction. Dismissal as a penalty should be reserved for cases involving serious misconduct and repeated disciplinary infractions. A crucial question would be whether the misconduct is of such a serious nature that it goes to the core of the employment relationship and makes any possible continued employment relationship intolerable. Additionally, apart from aspects like the importance of the rule breached and the harm caused by the employee’s breach, certain considerations should also be accounted, like length of service disciplinary history, and the employee’s personal circumstances, as well as the particular circumstances surrounding the infringement. Dishonest conduct by an employee that destroys the goodwill, trust and confidence an employer holds towards an employee, would normally be deemed as a significant breach which may justify a sanction of dismissal. The test is whether or not the misconduct was of such serious nature that it would make a continued employment relationship intolerable; “whether or not respondent’s actions had the effect of rendering the continuation of the relationship of employer and employee intolerable”. It still remains for the employer to present evidence that a continued relationship would be intolerable and not to merely liken serious misconduct with such a finding. Relatively recent case law seems to suggest that employers are entitled to a strict attitude towards dishonesty as a ground for dismissal. The objective of the CCMA Guidelines on Misconduct Arbitrations, effective from 1 January 2012, is to ensure that arbitrators issue consistent awards on dismissals involving misconduct. The questions that the guidelines seek to address are, inter alia, (i) how an arbitrator should conduct the proceedings; (ii) the valuation of evidence for the purpose of making an award; (iii) assessing the procedural fairness of a dismissal; (iv) assessing the substantive fairness of a dismissal; and (v) determining the remedy for an unfair dismissal. The Guidelines are peremptory in that arbitrators will have to take them into account and will have to provide an explanation if they deviate. It is undoubtedly a useful tool in guiding employers on what they need to present to commissioners at arbitration.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
Strikes in the transport sector
- Authors: Grigor, Marius Hugo
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Strikes and lockouts -- South Africa , Arbitration, Industrial , Right to strike
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10300 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1021100
- Description: Strike action by employees is globally used in matters of mutual interest in order to place pressure on employers to meet their demands although the right to strike is not contained in any of the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) conventions or recommendations. Two conventions of the ILO are however relevant in the context of strikes and lockouts.1 The first is the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention 87 of 1948 and the second convention of importance is the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention 98 of 1949, both of which was ratified by South Africa and accordingly binds South Africa to comply with their provisions. The ILO appointed legal experts to assist the drafters of the Labour Relations Act,2 (LRA) in order to comply with these conventions. Furthermore section 3 of the LRA provides that the LRA must be interpreted in compliance with the international law obligations of South Africa. Section 27 of the Interim Constitution3 made provision for both the right to strike and the right of employers to lockout. In the proposed text of the final Constitution the recourse of the employer to lockout was not included. The text of the final Constitution was submitted to the Constitutional Court (CC) for certification in that it had to decide whether the new text of the final Constitution complied with the constitutional principles agreed to by the different political parties as the inviolable framework for the final Constitution. The CC delivered its judgment in Ex parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa4 and concluded that the omission of a right to lockout from the final Constitution does not conflict with constitutional principles. The CC did not agree with the argument, raised by Business South Africa, based on the proposition that the right of employers to lockout is the necessary equivalent to the right of workers to strike and that therefore, in order to treat workers and employers equally, both should be recognized in the new text. The result of this judgment is that employees’ right to strike is expressly protected by section 23 of the Constitution whilst the right of employers to lockout their employees is not expressly entrenched. The employers’ right is however protected by implication through the express protection of the right to bargain collectively in terms of section 23(5) of the Constitution and section 64 of the LRA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Grigor, Marius Hugo
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Strikes and lockouts -- South Africa , Arbitration, Industrial , Right to strike
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10300 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1021100
- Description: Strike action by employees is globally used in matters of mutual interest in order to place pressure on employers to meet their demands although the right to strike is not contained in any of the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) conventions or recommendations. Two conventions of the ILO are however relevant in the context of strikes and lockouts.1 The first is the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention 87 of 1948 and the second convention of importance is the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention 98 of 1949, both of which was ratified by South Africa and accordingly binds South Africa to comply with their provisions. The ILO appointed legal experts to assist the drafters of the Labour Relations Act,2 (LRA) in order to comply with these conventions. Furthermore section 3 of the LRA provides that the LRA must be interpreted in compliance with the international law obligations of South Africa. Section 27 of the Interim Constitution3 made provision for both the right to strike and the right of employers to lockout. In the proposed text of the final Constitution the recourse of the employer to lockout was not included. The text of the final Constitution was submitted to the Constitutional Court (CC) for certification in that it had to decide whether the new text of the final Constitution complied with the constitutional principles agreed to by the different political parties as the inviolable framework for the final Constitution. The CC delivered its judgment in Ex parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa4 and concluded that the omission of a right to lockout from the final Constitution does not conflict with constitutional principles. The CC did not agree with the argument, raised by Business South Africa, based on the proposition that the right of employers to lockout is the necessary equivalent to the right of workers to strike and that therefore, in order to treat workers and employers equally, both should be recognized in the new text. The result of this judgment is that employees’ right to strike is expressly protected by section 23 of the Constitution whilst the right of employers to lockout their employees is not expressly entrenched. The employers’ right is however protected by implication through the express protection of the right to bargain collectively in terms of section 23(5) of the Constitution and section 64 of the LRA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- «
- ‹
- 1
- ›
- »