Substantive agreement entered into between National Brands Limited and the Food and Allied Workers Union for the period ending 30 June 2014
- National Brands Limited, Food and Allied Workers Union
- Authors: National Brands Limited , Food and Allied Workers Union
- Date: 2011-08-16
- Subjects: National Brands Limited , Food and Allied Workers Union , Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Wages -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/96020 , vital:31226 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Substantive agreement entered into between National Brands Limited and the Food and Allied Workers Union for the period ending 30 June 2014.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011-08-16
- Authors: National Brands Limited , Food and Allied Workers Union
- Date: 2011-08-16
- Subjects: National Brands Limited , Food and Allied Workers Union , Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Wages -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/96020 , vital:31226 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Substantive agreement entered into between National Brands Limited and the Food and Allied Workers Union for the period ending 30 June 2014.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2011-08-16
Critical analysis of the 2007 public service strike and its impact on the evolution of formalised collective bargaining in South Africa
- Authors: Bhe, Vuyisile
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa , Strikes and lockouts -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10192 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1043 , Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa , Strikes and lockouts -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Description: Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act defines ’strike’ as the partial or complete concerted refusal to work, or the retardation or obstruction of work, by persons who are or have been employed by the same employer or by different employers, for the purpose of remedying a grievance or resolving a dispute in respect of any matter of mutual interest between the employer and employee, and any reference to “work” this definition includes overtime work, whether it is voluntary or compulsory. According to Mcllroy: “As long as our society is divided between those who own and control the means of production and those who only have the ability to work, strikes will be inevitable because they are the ultimate means workers have of protecting themselves.” 1 The Constitutional Court justified the exclusion of a constitutional right to lock out and the inclusion of a constitutional right to strike by indicating that the right to strike is not equivalent to a right to lock out and is essential for workplace democracy. 2 The right to strike is essential to bolster collective bargaining and thereby to give employees the power to bargain effectively with employers. The employers on the According to the Constitutional Court employers enjoy greater social and economic power compared to individual workers and may exercise a wide range of power against workers through a range of weapons, such as dismissal, the employment of alternative or replacement labour, the unilateral implementation of new terms and conditions of employment, and the exclusion of workers from the workplace. To combat this and have a say in the workplace, the Constitutional Court held that “employees need to act in concert to provide them collectively with sufficient power to bargain effectively with employers and exercise collective power primarily through the mechanism of strike action”. The importance of the right to strike in creating workplace democracy is also reflected in a number of Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court judgments. other hand have economic strength that is used to bargain effectively. That is why the strike enjoys constitutional protection, whereas the lock-out does not. , Abstract
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Bhe, Vuyisile
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa , Strikes and lockouts -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10192 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1043 , Collective bargaining -- South Africa , Dispute resolution (Law) -- South Africa , Strikes and lockouts -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Industrial relations -- South Africa
- Description: Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act defines ’strike’ as the partial or complete concerted refusal to work, or the retardation or obstruction of work, by persons who are or have been employed by the same employer or by different employers, for the purpose of remedying a grievance or resolving a dispute in respect of any matter of mutual interest between the employer and employee, and any reference to “work” this definition includes overtime work, whether it is voluntary or compulsory. According to Mcllroy: “As long as our society is divided between those who own and control the means of production and those who only have the ability to work, strikes will be inevitable because they are the ultimate means workers have of protecting themselves.” 1 The Constitutional Court justified the exclusion of a constitutional right to lock out and the inclusion of a constitutional right to strike by indicating that the right to strike is not equivalent to a right to lock out and is essential for workplace democracy. 2 The right to strike is essential to bolster collective bargaining and thereby to give employees the power to bargain effectively with employers. The employers on the According to the Constitutional Court employers enjoy greater social and economic power compared to individual workers and may exercise a wide range of power against workers through a range of weapons, such as dismissal, the employment of alternative or replacement labour, the unilateral implementation of new terms and conditions of employment, and the exclusion of workers from the workplace. To combat this and have a say in the workplace, the Constitutional Court held that “employees need to act in concert to provide them collectively with sufficient power to bargain effectively with employers and exercise collective power primarily through the mechanism of strike action”. The importance of the right to strike in creating workplace democracy is also reflected in a number of Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court judgments. other hand have economic strength that is used to bargain effectively. That is why the strike enjoys constitutional protection, whereas the lock-out does not. , Abstract
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
Dismissals within the context of collective bargaining
- Authors: Qotoyi, Thanduxolo
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10223 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1039 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Description: Competitive forces in the market force employers to change the way they operate their businesses. The changes that employers have to make often demand an alteration of the employees’ terms and conditions of employment. By law employers are not permitted to unilaterally effect changes to the employee’s terms and conditions of employment. They have to obtain the consent of the affected employees. This is where collective bargaining fits in. The employer has to negotiate with the employees. One way in which through the process of collective bargaining an employer can exert pressure on the employees to accept the changes is to effect a lock-out. Under the Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956 within the context of a lock-out, an employer was permitted to use conditional dismissal as a bargaining weapon. This conditional dismissal had to be coupled with an offer of reemployment should the employees accept an employer’s demand. In essence, the lock-out had a bite in the form of the conditional dismissal. This made the lock-out quite effective. The 1995 Labour Relations Act prohibits in no uncertain terms the use of a dismissal as a means of compelling employees to accept an employer’s demand in any matter of mutual interest. Within the collective bargaining context, dismissal is not a legitimate option. The employer only has the lock-out as a tool of compulsion. The definition of a lock-out in terms of this Act does not accommodate the use of dismissal. This makes the lock-out option to be less potent than it was under the 1956 Labour Relations Act. However, employers are permitted to dismiss on operational grounds, provided that they follow a fair procedure. Terms and conditions of employment greatly feature in the operational requirements of a business. If the employees’ terms and conditions of employment are not responsive to the operational requirements of the business and they are unwilling to accept changes to those terms, the employer has the right to dismiss them. The employer will not be dismissing the employees as a way of inducing them to accept the changes. He will instead be dismissing them on the basis of operational requirements. iv The question that then arises is how should a dismissal that is intended to compel employees to accept an employers demand (falling within section 187(1)(c) of the 1995 Labour Relations Act be distinguished from a dismissal that is genuinely based on operational requirements as contemplated by section 188(1)(a)(ii). Doesn’t the fact that section 187(1)(c) explicitly prohibits the use of dismissal within the context of collective bargaining give rise to some tension with section 188(1)(a)(ii) which categorically gives employers the right to dismiss on operational grounds. The decision of the Labour Appeal Court in Fry’s Metals v NUMSA has stated that there is no tension whatsoever between the two sections. The court has also ruled that the dismissals that are hit by section 187(1)(c) are those dismissals that are accompanied by an offer of reemployment. According to the court, this offer is indicative of the real purpose of the employer, namely to compel employees to accept his demand. Dismissals not accompanied by an offer of re-employment are on the other hand a true reflection of the fact that the employer is indeed dismissing the employees for operational requirements. This literal interpretation of the meaning and scope of section 187(1)(c) has the potential of opening the floodgates. Instead of resorting to the use of the lock-out to secure the agreement of employees in the collective bargaining process, employers now have a potent tool in the form of a dismissal. As long as the employer makes it abundantly clear that the dismissal is final and irrevocable, he is free from the claws of section 187(1)(c). Given the fact that the lock-out option is not always effective, employers may find it hard to resist the temptation to use the threat of permanent dismissal as a bargaining chip. It is an option that is emasculated by the fact that in an employer initiated lock-out the use of replacement labour is prohibited. The threat of not just a conditional dismissal but a permanent one may force employees to capitulate to the employer’s demand during negotiations. This would effectively render negotiations about changes to terms and conditions of employment a farce. The employer would have an upper hand. The implications of this narrow interpretation are quite far-reaching. The long held view that dismissal is not a legitimate weapon of coercion in the collective bargaining process is under serious challenge. Only conditional dismissals are illegitimate in the collective bargaining v arena. Permanent dismissals are permitted. This negates the very purpose of the collective bargaining process. This study seeks to examine the anomalies that flow from this interpretation of the meaning of section 187(1)(c). The study further investigates if this interpretation is not at odds with what the legislation really intended to achieve by enacting this clause. The study also explores ways in which the sanctity of collective bargaining could be restored. Recommendations are made to that effect.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Qotoyi, Thanduxolo
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10223 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1039 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Description: Competitive forces in the market force employers to change the way they operate their businesses. The changes that employers have to make often demand an alteration of the employees’ terms and conditions of employment. By law employers are not permitted to unilaterally effect changes to the employee’s terms and conditions of employment. They have to obtain the consent of the affected employees. This is where collective bargaining fits in. The employer has to negotiate with the employees. One way in which through the process of collective bargaining an employer can exert pressure on the employees to accept the changes is to effect a lock-out. Under the Labour Relations Act 28 of 1956 within the context of a lock-out, an employer was permitted to use conditional dismissal as a bargaining weapon. This conditional dismissal had to be coupled with an offer of reemployment should the employees accept an employer’s demand. In essence, the lock-out had a bite in the form of the conditional dismissal. This made the lock-out quite effective. The 1995 Labour Relations Act prohibits in no uncertain terms the use of a dismissal as a means of compelling employees to accept an employer’s demand in any matter of mutual interest. Within the collective bargaining context, dismissal is not a legitimate option. The employer only has the lock-out as a tool of compulsion. The definition of a lock-out in terms of this Act does not accommodate the use of dismissal. This makes the lock-out option to be less potent than it was under the 1956 Labour Relations Act. However, employers are permitted to dismiss on operational grounds, provided that they follow a fair procedure. Terms and conditions of employment greatly feature in the operational requirements of a business. If the employees’ terms and conditions of employment are not responsive to the operational requirements of the business and they are unwilling to accept changes to those terms, the employer has the right to dismiss them. The employer will not be dismissing the employees as a way of inducing them to accept the changes. He will instead be dismissing them on the basis of operational requirements. iv The question that then arises is how should a dismissal that is intended to compel employees to accept an employers demand (falling within section 187(1)(c) of the 1995 Labour Relations Act be distinguished from a dismissal that is genuinely based on operational requirements as contemplated by section 188(1)(a)(ii). Doesn’t the fact that section 187(1)(c) explicitly prohibits the use of dismissal within the context of collective bargaining give rise to some tension with section 188(1)(a)(ii) which categorically gives employers the right to dismiss on operational grounds. The decision of the Labour Appeal Court in Fry’s Metals v NUMSA has stated that there is no tension whatsoever between the two sections. The court has also ruled that the dismissals that are hit by section 187(1)(c) are those dismissals that are accompanied by an offer of reemployment. According to the court, this offer is indicative of the real purpose of the employer, namely to compel employees to accept his demand. Dismissals not accompanied by an offer of re-employment are on the other hand a true reflection of the fact that the employer is indeed dismissing the employees for operational requirements. This literal interpretation of the meaning and scope of section 187(1)(c) has the potential of opening the floodgates. Instead of resorting to the use of the lock-out to secure the agreement of employees in the collective bargaining process, employers now have a potent tool in the form of a dismissal. As long as the employer makes it abundantly clear that the dismissal is final and irrevocable, he is free from the claws of section 187(1)(c). Given the fact that the lock-out option is not always effective, employers may find it hard to resist the temptation to use the threat of permanent dismissal as a bargaining chip. It is an option that is emasculated by the fact that in an employer initiated lock-out the use of replacement labour is prohibited. The threat of not just a conditional dismissal but a permanent one may force employees to capitulate to the employer’s demand during negotiations. This would effectively render negotiations about changes to terms and conditions of employment a farce. The employer would have an upper hand. The implications of this narrow interpretation are quite far-reaching. The long held view that dismissal is not a legitimate weapon of coercion in the collective bargaining process is under serious challenge. Only conditional dismissals are illegitimate in the collective bargaining v arena. Permanent dismissals are permitted. This negates the very purpose of the collective bargaining process. This study seeks to examine the anomalies that flow from this interpretation of the meaning of section 187(1)(c). The study further investigates if this interpretation is not at odds with what the legislation really intended to achieve by enacting this clause. The study also explores ways in which the sanctity of collective bargaining could be restored. Recommendations are made to that effect.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
Agreement on wages and terms and conditions of employment entered into by and between the Employer's Organization for the Grain Industry, and Food and Allied Workers Union, National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers
- Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry, Food and Allied Workers Union, National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers
- Authors: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers
- Date: 2008-02-28
- Subjects: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU) , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/95425 , vital:31155 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Agreement on wages and terms and conditions of employment entered into by and between the Employer's Organization for the Grain Industry, and Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2008-02-28
- Authors: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers
- Date: 2008-02-28
- Subjects: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU) , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/95425 , vital:31155 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Agreement on wages and terms and conditions of employment entered into by and between the Employer's Organization for the Grain Industry, and Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2008-02-28
Memorandum of collective agreement entered into under the auspices of the Bargaining Council for the Grain Industry by the parties to the Council. The parties being the Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry and the Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW), and Solidarity Union
- Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry, Food and Allied Workers Union, National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers, Solidarity Union
- Authors: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers , Solidarity Union
- Date: 2007-04-23
- Subjects: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU) , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW) , Solidarity Union , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/95348 , vital:31147 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Memorandum of collective agreement entered into under the auspices of the Bargaining Council for the Grain Industry by the parties to the Council. The parties being the Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry and the Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW), and Solidarity Union.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2007-04-23
- Authors: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers , Solidarity Union
- Date: 2007-04-23
- Subjects: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU) , National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW) , Solidarity Union , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/95348 , vital:31147 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Memorandum of collective agreement entered into under the auspices of the Bargaining Council for the Grain Industry by the parties to the Council. The parties being the Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry and the Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), National Union of Food, Beverage, Wine, Spirits and Allied Workers (NUFBWSAW), and Solidarity Union.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2007-04-23
Memorandum of agreement reached between the following parties to the Barganining Council for the Grain Industry: Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), Solidarity Union, and Employers Organisation for the Grain Industry
- Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry, Food and Allied Workers Union, Solidarity Union
- Authors: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union , Solidarity Union
- Date: 2006-02-28
- Subjects: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU) , Solidarity Union , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/95400 , vital:31152 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Memorandum of agreement reached between the following parties to the Barganining Council for the Grain Industry: Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), Solidarity Union, and Employers Organisation for the Grain Industry.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006-02-28
- Authors: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union , Solidarity Union
- Date: 2006-02-28
- Subjects: Employers' Organization for the Grain Industry , Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU) , Solidarity Union , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: collective labor agreements , text
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/95400 , vital:31152 , Labour Research Service (LRS)
- Description: Memorandum of agreement reached between the following parties to the Barganining Council for the Grain Industry: Food and Allied Workers Union (FAWU), Solidarity Union, and Employers Organisation for the Grain Industry.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006-02-28
The variation of conditions of employment
- Authors: Horo, Lindile
- Date: 2002
- Subjects: Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Labor disputes -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11043 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/282 , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Labor disputes -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Description: This paper seeks to bring clarity to a number of issues that arise from a process resulting from the unilateral variation of terms and conditions of employment and the conflict management and dispute resolution processes. The variation of employment terms particularly when it is driven by one party to the employment relationship can cause instability, insecurity, confusion and uncertainty to the parties involved. The nature of work is not constant and therefore changes are inevitable. This then has an effect of bringing disorder not only to the employer-employee relationship but also to the labour relations balance. In many instances and depending on whether it is the employer or employee who propagates the changes, the reasons to alter the conditions are different. Employers usually cite operational or economic reasons that are meant for the survival of the business as the need to make the changes. From the employees’ side the changes are necessitated by reasons aimed at a move from protecting the favourable employment conditions already acquired to improving them or attaining more. In the event that the parties to the employment relationship do not agree to the changes proposed and implemented, a dispute usually arises. This results from the failure of a consultation process, negotiations, persuasion or collective bargaining in general. In essence such a dispute arises from absence of consent to the changes. The failure of a bargaining system requires the process to assume a new nature. The dispute resolution systems and the conflict management systems follow as both the appropriate and necessary steps. The bargaining power together with the intervention of the third party is at the centre of this phase. The parties, depending on the nature of the dispute, the conditions that iv are changed and who are affected by the changes, have choices on what dispute resolution mechanisms to employ. The choice made has a huge impact on both the outcome required in the form of recourse, how the dispute will be resolved or how the conflict will be managed. There is legislative intervention with regards to the resolution of the conflictual scenarios that arise from disputes on unilateral variation of terms and conditions of employment. There are also non-statutory measures available to the parties. The choices are vast as to when can the variation take place, the reasons for the changes, the parties involved, the possible dispute resolution mechanisms, what can be varied and whether the unilateral implementation can be viewed as fair.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2002
- Authors: Horo, Lindile
- Date: 2002
- Subjects: Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Labor disputes -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11043 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/282 , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Labor disputes -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Description: This paper seeks to bring clarity to a number of issues that arise from a process resulting from the unilateral variation of terms and conditions of employment and the conflict management and dispute resolution processes. The variation of employment terms particularly when it is driven by one party to the employment relationship can cause instability, insecurity, confusion and uncertainty to the parties involved. The nature of work is not constant and therefore changes are inevitable. This then has an effect of bringing disorder not only to the employer-employee relationship but also to the labour relations balance. In many instances and depending on whether it is the employer or employee who propagates the changes, the reasons to alter the conditions are different. Employers usually cite operational or economic reasons that are meant for the survival of the business as the need to make the changes. From the employees’ side the changes are necessitated by reasons aimed at a move from protecting the favourable employment conditions already acquired to improving them or attaining more. In the event that the parties to the employment relationship do not agree to the changes proposed and implemented, a dispute usually arises. This results from the failure of a consultation process, negotiations, persuasion or collective bargaining in general. In essence such a dispute arises from absence of consent to the changes. The failure of a bargaining system requires the process to assume a new nature. The dispute resolution systems and the conflict management systems follow as both the appropriate and necessary steps. The bargaining power together with the intervention of the third party is at the centre of this phase. The parties, depending on the nature of the dispute, the conditions that iv are changed and who are affected by the changes, have choices on what dispute resolution mechanisms to employ. The choice made has a huge impact on both the outcome required in the form of recourse, how the dispute will be resolved or how the conflict will be managed. There is legislative intervention with regards to the resolution of the conflictual scenarios that arise from disputes on unilateral variation of terms and conditions of employment. There are also non-statutory measures available to the parties. The choices are vast as to when can the variation take place, the reasons for the changes, the parties involved, the possible dispute resolution mechanisms, what can be varied and whether the unilateral implementation can be viewed as fair.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2002
Social workers perceptions on unionisation and collective bargaining : an exploratory study of the central region of the Eastern Cape
- Authors: Dyakala, Tumeka
- Date: 2000
- Subjects: Social workers -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape -- Attitudes , Labor unions -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: vital:695 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1006405 , Social workers -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape -- Attitudes , Labor unions -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Description: This study explores primarily the views of social workers in the Central region of the Eastern Cape on unionisation and collective bargaining, and at a secondary level the views of their employers and of the trade unions organising social workers, regarding social workers' involvement and non-involvement in these processes. It examines the paradox of compatibility of professionalism and unionism. There are two schools of thought regarding compatibility of professionalism and unionisation one views these concepts as antagonistic whilst the other views these concepts as complementary. Some social workers have been reluctant to participate in trade unions in the past until recently. Reasons advanced for their recent accelerated involvement in trade unions are explored in this study. Social workers views on the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 as the source of the legal framework, within which trade unions and employers interact, through the process of collective bargaining are explored. Proposed alternative mechanisms to these processes as perceived by social workers are closely examined. Semi-structured, self administered questionnaires were distributed to social workers whilst semi-structured interviews were conducted with employer representatives and trade union officials. This helped the researcher to have a broader view of the situation. Findings point to a scenario of disunity of both employers and employees in the social work profession. The study is a pioneering effort in the Central region and sets a way forward for further exploration of this subject. It is hoped that this study will make a worthwhile contribution to the social work profession's industrial relations field
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2000
- Authors: Dyakala, Tumeka
- Date: 2000
- Subjects: Social workers -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape -- Attitudes , Labor unions -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , MSocSc
- Identifier: vital:695 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1006405 , Social workers -- South Africa -- Eastern Cape -- Attitudes , Labor unions -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Description: This study explores primarily the views of social workers in the Central region of the Eastern Cape on unionisation and collective bargaining, and at a secondary level the views of their employers and of the trade unions organising social workers, regarding social workers' involvement and non-involvement in these processes. It examines the paradox of compatibility of professionalism and unionism. There are two schools of thought regarding compatibility of professionalism and unionisation one views these concepts as antagonistic whilst the other views these concepts as complementary. Some social workers have been reluctant to participate in trade unions in the past until recently. Reasons advanced for their recent accelerated involvement in trade unions are explored in this study. Social workers views on the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 as the source of the legal framework, within which trade unions and employers interact, through the process of collective bargaining are explored. Proposed alternative mechanisms to these processes as perceived by social workers are closely examined. Semi-structured, self administered questionnaires were distributed to social workers whilst semi-structured interviews were conducted with employer representatives and trade union officials. This helped the researcher to have a broader view of the situation. Findings point to a scenario of disunity of both employers and employees in the social work profession. The study is a pioneering effort in the Central region and sets a way forward for further exploration of this subject. It is hoped that this study will make a worthwhile contribution to the social work profession's industrial relations field
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2000
Wage negotiations workbook
- Authors: Workers' Education Project
- Date: 19--?
- Subjects: Labour unions -- South Africa , Wages , Employee fringe benefits -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: text , pamphlet
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/111129 , vital:33388
- Description: A house that is built on a weak foundation cannot stand. The same is true of a union that is entering the negotiations. A union's foundations for effective and successful bargaining must be built a long time before the negotiations with the employer begins. Many unions fight hard to gain recognition with employers; and then fail miserably in negotiations because they did not make even the simplest basic preparations.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 19--?
- Authors: Workers' Education Project
- Date: 19--?
- Subjects: Labour unions -- South Africa , Wages , Employee fringe benefits -- South Africa , Collective bargaining -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: text , pamphlet
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/111129 , vital:33388
- Description: A house that is built on a weak foundation cannot stand. The same is true of a union that is entering the negotiations. A union's foundations for effective and successful bargaining must be built a long time before the negotiations with the employer begins. Many unions fight hard to gain recognition with employers; and then fail miserably in negotiations because they did not make even the simplest basic preparations.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 19--?