Collective bargaining challenges in the public service sector
- Authors: Maleka, Reuben Mpono
- Date: 2024-04
- Subjects: Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Collective labor agreements -- South Africa , Arbitration, Industrial -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Master's theses , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/66283 , vital:74474
- Description: The concept of collective bargaining is a very old employment relations concept that has evolved and developed over the years. The concept originated in the British trade union and other related labour movement,1 but it was Samuel Gompers, an American labour leader, who developed its common use in his country. Over the years the use and development of collective bargaining has spread over the world and therefore “collective bargaining has a long history, evidenced by developments in different countries, as well as by the importance it has played in granting workers a greater voice in organizations”.2 The Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (“LRA”) was enacted with the view to facilitate collective bargaining3 between employers, employers' organizations, trade unions, and employees in order to set working conditions, develop industrial policy, and deal with other issues that are of common interest.4 In practice, collective bargaining involves demand and concession between parties up until a compromise can be found.5 Hence, collective bargaining may not be reduced to mere consultations, as it requires each party to not simply attend to and consider the representations of the other, but also sacrifice fixed positions whenever possible in order to reach a compromise.6 Notably, traditional collective bargaining is a mechanism to negotiate the terms and conditions of employment and is not a vehicle to facilitate joint decision making.7 The greatest net benefit from collective bargaining can be obtained when a system that promotes good faith bargaining and the efficient enforcement of collective agreements is in place , Thesis (LLM) -- Faculty of Law, Department of Mercantile Law, 2024 , The concept of collective bargaining is a very old employment relations concept that has evolved and developed over the years. The concept originated in the British trade union and other related labour movement, but it was Samuel Gompers, an American labour leader, who developed its common use in his country. Over the years the use and development of collective bargaining has spread over the world and therefore “collective bargaining has a long history, evidenced by developments in different countries, as well as by the importance it has played in granting workers a greater voice in organizations”. The Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (“LRA”) was enacted with the view to facilitate collective bargaining between employers, employers' organizations, trade unions, and employees in order to set working conditions, develop industrial policy, and deal with other issues that are of common interest. In practice, collective bargaining involves demand and concession between parties up until a compromise can be found. Hence, collective bargaining may not be reduced to mere consultations, as it requires each party to not simply attend to and consider the representations of the other, but also sacrifice fixed positions whenever possible in order to reach a compromise. Notably, traditional collective bargaining is a mechanism to negotiate the terms and conditions of employment and is not a vehicle to facilitate joint decision making. The greatest net benefit from collective bargaining can be obtained when a system that promotes good faith bargaining and the efficient enforcement of collective agreements is in place
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2024-04
Disputes about the interpretation, application and breach of collective agreements
- Authors: Roelofse, Cornelius Johannes
- Date: 2020
- Subjects: Collective labor agreements -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/47414 , vital:39988
- Description: Section 24 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (the Act) regulates disputes about the interpretation and application of collective agreements. On the face of it, there is nothing particularly complicated about section 24 of the Act. This section provides that, if there is a dispute about the interpretation or application of a collective agreement, any party to the dispute may refer the dispute to the CCMA; firstly, if the agreement itself does not provide for its resolution by conciliation or arbitration by another body; secondly, if the dispute resolution procedure is inoperative and finally, if a party is frustrating the resolution of the dispute under the dispute resolution provisions of the collective agreement. Most bargaining council main agreements provide for the resolution of disputes concerning the interpretation or application of their collective agreements by conciliation or, if that fails, by arbitration. But what exactly is the scope of these provisions, and what are the powers of arbitrators when entertaining such matters? These questions are significant. If the scope of section 24 of the Act is as limitless as it seems, and if arbitrators acting in terms of that section have full powers not only to interpret and apply the provisions of collective agreements, but also to order parties not only to comply with them, and to make restitution to the other party if they haven’t, then statutory arbitrators may make orders equivalent to those that courts may make in actions for breaches of contract and, potentially, arbitrate matters over which they would not otherwise have jurisdiction. This could complicate affairs if the collective agreement being interpreted and applied is incorporated into the employment contracts of the employees concerned. The Act does not expressly set out the powers of arbitrators dealing with disputes under section 24 of the Act. For a long time after the promulgation of the Act, statutory arbitrators were generally of the view that section 24 meant what it apparently says, that it empowers arbitrators both to declare the true meaning of collective agreements to apply and to enforce them, also to order defaulting employers to compensate employees for the financial loss they have suffered in consequence of the breach. However, this understanding of what section 24 of the Act entails was thrown into confusion by two judgments of the Labour Appeal Court (LAC), Johannesburg City Parks v Mphahlani NO1 (Johannesburg City Parks) and Minister of Safety and Security v SSSBC (SSSBC). 2 In this treatise a discussion and analysis will follow of how these two judgments influenced future case law about the meaning and scope of section 24 of the Act and the uncertainties it created.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2020
The effect of the amendments to the labour relations act on collective labour law and proliferation of the unions
- Authors: Galorale, Mompati Jonas
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Collective labor agreements -- South Africa , Labor unions -- Law and legislation -- South Africa Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/30216 , vital:30901
