The protection offered in terms of the 2014 labour law amendments to fixed-term Contract and part-time employees
- Authors: Ntsebeza, Uonella
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Labor contract -- South Africa Employee rights -- South Africa Labor market -- laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/33567 , vital:32888
- Description: Labour law knows that employers are generally in a stronger bargaining position than employees.1Therefore, labour law is largely premised on the idea of protection of the interest of employees. Fixed term employees2 as ‘atypical’3 or ‘conditional’ employees are particularly weak bargaining parties in the employment relationship. It is common practice for employers to treat fixed term and part-time employees differently to their permanent colleagues. Temporary employment relationships are often associated with the withholding of rights and benefits, lack of job security, deprivation of status and poor remuneration. Fixed term employees are also likely to be more exposed to exploitation, particularly those who are not highly skilled. 4In addition, they often do not enjoy trade union protection and are not covered by collective agreements. Most of these workers are unskilled or work in sectors with limited trade union organisation and limited coverage by collective bargaining, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. Therefore, fixed term employees are more inclined to depend on the statutory protection enacted to ensure basic working conditions. These employees are often not recruited into trade unions due to the precarious or temporary nature of their work fixed term employees are more inclined to depend on statutory protection enacted to ensure basic working conditions.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
- Authors: Ntsebeza, Uonella
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Labor contract -- South Africa Employee rights -- South Africa Labor market -- laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/33567 , vital:32888
- Description: Labour law knows that employers are generally in a stronger bargaining position than employees.1Therefore, labour law is largely premised on the idea of protection of the interest of employees. Fixed term employees2 as ‘atypical’3 or ‘conditional’ employees are particularly weak bargaining parties in the employment relationship. It is common practice for employers to treat fixed term and part-time employees differently to their permanent colleagues. Temporary employment relationships are often associated with the withholding of rights and benefits, lack of job security, deprivation of status and poor remuneration. Fixed term employees are also likely to be more exposed to exploitation, particularly those who are not highly skilled. 4In addition, they often do not enjoy trade union protection and are not covered by collective agreements. Most of these workers are unskilled or work in sectors with limited trade union organisation and limited coverage by collective bargaining, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. Therefore, fixed term employees are more inclined to depend on the statutory protection enacted to ensure basic working conditions. These employees are often not recruited into trade unions due to the precarious or temporary nature of their work fixed term employees are more inclined to depend on statutory protection enacted to ensure basic working conditions.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
The return-to-work policy for injured and diseased workers
- Authors: Keti, Nosicelo
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Employees -- Rehabilitation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Workers' compensation Industrial accidents
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/31064 , vital:31307
- Description: Despite measures undertaken by employers in promoting safety in the workplace, employees become injured or diseased due to work related accidents. When an employee sustains a work related injury or disease that results in their short term or prolonged absence from work, it becomes crucial for the employer to return the injured or diseased employee back to work as quickly as possible. Returning employees back to work as early as possible becomes an important factor in reducing worker’s compensation costs. In South Africa, unlike developed countries like the United Kingdom, there is still a lack or absence of rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes. The lack or absence of suitable rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes that not only ensure that an injured or diseased employee is returned to work, but further enable such injured or diseased employee to attain, keep and progress in employment often results in employees becoming dependent on disability grants or social welfare payments. There is recognition that some effort is required to ensure that employees who have been affected by work related injuries or diseases are returned to gainful employment. The Committee of Inquiry into a Comprehensive System of Social Security for South Africa, in 2002, highlighted that “modern social protection policy making is no longer therapeutic but also pre-emptive and restorative or rehabilitative in nature”. The study investigated the need for the South African government and business to adopt and implement programmes or systems that are targeted at correcting or restoring the damage. This can be achieved through retraining, re-skilling and social integration of the injured or diseased employees. The findings indicate that despite recognition by the Compensation of Occupational Injuries and Disease Act (COIDA) of the need to establish and implement appropriate rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes, such programmes have still not been established in South Africa. There are, however, initiatives directed towards the establishment and implementation of these programmes and these are found in the proposed COIDA amendment Bill which prioritises rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW. Proposed in the Bill, is the imposition of incentives for those employers who successfully implement rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes within their workplaces and penalties against those who fail to comply with the provisions of the proposed Bill. Another relief can be seen in the form of the Road Accident Benefit Scheme (RABS) Bill, which will soon replace the Road Accident Fund (RAF). Unlike the RAF, which is primarily concerned about the compensation of road accident victims through lump sum payments, RABS will particularly focus on rehabilitation and vocational training and will offer payments in a structured manner to not only ensure the continual financial support of the accident victims, but further that the proposed scheme remains sustainable in the long term. Further findings are that although the Constitution of the v Republic of South Africa has adopted an international law friendly approach and the Bill of Rights is in support of the implementation of RTW measures, South African law is not aligned to international and regional standards. South Africa has still not ratified international instruments that promote the early return of injured or diseased employees back to work. In conclusion, South Africa needs to adopt and implement rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW measures or programmes for injured or diseased workers in order to address the high unemployment rate, poverty and dependence on State funded social assistance services.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
- Authors: Keti, Nosicelo
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Employees -- Rehabilitation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Workers' compensation Industrial accidents
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/31064 , vital:31307
- Description: Despite measures undertaken by employers in promoting safety in the workplace, employees become injured or diseased due to work related accidents. When an employee sustains a work related injury or disease that results in their short term or prolonged absence from work, it becomes crucial for the employer to return the injured or diseased employee back to work as quickly as possible. Returning employees back to work as early as possible becomes an important factor in reducing worker’s compensation costs. In South Africa, unlike developed countries like the United Kingdom, there is still a lack or absence of rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes. The lack or absence of suitable rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes that not only ensure that an injured or diseased employee is returned to work, but further enable such injured or diseased employee to attain, keep and progress in employment often results in employees becoming dependent on disability grants or social welfare payments. There is recognition that some effort is required to ensure that employees who have been affected by work related injuries or diseases are returned to gainful employment. The Committee of Inquiry into a Comprehensive System of Social Security for South Africa, in 2002, highlighted that “modern social protection policy making is no longer therapeutic but also pre-emptive and restorative or rehabilitative in nature”. The study investigated the need for the South African government and business to adopt and implement programmes or systems that are targeted at correcting or restoring the damage. This can be achieved through retraining, re-skilling and social integration of the injured or diseased employees. The findings indicate that despite recognition by the Compensation of Occupational Injuries and Disease Act (COIDA) of the need to establish and implement appropriate rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes, such programmes have still not been established in South Africa. There are, however, initiatives directed towards the establishment and implementation of these programmes and these are found in the proposed COIDA amendment Bill which prioritises rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW. Proposed in the Bill, is the imposition of incentives for those employers who successfully implement rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW programmes within their workplaces and penalties against those who fail to comply with the provisions of the proposed Bill. Another relief can be seen in the form of the Road Accident Benefit Scheme (RABS) Bill, which will soon replace the Road Accident Fund (RAF). Unlike the RAF, which is primarily concerned about the compensation of road accident victims through lump sum payments, RABS will particularly focus on rehabilitation and vocational training and will offer payments in a structured manner to not only ensure the continual financial support of the accident victims, but further that the proposed scheme remains sustainable in the long term. Further findings are that although the Constitution of the v Republic of South Africa has adopted an international law friendly approach and the Bill of Rights is in support of the implementation of RTW measures, South African law is not aligned to international and regional standards. South Africa has still not ratified international instruments that promote the early return of injured or diseased employees back to work. In conclusion, South Africa needs to adopt and implement rehabilitation, reintegration and RTW measures or programmes for injured or diseased workers in order to address the high unemployment rate, poverty and dependence on State funded social assistance services.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
The role of the CCMA and bargaining councils in labour dispute resolution
- Authors: Mkalipi, Thembinkosi
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: South Africa -- Commission for Conciliation, Mediation, and Arbitration , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa Arbitration, Industrial -- South Africa Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/32182 , vital:31977
- Description: A feature of collective bargaining is that it has a habit of ending in deadlock. However, in the event of a dispute, an aggrieved party is not free to call an immediate strike or lockout. The Labour Relations Act of 1956 and the Labour Relations Act of 1995 (“the LRA”) provided for a strict procedure to be followed in an event of a dispute. The law before 1995 regarded industrial action in the case of a dispute that did not follow the procedure as an illegal act attracting criminal sanction. The law then distinguished between a dispute of right and a dispute of interest. Like many countries, South Africa, has a very violent history regarding the resolution of labour disputes. This is illustrated by the force and brutality that was used to solve the 1913 white miners’ strike after martial law was declared. The reaction of the employers and the state was more brutal. The same violence and brutality were applied in the 1914 railway-workers strike and the 1946 African workers strike. The most important purpose of labour law is to ensure labour peace will prevail in the labour market and to regulate relations between employer and employee. Labour peace ensures that the economy functions effectively and if this happens, society at large benefits greatly. In Chapter 1 of the LRA one of the purposes of the LRA is stated as: “the effective resolution of labour disputes.” This section is intended to give effect section 23(1) of the Constitution, which provide that, ‘‘everyone has the right to fair labour practices’’1. This treatise will analyse the role of the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (the CCMA) in dispute resolution; its functions and jurisdiction, ensure labour peace and whether the dispute resolution system provided in the law and implemented by the different dispute resolution institutions have succeeded to advance Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 [1996]. Economic development, social justice, labour peace and the democratisation of the workplace to fulfil the purpose of the LRA. Under the previous Labour Relations Act2 (the “1956 LRA”) disputes were resolved through three main institutions namely, Conciliation Boards, Industrial Councils and the Industrial Court3. A Conciliation Board was on ad hoc - body established by the Minister of Manpower on application by any one of the parties in dispute. There was no requirement for an agreement between the disputing parties to apply for the establishment of a Conciliation Board. Either party could approach the Minister for its establishment. This application could be made on the workers side by one or more registered trade unions, one or more employees, or one or more registered trade unions. On the employer’s side, the application can be made by one or more registered employers’ organisations or, one or more employers.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
- Authors: Mkalipi, Thembinkosi
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: South Africa -- Commission for Conciliation, Mediation, and Arbitration , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa Arbitration, Industrial -- South Africa Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/32182 , vital:31977
- Description: A feature of collective bargaining is that it has a habit of ending in deadlock. However, in the event of a dispute, an aggrieved party is not free to call an immediate strike or lockout. The Labour Relations Act of 1956 and the Labour Relations Act of 1995 (“the LRA”) provided for a strict procedure to be followed in an event of a dispute. The law before 1995 regarded industrial action in the case of a dispute that did not follow the procedure as an illegal act attracting criminal sanction. The law then distinguished between a dispute of right and a dispute of interest. Like many countries, South Africa, has a very violent history regarding the resolution of labour disputes. This is illustrated by the force and brutality that was used to solve the 1913 white miners’ strike after martial law was declared. The reaction of the employers and the state was more brutal. The same violence and brutality were applied in the 1914 railway-workers strike and the 1946 African workers strike. The most important purpose of labour law is to ensure labour peace will prevail in the labour market and to regulate relations between employer and employee. Labour peace ensures that the economy functions effectively and if this happens, society at large benefits greatly. In Chapter 1 of the LRA one of the purposes of the LRA is stated as: “the effective resolution of labour disputes.” This section is intended to give effect section 23(1) of the Constitution, which provide that, ‘‘everyone has the right to fair labour practices’’1. This treatise will analyse the role of the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (the CCMA) in dispute resolution; its functions and jurisdiction, ensure labour peace and whether the dispute resolution system provided in the law and implemented by the different dispute resolution institutions have succeeded to advance Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 [1996]. Economic development, social justice, labour peace and the democratisation of the workplace to fulfil the purpose of the LRA. Under the previous Labour Relations Act2 (the “1956 LRA”) disputes were resolved through three main institutions namely, Conciliation Boards, Industrial Councils and the Industrial Court3. A Conciliation Board was on ad hoc - body established by the Minister of Manpower on application by any one of the parties in dispute. There was no requirement for an agreement between the disputing parties to apply for the establishment of a Conciliation Board. Either party could approach the Minister for its establishment. This application could be made on the workers side by one or more registered trade unions, one or more employees, or one or more registered trade unions. On the employer’s side, the application can be made by one or more registered employers’ organisations or, one or more employers.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
The unfair labour practice relating to suspension
- Authors: Moela, Matlose Phineas
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Labor policy -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/23038 , vital:30398
- Description: This treatise considers unfair-labour- practice relating to suspensions in the workplace. Furthermore the treatise outlines the legal framework relating to suspensions in the workplace. As I explore this fundamental issues of the law, the fairness relating to suspension will be examined. Some recommendations are also made as to how departments and organisations must develop guidelines and policies which are legally sound to deal with suspension in the workplace. Employees often challenge the fairness of their suspension in the workplace. These challenges are based on a number of things, including failure to provide an employee to make representations, failure to comply with policies regulating suspensions in the workplace, suspension without pay, prolonged suspensions, etc. The treatise therefore also consider these challenges as well as the recourse available to employees. The treatise commences with the legal framework and principles contained in the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the LRA) applicable to suspensions. The treatise then considers other legislation and recent developments in both the public and private sector. The study concludes with remedies available to employees in instances where an unfair-labour-practice relating to suspension has been found to be committed by an employer during the suspension process.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
- Authors: Moela, Matlose Phineas
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Labor policy -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/23038 , vital:30398
- Description: This treatise considers unfair-labour- practice relating to suspensions in the workplace. Furthermore the treatise outlines the legal framework relating to suspensions in the workplace. As I explore this fundamental issues of the law, the fairness relating to suspension will be examined. Some recommendations are also made as to how departments and organisations must develop guidelines and policies which are legally sound to deal with suspension in the workplace. Employees often challenge the fairness of their suspension in the workplace. These challenges are based on a number of things, including failure to provide an employee to make representations, failure to comply with policies regulating suspensions in the workplace, suspension without pay, prolonged suspensions, etc. The treatise therefore also consider these challenges as well as the recourse available to employees. The treatise commences with the legal framework and principles contained in the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (hereinafter referred to as the LRA) applicable to suspensions. The treatise then considers other legislation and recent developments in both the public and private sector. The study concludes with remedies available to employees in instances where an unfair-labour-practice relating to suspension has been found to be committed by an employer during the suspension process.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
Unfair discrimination and affirmative action in the workplace
- Authors: Motona, Johannes
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa Affirmative action programs -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/32300 , vital:32007
- Description: South Africa enacted the following legislation, the Constitution, the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 and the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 and the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. In terms of the Constitution a notion of substantive equality was incorporated in the Bill of Rights. Section 9 of the Constitution specifically provides that no person may be discriminated against and provides a list of grounds which are specifically prohibited. Furthermore, the Constitution affirms the values of equality, dignity and freedom. The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 aims at eliminating social and economic inequalities which were created by apartheid. The Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 is similar to the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act and takes into consideration the inequalities in employment, occupation and income which exist as a result of apartheid. In maintaining the objective of this treatise, section 6(2) of the EEA must be seen as an extension of and read in light of section 9(2) of the Constitution which provides that equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms and permits the use of legislative and other measures, designed to protect or advance persons or categories of persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination in the past for the purpose of achieving substantive equality. Therefore, section 6(2)(a) of the EEA may be considered the statutory equivalent of section 9(2) of the Constitution. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 has a key and crucial commitment to substantive equality and to correct the imbalances of the past and to create a less divided society in which the constitutional democracy can be advanced. The Constitution identifies human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms as some of the basic values upon which South Africa is founded. The Constitution restraints the state and any person from unfairly discriminating on grounds that adversely impacts upon dignity. It further empowers the state to take legislative and other measures to advance persons previously disadvantaged by unfair discrimination. This treatise covers the test for affirmative action as in the Harksen Test, Minister of Finance v Van Heerden and recently strengthened in Solidarity obo Barnard v SA Police Services. It also deals with the Barnard trilogy. Of significance is that the Constitutional Court judgment in Barnard is the first Constitutional Court judgment dealing with affirmative action and its application in terms of the EEA. The judgment strengthens the Constitutional Court finding in Van Heerden in that a restitutionary measure such as affirmative action is not presumed unfair unless it complies with the section 9(2) “internal test”. The Post Barnard Judgment is also discussed in this treatise with reference to the following cases: Mgolozeli v Gauteng Department of Finance and Another, Solidarity and the Department of Correctional Services, South Africa Police Service v the Public Service Association of South Africa: Captain Munsamy and another and Solidarity v the Minister of Safety and Security and others.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
- Authors: Motona, Johannes
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa Affirmative action programs -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/32300 , vital:32007
- Description: South Africa enacted the following legislation, the Constitution, the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 and the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 and the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. In terms of the Constitution a notion of substantive equality was incorporated in the Bill of Rights. Section 9 of the Constitution specifically provides that no person may be discriminated against and provides a list of grounds which are specifically prohibited. Furthermore, the Constitution affirms the values of equality, dignity and freedom. The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act 4 of 2000 aims at eliminating social and economic inequalities which were created by apartheid. The Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 is similar to the Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act and takes into consideration the inequalities in employment, occupation and income which exist as a result of apartheid. In maintaining the objective of this treatise, section 6(2) of the EEA must be seen as an extension of and read in light of section 9(2) of the Constitution which provides that equality includes the full and equal enjoyment of all rights and freedoms and permits the use of legislative and other measures, designed to protect or advance persons or categories of persons disadvantaged by unfair discrimination in the past for the purpose of achieving substantive equality. Therefore, section 6(2)(a) of the EEA may be considered the statutory equivalent of section 9(2) of the Constitution. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 has a key and crucial commitment to substantive equality and to correct the imbalances of the past and to create a less divided society in which the constitutional democracy can be advanced. The Constitution identifies human dignity, the achievement of equality and the advancement of human rights and freedoms as some of the basic values upon which South Africa is founded. The Constitution restraints the state and any person from unfairly discriminating on grounds that adversely impacts upon dignity. It further empowers the state to take legislative and other measures to advance persons previously disadvantaged by unfair discrimination. This treatise covers the test for affirmative action as in the Harksen Test, Minister of Finance v Van Heerden and recently strengthened in Solidarity obo Barnard v SA Police Services. It also deals with the Barnard trilogy. Of significance is that the Constitutional Court judgment in Barnard is the first Constitutional Court judgment dealing with affirmative action and its application in terms of the EEA. The judgment strengthens the Constitutional Court finding in Van Heerden in that a restitutionary measure such as affirmative action is not presumed unfair unless it complies with the section 9(2) “internal test”. The Post Barnard Judgment is also discussed in this treatise with reference to the following cases: Mgolozeli v Gauteng Department of Finance and Another, Solidarity and the Department of Correctional Services, South Africa Police Service v the Public Service Association of South Africa: Captain Munsamy and another and Solidarity v the Minister of Safety and Security and others.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
Dismissal for operational requirements in the context of collective bargaining
- Authors: Mfaxa, Mncedisi
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- Dismissal of Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/13923 , vital:27358
- Description: The highly competitive environment in which companies functions prompts the need to review their operations which may include reconsideration of the manning levels, and or changing terms and conditions of employment in order to be able to survive and prosper economically. The difficulty arises when the employers have to respond to the challenges. By law the employers are legally prohibited from unilaterally effecting the changes to the terms and conditions of employment. Furthermore, changing terms and conditions of employment is dealt with through collective bargaining and as such, the dismissal is outlawed as a legitimate instrument to coerce the employees to concede to the proposals. So the employers have to obtain an agreement or consent with the affected employees. In terms of the 1956 LRA the employer could justifiably terminate the contract of employment within the context of collective bargaining. For the employer to avoid offending the lock out provisions in terms of the 1956 LRA, the lock-out dismissal had to be effected in order to achieve a specific purpose, and it had to be conditional. Unlike its predecessor, the 1995 Labour Relations Act introduced section 187(1)(c) which renders the so-called lock-out dismissal by an employer, within the context of collective bargaining, automatically unfair. Section 187(1)(c) categorises a dismissal as automatically unfair, if the reason is a refusal by employees to accept a demand in respect of any matter of mutual interest between them and their employer. The employers are however permitted in terms of the 1995 LRA, to dismiss the employees based on operational grounds, as long as the requisite process has been adhered to. The employers need to restructure their operations in order to ensure that terms and conditions of employment are responsive to operational needs. Where the employees’ terms and conditions of employment are not in line with the company operational requirements, the need to terminate the employment contracts of the employees may arise. The employers are within their right to terminate the service of the employees who refuse to accept changes to their conditions of service based on the employers’ operational requirements. The court in Schoeman v Samsung Electronics confirmed that employer’s right to run its business in a successful manner, which includes affecting changes to the existing terms and conditions of employment to be aligned with the market demand. The dismissal is outlawed as a mechanism to coerce the employees to acceptance the employer’s demand relating to matters of mutual interest. At the same time, the employers are within their rights terminate the service of the employees who refuse to accept changes to their conditions of service based on the employers operational requirements. There is a clear tension between sections 187(1) (c), 188(1) (ii) and 189 of LRA. When the employers seek to review the terms and conditions of employment, the tension between these sections becomes more common, as it involves the matters of mutual interest which are dealt with through the collective bargaining arena and the dispute of right through arbitration. In Fry’s Metals v Numsa the court rejected the notion that there is tension between section 187(1) (c) and section 188(1) (a) (ii) of the LRA. Instead the court was of the view that, there is a historical context to section 187(1) (c) which is the now repealed 1956 Labour Relations Act. The 1956 LRA included in its definition of a lock-out the termination by the employer. Secondly, the court interpreted section 187(1)(C) to only give protection to employees who are dismissed in order to compel them to accept a demand on a matter of mutual interest, and only where the dismissal was of a temporary nature. The court interpretation in Fry’s metals implied that, section 187(1)(c) will only come to the defence of employees if they are dismissed for the purpose compelling them to accept a demand on a matter of mutual interest, and if the dismissal was of a temporary nature. Where a permanent dismissal is effected because employees would not accept its demands, section 187(1) (c) could not come to the employees’ protection. Considering that the lock out provided for in terms of the 1995 LRA is not a preferred option by most of the employers, they will rather resort to use the loophole created by the narrow interpretation of section 187(1)(c) to circumvent having to secure consensus from the affected employees and rather dismissed them based on operational requirements. This study seeks to deal with the questions relating to the relationship between collective bargaining related dismissals in particular the automatically unfair dismissal in terms of section 187(1) (c) and business restructuring related dismissal. As such the relationship between sections 187(1) (c) and dismissals based on operational requirements will be central to this study.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Mfaxa, Mncedisi
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- Dismissal of Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/13923 , vital:27358
- Description: The highly competitive environment in which companies functions prompts the need to review their operations which may include reconsideration of the manning levels, and or changing terms and conditions of employment in order to be able to survive and prosper economically. The difficulty arises when the employers have to respond to the challenges. By law the employers are legally prohibited from unilaterally effecting the changes to the terms and conditions of employment. Furthermore, changing terms and conditions of employment is dealt with through collective bargaining and as such, the dismissal is outlawed as a legitimate instrument to coerce the employees to concede to the proposals. So the employers have to obtain an agreement or consent with the affected employees. In terms of the 1956 LRA the employer could justifiably terminate the contract of employment within the context of collective bargaining. For the employer to avoid offending the lock out provisions in terms of the 1956 LRA, the lock-out dismissal had to be effected in order to achieve a specific purpose, and it had to be conditional. Unlike its predecessor, the 1995 Labour Relations Act introduced section 187(1)(c) which renders the so-called lock-out dismissal by an employer, within the context of collective bargaining, automatically unfair. Section 187(1)(c) categorises a dismissal as automatically unfair, if the reason is a refusal by employees to accept a demand in respect of any matter of mutual interest between them and their employer. The employers are however permitted in terms of the 1995 LRA, to dismiss the employees based on operational grounds, as long as the requisite process has been adhered to. The employers need to restructure their operations in order to ensure that terms and conditions of employment are responsive to operational needs. Where the employees’ terms and conditions of employment are not in line with the company operational requirements, the need to terminate the employment contracts of the employees may arise. The employers are within their right to terminate the service of the employees who refuse to accept changes to their conditions of service based on the employers’ operational requirements. The court in Schoeman v Samsung Electronics confirmed that employer’s right to run its business in a successful manner, which includes affecting changes to the existing terms and conditions of employment to be aligned with the market demand. The dismissal is outlawed as a mechanism to coerce the employees to acceptance the employer’s demand relating to matters of mutual interest. At the same time, the employers are within their rights terminate the service of the employees who refuse to accept changes to their conditions of service based on the employers operational requirements. There is a clear tension between sections 187(1) (c), 188(1) (ii) and 189 of LRA. When the employers seek to review the terms and conditions of employment, the tension between these sections becomes more common, as it involves the matters of mutual interest which are dealt with through the collective bargaining arena and the dispute of right through arbitration. In Fry’s Metals v Numsa the court rejected the notion that there is tension between section 187(1) (c) and section 188(1) (a) (ii) of the LRA. Instead the court was of the view that, there is a historical context to section 187(1) (c) which is the now repealed 1956 Labour Relations Act. The 1956 LRA included in its definition of a lock-out the termination by the employer. Secondly, the court interpreted section 187(1)(C) to only give protection to employees who are dismissed in order to compel them to accept a demand on a matter of mutual interest, and only where the dismissal was of a temporary nature. The court interpretation in Fry’s metals implied that, section 187(1)(c) will only come to the defence of employees if they are dismissed for the purpose compelling them to accept a demand on a matter of mutual interest, and if the dismissal was of a temporary nature. Where a permanent dismissal is effected because employees would not accept its demands, section 187(1) (c) could not come to the employees’ protection. Considering that the lock out provided for in terms of the 1995 LRA is not a preferred option by most of the employers, they will rather resort to use the loophole created by the narrow interpretation of section 187(1)(c) to circumvent having to secure consensus from the affected employees and rather dismissed them based on operational requirements. This study seeks to deal with the questions relating to the relationship between collective bargaining related dismissals in particular the automatically unfair dismissal in terms of section 187(1) (c) and business restructuring related dismissal. As such the relationship between sections 187(1) (c) and dismissals based on operational requirements will be central to this study.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
Gender-based affirmative action in the appointment of High Court judges
- Authors: Van Heerden, Anneli
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Affirmative action programs -- South Africa , Women judges Sex discrimination against women -- Employment -- South Africa Women -- Employment -- Law and legislation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/21263 , vital:29468
- Description: The legitimacy of the judiciary is dependent on the racial and gender diversity of the courts. As a result of the oppressive policies imposed by the apartheid government, the High Court judiciary in 1994 was composed almost exclusively of white men. Judges were appointed at the behest of the executive arm of government and political considerations undoubtedly played a role in the selection process. As a result, the integrity of the judiciary was severely compromised in that the composition was entirely unrepresentative of the population it served, and they were appointed in order to further the strict racial policies of the apartheid government. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa came into being through multi-party negotiations and is to form the basis of a complete transformation of the South African society. In a clear move away from the judicial appointments procedure of the past, the Constitution specifies that judges are to be selected by the Judicial Services Commission which is an independent body composed of members from all three branches of the government. In its selection, the JSC is guided by section 174(2) of the Constitution which requires that the racial and gender demographics of the judiciary must be considered when judges are appointed so as to make the bench broadly reflective of the South Africa population. Systemic discrimination of the past denied women the opportunity to gain the necessary knowledge and experience to be eligible for appointment to the bench. Special measures are therefore needed to advance women’s career path to the judiciary. In 2010, the Judicial Services Commission adopted selection criteria to be considered when shortlisting and selecting candidates to be recommended to the President for judicial appointment. Included in these criteria is the consideration of symbolism and potential. Special measures to advance persons who were previously disadvantaged by discriminatory practices are permissible in terms of section 9(2) of the Constitution. It recognises that true substantive equality will not be achieved without special measures aimed at remedying to disadvantage still felt by many people in South Africa, including women. The imposition of such measures does, however, have limitations. In the judiciary, specifically, demographic considerations can not be the primary consideration when judges are appointed. This could lead to a judiciary that is incapable to dispense justice to the population it serves because it does not have the required skill, knowledge and experience. On the other hand, if judges are appointed solely on technical merit, the judiciary is likely to remain male-dominated. The JSC therefore has to carefully balance the need for demographic transformation of the judiciary with the need to appoint technically competent judges. In Minister of Finance v van Heerden, the Constitutional Court laid down three requirements which remedial measures must meet in order to pass constitutional muster. Firstly, the beneficiaries targeted by the remedial measure must be persons who have been discriminated against in the past. Secondly, it must be designed to protect or advance previously disadvantaged persons. Lastly, the remedial measures must promote the achievement of equality in the long term. Once a measures meets all three of these requirements, it is not considered to be unfair discrimination against previously advantaged persons who do not stand to benefit from the measure in question. To safeguard the independence of the judiciary, judges are not considered to be employees of the state. This means that the provisions contained in labour legislation which requires the adoption of a formal employment equity plan when imposing affirmative action measures is not directly applicable to the appointment of judges. The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act envisages the adoption of equality plans in all spheres not governed by labour legislation. These provisions are, however, not yet in force. As a result, there is no legislation that requires the Judicial Services Commission to adopt a formal affirmative action policy, and appointments made to address the gender imbalances on the judiciary are made on an ad hoc basis which runs counter to the test formulated in van Heerden. A related problem is that the Judicial Services Commission has not given sufficient content on the criteria needed for judicial appointment. For instance, even though the Judicial Services Commission does consider the technical competence, it has not published any guidance as to what is considered to be the minimum threshold of formal qualifications or experience needed to be appointed to judicial office. This has led many people to speculate that certain judges are appointed for ulterior purposes or, alternatively, that there exists some racial or gender bias within the Judicial Services Commission. This holds unfortunate consequences for the perceived legitimacy of the judiciary and strengthens the call for more structure and clarity in the appointment of judges.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Van Heerden, Anneli
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Affirmative action programs -- South Africa , Women judges Sex discrimination against women -- Employment -- South Africa Women -- Employment -- Law and legislation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/21263 , vital:29468
- Description: The legitimacy of the judiciary is dependent on the racial and gender diversity of the courts. As a result of the oppressive policies imposed by the apartheid government, the High Court judiciary in 1994 was composed almost exclusively of white men. Judges were appointed at the behest of the executive arm of government and political considerations undoubtedly played a role in the selection process. As a result, the integrity of the judiciary was severely compromised in that the composition was entirely unrepresentative of the population it served, and they were appointed in order to further the strict racial policies of the apartheid government. The Constitution of the Republic of South Africa came into being through multi-party negotiations and is to form the basis of a complete transformation of the South African society. In a clear move away from the judicial appointments procedure of the past, the Constitution specifies that judges are to be selected by the Judicial Services Commission which is an independent body composed of members from all three branches of the government. In its selection, the JSC is guided by section 174(2) of the Constitution which requires that the racial and gender demographics of the judiciary must be considered when judges are appointed so as to make the bench broadly reflective of the South Africa population. Systemic discrimination of the past denied women the opportunity to gain the necessary knowledge and experience to be eligible for appointment to the bench. Special measures are therefore needed to advance women’s career path to the judiciary. In 2010, the Judicial Services Commission adopted selection criteria to be considered when shortlisting and selecting candidates to be recommended to the President for judicial appointment. Included in these criteria is the consideration of symbolism and potential. Special measures to advance persons who were previously disadvantaged by discriminatory practices are permissible in terms of section 9(2) of the Constitution. It recognises that true substantive equality will not be achieved without special measures aimed at remedying to disadvantage still felt by many people in South Africa, including women. The imposition of such measures does, however, have limitations. In the judiciary, specifically, demographic considerations can not be the primary consideration when judges are appointed. This could lead to a judiciary that is incapable to dispense justice to the population it serves because it does not have the required skill, knowledge and experience. On the other hand, if judges are appointed solely on technical merit, the judiciary is likely to remain male-dominated. The JSC therefore has to carefully balance the need for demographic transformation of the judiciary with the need to appoint technically competent judges. In Minister of Finance v van Heerden, the Constitutional Court laid down three requirements which remedial measures must meet in order to pass constitutional muster. Firstly, the beneficiaries targeted by the remedial measure must be persons who have been discriminated against in the past. Secondly, it must be designed to protect or advance previously disadvantaged persons. Lastly, the remedial measures must promote the achievement of equality in the long term. Once a measures meets all three of these requirements, it is not considered to be unfair discrimination against previously advantaged persons who do not stand to benefit from the measure in question. To safeguard the independence of the judiciary, judges are not considered to be employees of the state. This means that the provisions contained in labour legislation which requires the adoption of a formal employment equity plan when imposing affirmative action measures is not directly applicable to the appointment of judges. The Promotion of Equality and Prevention of Unfair Discrimination Act envisages the adoption of equality plans in all spheres not governed by labour legislation. These provisions are, however, not yet in force. As a result, there is no legislation that requires the Judicial Services Commission to adopt a formal affirmative action policy, and appointments made to address the gender imbalances on the judiciary are made on an ad hoc basis which runs counter to the test formulated in van Heerden. A related problem is that the Judicial Services Commission has not given sufficient content on the criteria needed for judicial appointment. For instance, even though the Judicial Services Commission does consider the technical competence, it has not published any guidance as to what is considered to be the minimum threshold of formal qualifications or experience needed to be appointed to judicial office. This has led many people to speculate that certain judges are appointed for ulterior purposes or, alternatively, that there exists some racial or gender bias within the Judicial Services Commission. This holds unfortunate consequences for the perceived legitimacy of the judiciary and strengthens the call for more structure and clarity in the appointment of judges.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
Public service commission grievance recommendation process
- Authors: King, Lyn Carol
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Civil service -- South Africa Grievance procedures -- South Africa , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/18002 , vital:28552
- Description: The Public Service Commission (PSC) is an independent oversight body established in terms of chapter 10 of the Constitution, 1996. Although, its powers and functions were enacted in the Public Service Commission Act, 1997, this institution has been in existence since the early 1900’s. As an institution which was birthed during an era wrought with injustice, inequality upon a labour law framework which barely existed as the concept is understood today, the PSC played a leading role in the management of the public service. The influence of the Treasury, Governor-General and socio-political forces throughout the 1900’s negatively impacted the manner in which the PSC was effectively able to exercise its’ powers and functions. Subsequent thereto, the rise of staff associations and their concerted effort to be party to matters pertaining to the employment relationship, placed the PSC in a precarious situation which created the perception that the PSC was a “toothless organization”. Although the PSC has since transitioned significantly in that many of the functions it performed are now exercised by the Ministry of Public Service and Administration, today, this perception is still as real as it was in the 1970’s. The primary purpose of this treatise is to provide a historical background to present time, depicting the role undertaken by the PSC and whether the perception of being ineffective in the administration of the public service, remains. The researcher will provide a distinction of the nature of grievances dealt with by the PSC and other alternate dispute resolution bodies, with specific attention being drawn to the methodologies applied in the execution of its mandate relating to labour relations and personnel practices, and the overall bearing it this has on the effective administration of the public service. In the conclusion it is submitted that the powers and functions of the PSC may extend to directions, advice and recommendations (unenforceable), however in comparison to other dispute resolution bodies, these powers and functions are centred around the promotion of constitutionally enshrined values and principles. PSC prides itself in the fruits of its labour as it is able to make a far greater impact by investigating root causes of grievances and redressing systemic issues, emanating from yesteryear to date. It is therefore submitted that as a result of different methodologies applied in comparison to other dispute resolution bodies, the highly administrative processes embarked proves far more thorough and effective and as a result cannot be compared or perceived to be ineffective. Lastly, it is submitted that the co-operative rather than adversarial approach embarked upon by the PSC is befitting for a young democratic country where impact-driven bears far reaching results, extending over the public service administration at large. To this end, the researcher refutes the misconception that the PSC is a toothless, ineffective organization which no longer plays a meaningful role within the Public Service Administration.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: King, Lyn Carol
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Civil service -- South Africa Grievance procedures -- South Africa , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/18002 , vital:28552
- Description: The Public Service Commission (PSC) is an independent oversight body established in terms of chapter 10 of the Constitution, 1996. Although, its powers and functions were enacted in the Public Service Commission Act, 1997, this institution has been in existence since the early 1900’s. As an institution which was birthed during an era wrought with injustice, inequality upon a labour law framework which barely existed as the concept is understood today, the PSC played a leading role in the management of the public service. The influence of the Treasury, Governor-General and socio-political forces throughout the 1900’s negatively impacted the manner in which the PSC was effectively able to exercise its’ powers and functions. Subsequent thereto, the rise of staff associations and their concerted effort to be party to matters pertaining to the employment relationship, placed the PSC in a precarious situation which created the perception that the PSC was a “toothless organization”. Although the PSC has since transitioned significantly in that many of the functions it performed are now exercised by the Ministry of Public Service and Administration, today, this perception is still as real as it was in the 1970’s. The primary purpose of this treatise is to provide a historical background to present time, depicting the role undertaken by the PSC and whether the perception of being ineffective in the administration of the public service, remains. The researcher will provide a distinction of the nature of grievances dealt with by the PSC and other alternate dispute resolution bodies, with specific attention being drawn to the methodologies applied in the execution of its mandate relating to labour relations and personnel practices, and the overall bearing it this has on the effective administration of the public service. In the conclusion it is submitted that the powers and functions of the PSC may extend to directions, advice and recommendations (unenforceable), however in comparison to other dispute resolution bodies, these powers and functions are centred around the promotion of constitutionally enshrined values and principles. PSC prides itself in the fruits of its labour as it is able to make a far greater impact by investigating root causes of grievances and redressing systemic issues, emanating from yesteryear to date. It is therefore submitted that as a result of different methodologies applied in comparison to other dispute resolution bodies, the highly administrative processes embarked proves far more thorough and effective and as a result cannot be compared or perceived to be ineffective. Lastly, it is submitted that the co-operative rather than adversarial approach embarked upon by the PSC is befitting for a young democratic country where impact-driven bears far reaching results, extending over the public service administration at large. To this end, the researcher refutes the misconception that the PSC is a toothless, ineffective organization which no longer plays a meaningful role within the Public Service Administration.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
The status of employees employed by temporary employment services
- Authors: Strydom, Masunet
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Employment agencies -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Employees -- South Africa Personnel management -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/13680 , vital:27295
- Description: The traditional employer-employee relationship came under an increased threat the past two decades with employers finding the option of utilising the services of Labour Brokers more attractive. Various reasons existed for this tendency amongst employers to opt for the use of Labour Brokers, some of these reasons being valid but mostly some reasons being born out of fear for the unknown labour law duties and obligations that were proposed to be placed on employers post 1994. In the absence of an action plan between the role players in the labour fraternity pathing the way traditional employer-employee relationships could be salvage, employers resorted to the appointment of Labour Brokers and Government on their part retaliated by considering either the total ban of Labour Brokers or the regulation of the profession to such an extent that same became largely unattractive and problematic. The non-addressing of problems and fears faced with by employers post 1994 resulted in an opportunity waisted to narrow the gap between employers and employees with the fight over work force power being the more important factor taken into consideration. This treatise will explore the options that faced the roll players post 1994 in the labour market, the reason for choices made and the effect same has had since on the labour market. The problematic amendments made to Section 198 of the Labour Relations Act in an attempt to iron out the wrinkles poor choices made by the stake holders over the regulations of Labour Brokers, will be discussed. The ripple effect the amendments to Section 198 of the Labour Relations Act had on other pieces of South African legislation will be considered and the uncertainty and confusion it has created discussed. Specific attention needs to be drawn to the intention of the legislature as to which party, the Labour Broker or employer, will be responsible for the ramifications of the wrong doings of an employee. Also, which party will be responsible to the employee to fulfil its labour rights as granted in the Constitution of South Africa. Unleashing reaction to the regulations of Temporary Employment Services does not seem to be a problem, the problem arises where the regulations proposed did not unleashed the desired reaction and roll players finding themselves frustrated and with having no alternative as to turn the Courts to solve the largely self-inflicted conundrum. The courts are left with the task of clarifying the legislature’s true intension in amending section 198 of the Labour Relations Act, which impact the writer with all due respect do not think the legislature even appreciated when the amendments were drafted. Currently, there is dividing views on the future of Labour Brokers per se in South Africa and the interpretation concerning Section 198 of the Labour Relations Act, as amended. The focus of this treatise is to highlight the different interpretations given to these amendments this far and highlight that if it is in fact the wish of stake holders in the Labour fraternity that Labour Brokers should continue to exist, clarification is needed by our Constitution Court on certain vital issues and as discussed in this treatise.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Strydom, Masunet
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Employment agencies -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Employees -- South Africa Personnel management -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/13680 , vital:27295
- Description: The traditional employer-employee relationship came under an increased threat the past two decades with employers finding the option of utilising the services of Labour Brokers more attractive. Various reasons existed for this tendency amongst employers to opt for the use of Labour Brokers, some of these reasons being valid but mostly some reasons being born out of fear for the unknown labour law duties and obligations that were proposed to be placed on employers post 1994. In the absence of an action plan between the role players in the labour fraternity pathing the way traditional employer-employee relationships could be salvage, employers resorted to the appointment of Labour Brokers and Government on their part retaliated by considering either the total ban of Labour Brokers or the regulation of the profession to such an extent that same became largely unattractive and problematic. The non-addressing of problems and fears faced with by employers post 1994 resulted in an opportunity waisted to narrow the gap between employers and employees with the fight over work force power being the more important factor taken into consideration. This treatise will explore the options that faced the roll players post 1994 in the labour market, the reason for choices made and the effect same has had since on the labour market. The problematic amendments made to Section 198 of the Labour Relations Act in an attempt to iron out the wrinkles poor choices made by the stake holders over the regulations of Labour Brokers, will be discussed. The ripple effect the amendments to Section 198 of the Labour Relations Act had on other pieces of South African legislation will be considered and the uncertainty and confusion it has created discussed. Specific attention needs to be drawn to the intention of the legislature as to which party, the Labour Broker or employer, will be responsible for the ramifications of the wrong doings of an employee. Also, which party will be responsible to the employee to fulfil its labour rights as granted in the Constitution of South Africa. Unleashing reaction to the regulations of Temporary Employment Services does not seem to be a problem, the problem arises where the regulations proposed did not unleashed the desired reaction and roll players finding themselves frustrated and with having no alternative as to turn the Courts to solve the largely self-inflicted conundrum. The courts are left with the task of clarifying the legislature’s true intension in amending section 198 of the Labour Relations Act, which impact the writer with all due respect do not think the legislature even appreciated when the amendments were drafted. Currently, there is dividing views on the future of Labour Brokers per se in South Africa and the interpretation concerning Section 198 of the Labour Relations Act, as amended. The focus of this treatise is to highlight the different interpretations given to these amendments this far and highlight that if it is in fact the wish of stake holders in the Labour fraternity that Labour Brokers should continue to exist, clarification is needed by our Constitution Court on certain vital issues and as discussed in this treatise.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017