- Description: The Constitution guarantees freedom of association, the right of employees to form and join trade unions and to strike, and the rights of trade unions, employers and employers’ associations to bargaining collectively. Section 23 of the Constitution is even-handed: it confers on “everyone” (including employers) a right to fair labour practices and leaving aside the right to strike, confers identical rights on trade unions and employers’ organisations. It is also important to note that the Constitution seeks to advance principles of equality and human dignity before the law. Section 1 of the Labour Relations Act 65 of 1995 (the LRA) provides that the purpose of the LRA is to advance economic development, social justice, labour peace and democratization of the workplace. When interpreting and applying the LRA and the amendments one must give effect to the primary objects of the LRA in compliance with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 (the Constitution) and in compliance with ratified Conventions of the International Labour Organisation (the ILO). In terms of section 45 of the Labour Relations Amendment Act 6 of 2014 (the LRAA), the President of the Republic of South Africa declared 1 January 2015 as the effective date for the amendments. Employers had from the 1 January 2015 to comply with the LRAA. The amendments impact on all employees, employers and registered trade unions. The amendments responded to, amongst other things, the increased formalisation of labour and also seeks to ensure that vulnerable groups of employees receive adequate protection. The main purpose for the amendments to section 21 of the LRA is to provide for the organisation of employees engaged by a temporary employment service (TES), to broaden the discretion of commissioners under which organisational rights may be granted, to grant majority rights to most representative unions and to allow a commissioner to grant organisational rights despite a threshold agreement. Collective labour law is also materially effected by these amendments, which are aimed at promoting the inclusion of non-standard employees in the collective bargaining framework and expanding the application of organisational rights. The collective-labour law amendments are the focus of this treatise. This will expand the employee pool in a workplace for purposes of securing organisational rights. The amendments have the effect of creating a more inclusive collective bargaining environment in the workplace. It is hoped that this will lessen the need felt by smaller unions to use industrial action as the only route to secure organisational rights previously intended for more representative unions only. The LRAA made it much easier for unions to obtain organisational rights to sufficiently represented unions who do not have majority representation. A commisioner may in terms section 22 of the amendments extend a collective agreement between a TES and its employees and this agreement may be enforced on the client and vice versa. Trade unions representing the employees of a TES will be in a position to exercise their organisational rights not only at the workplace of the TES, but also at the client’s workplace, despite the employees not being employees of the client. In furtherance of these objectives the LRA1 provides a regulatory framework for collective bargaining and organisational rights – in keeping with international and constitutional obligations. Trade unions are the vehicles for effective collective bargaining, while the LRA unequivocally promotes the policy choice of majoritarianism. The LRA was formulated around the furthering of section 23(5) of the Constitution. What is of significance therefore, is to regulate the framework for collective bargaining, of which the amendments prioritized the provision of legislated organisational rights. In keeping with the constitutional objectives mentioned above, section 21(8)(a)(i) of the LRA directs commissioners, in resolving recognition disputes, to: “seek to minimise the proliferation of trade union representation in a single workplace, and where possible, to encourage a system of a representative trade union in a workplace.”
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
Employee attitudes in a South African metropole post-implementation of the 2010 wage curve collective agreement
- Authors: Somgede-Tshikila, Pateka
- Subjects: Job satisfaction -- South Africa , Organizational commitment -- South Africa , Collective labor agreements -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MA
- Identifier: vital:9436 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020901
- Description: The study will investigate how the workers of Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality in the Department of Roads and Stormwater (Eastern region) feel about their jobs in terms of job satisfaction. Furthermore, the study will investigate how they feel about commitment to the union, commitment to the organisation, and management satisfaction during and after the implementation of job task levels, which was the result of the wage curve agreement that was signed in 2010 and implemented in 2011.The first objective of the study is to describe the collective agreements that were signed in 2010 as a result of a need to categorise municipalities and evaluate jobs, and the consequences of the collective agreements on employees through the study of documents supplemented by interviews and questionnaires. The second objective is to investigate if there has been a change in attitudes of the employees in the Roads and Stormwater Department of the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality after the implementation of the wage curve agreement. There are six research questions; two relate to the first objective, and these are (a) what was the nature of the wage curve and job evaluation collective agreement? and(b) what were the consequences of the implementation of the wage curve and job evaluation collective agreement of the employees of the Ekurhuleni Metropolitan Municipality? The other four questions related to the second objective, which led to the following research questions related to the attitudes of the employees and the change in these attitudes after the implementation of the collective agreement. These four questions were (a) what was the change in employee attitudes post the introduction of the wage curve? in particular, the attitudes of organisational commitment, job satisfaction, management satisfaction and union commitment, (b) what is the relationship between the sub-groups and employee attitudes pre the wage curve agreement implementation?(c) what is the relationship between sub-groups and employee attitudes post the wage curve agreement implementation? (d) what is the relationship between the sub-groups and the change in employee attitudes pre and post the wage curve agreement implementation? Quantitative and qualitative research methods were used in the study to analyse the strike process and to understand and describe the attitudes of all the participants in relation to the four constructs provided by Chaulk and Brown (2008). Self-administered questionnaires will be given to participants, and there will be face-to-face interviews with the union officials and management. The findings relating to the first objective indicate that the employees were unhappy with the implementation of the wage curve collective agreement. The second objective showed that the changes in the attitudes of employees after the implementation of the job evaluation and wage curve collective agreement were negative and that there was a significant decrease in the level of organisational commitment, job satisfaction, union commitment and management satisfaction after the implementation.
- Full Text: