Sexual harassment in employment
- Authors: Ristow, Liezel
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Sexual harassment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Sex discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11062 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/341 , Sexual harassment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Sex discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: Africa as no exception. It is generally accepted that women constitute the vast majority of sexual harassment victims. Sexual harassment is therefore one of the major barriers to women’s equality as it is a significant obstacle to women’s entrance into many sectors of the labour market. The Constitution now provides that no person may unfairly discriminate against anyone on grounds of, inter alia, sex and gender. The Employment Equity Act now provides that harassment is a form of unfair discrimination. It has been said that harassment is discriminatory because it raises an arbitrary barrier to the full and equal enjoyment of a person’s rights in the workplace. Much can be learned from the law of the United States and that country’s struggle to fit harassment under its discrimination laws. The Code of Good Practice on the Handling of Sexual Harassment Cases attempts to eliminate sexual harassment in the workplace by providing procedures that will enable employers to deal with occurrences of sexual harassment and to implement preventative measures. The Code also encourages employers to develop and implement policies on sexual harassment that will serve as a guideline for the conduct of all employees. Although the Code has been subject to some criticism, particularly regarding the test for sexual harassment, it remains a valuable guide to both employers and employees alike. The appropriate test for sexual harassment as a form of unfair discrimination has given rise to debate. Both the subjective test and the objective test for sexual harassment present problems. Some authors recommend a compromise between these two tests in the form of the “reasonable victim” test. The Employment Equity Act makes the employer liable for the prohibited acts of the employee in certain circumstances. The Act, however, places certain responsibilities on the employer and the employee-victim before the employer will be held liable for sexual harassment committed by an employee. Sexual harassment committed by an employee constitutes misconduct and can be a dismissible offence. An employer may also be held to have constructively dismissed an employee, if the employer was aware of the sexual harassment and failed to control such behaviour, and the employee is forced to resign. The test for determining the appropriateness of the sanction of dismissal for sexual harassment is whether or not the employee’s misconduct is serious and of such gravity that it makes a continued employment relationship intolerable. However, for such a dismissal to be fair it must be both substantively fair and procedurally fair.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
- Authors: Ristow, Liezel
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Sexual harassment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Sex discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11062 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/341 , Sexual harassment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Sex discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: Africa as no exception. It is generally accepted that women constitute the vast majority of sexual harassment victims. Sexual harassment is therefore one of the major barriers to women’s equality as it is a significant obstacle to women’s entrance into many sectors of the labour market. The Constitution now provides that no person may unfairly discriminate against anyone on grounds of, inter alia, sex and gender. The Employment Equity Act now provides that harassment is a form of unfair discrimination. It has been said that harassment is discriminatory because it raises an arbitrary barrier to the full and equal enjoyment of a person’s rights in the workplace. Much can be learned from the law of the United States and that country’s struggle to fit harassment under its discrimination laws. The Code of Good Practice on the Handling of Sexual Harassment Cases attempts to eliminate sexual harassment in the workplace by providing procedures that will enable employers to deal with occurrences of sexual harassment and to implement preventative measures. The Code also encourages employers to develop and implement policies on sexual harassment that will serve as a guideline for the conduct of all employees. Although the Code has been subject to some criticism, particularly regarding the test for sexual harassment, it remains a valuable guide to both employers and employees alike. The appropriate test for sexual harassment as a form of unfair discrimination has given rise to debate. Both the subjective test and the objective test for sexual harassment present problems. Some authors recommend a compromise between these two tests in the form of the “reasonable victim” test. The Employment Equity Act makes the employer liable for the prohibited acts of the employee in certain circumstances. The Act, however, places certain responsibilities on the employer and the employee-victim before the employer will be held liable for sexual harassment committed by an employee. Sexual harassment committed by an employee constitutes misconduct and can be a dismissible offence. An employer may also be held to have constructively dismissed an employee, if the employer was aware of the sexual harassment and failed to control such behaviour, and the employee is forced to resign. The test for determining the appropriateness of the sanction of dismissal for sexual harassment is whether or not the employee’s misconduct is serious and of such gravity that it makes a continued employment relationship intolerable. However, for such a dismissal to be fair it must be both substantively fair and procedurally fair.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
Shortcomimgs of the criminal law (sexual offences and related matters) amendment act
- Authors: Marais, Charl Johan
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: South Africa Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Amendment Act, 2007 , Sex crimes -- Law and legislation -- South Africa Sex crimes -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/40955 , vital:36277
- Description: The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act,1 hereinafter referred to as SORMA, came into operation on 16 December 2007 and acknowledges in its preamble, the then current, inadequate and discriminatory measures provided for in common law and statute relating to sexual offences. Although it aimed to address these measures, through the repeal of various common law sexual offences and the introduction, or amendment, of comprehensive statutory offences relating to sexual offences against children and vulnerable individuals, the legislature failed to take advantage of a golden opportunity; being the introduction of inquisitorial elements in the South African sexual offences legal framework.2 Through the introduction of SORMA, provisions relating to sexual offences against children were introduced, unfortunately it included sexual offences amongst children as well.3 However, this was declared unconstitutional in The Teddy Bear Clinic for Abused Children and Rapcan v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development,4 and Parliament was allowed 18 months to rectify the defect in the enactment. Although, Parliament failed to abide by the time period provided by the Constitutional Court, a larger disappointment was on the horizon; the realisation that the applicants’ constitutional challenge was too narrow. This, together with the lack of foresight on the part of the legislature, lead to SORMA, even in its amended form, being mainly accusatorial in nature. Furthermore, and despite the amendments, SORMA failed to completely decriminalise consensual sexual activity between children. Despite its shortcomings, SORMA could be said to provide adequate provisions relating to all possible sexual offences against children and vulnerable individuals. However, the shortcomings are not restricted to the provisions of the enactment, the shortcomings relate to the application thereof. Should inquisitorial elements be introduced, the focus of the trial would shift away from the victim and shift on to the accused, thereby extending the protection offered to children and vulnerable individuals to the maximum extent.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
- Authors: Marais, Charl Johan
- Date: 2019
- Subjects: South Africa Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Amendment Act, 2007 , Sex crimes -- Law and legislation -- South Africa Sex crimes -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/40955 , vital:36277
- Description: The Criminal Law (Sexual Offences and Related Matters) Amendment Act,1 hereinafter referred to as SORMA, came into operation on 16 December 2007 and acknowledges in its preamble, the then current, inadequate and discriminatory measures provided for in common law and statute relating to sexual offences. Although it aimed to address these measures, through the repeal of various common law sexual offences and the introduction, or amendment, of comprehensive statutory offences relating to sexual offences against children and vulnerable individuals, the legislature failed to take advantage of a golden opportunity; being the introduction of inquisitorial elements in the South African sexual offences legal framework.2 Through the introduction of SORMA, provisions relating to sexual offences against children were introduced, unfortunately it included sexual offences amongst children as well.3 However, this was declared unconstitutional in The Teddy Bear Clinic for Abused Children and Rapcan v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development,4 and Parliament was allowed 18 months to rectify the defect in the enactment. Although, Parliament failed to abide by the time period provided by the Constitutional Court, a larger disappointment was on the horizon; the realisation that the applicants’ constitutional challenge was too narrow. This, together with the lack of foresight on the part of the legislature, lead to SORMA, even in its amended form, being mainly accusatorial in nature. Furthermore, and despite the amendments, SORMA failed to completely decriminalise consensual sexual activity between children. Despite its shortcomings, SORMA could be said to provide adequate provisions relating to all possible sexual offences against children and vulnerable individuals. However, the shortcomings are not restricted to the provisions of the enactment, the shortcomings relate to the application thereof. Should inquisitorial elements be introduced, the focus of the trial would shift away from the victim and shift on to the accused, thereby extending the protection offered to children and vulnerable individuals to the maximum extent.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2019
Sidumo revisited
- Authors: Boyens, Marthinus Johannes
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Judicial review -- South Africa , Judgments -- South Africa , Labor courts -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10249 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020117
- Description: The primary purpose of this treatise is to revisit and reconsider the development of the review test set out in the Constitutional Court judgment of Sidumo & another v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd & Others (2007) 28 ILJ 2405 (CC) and consequently ascertain the correct approach to be adopted by our Labour Courts in the application of such test. The secondary purpose, entail the determination of the extent to which Labour Court judges interfere with the merits of awards and the resulting impact on the distinction between appeal and review. In order to establish whether the test for review was correctly developed and to determine whether our review proceedings deter recurrent interference by our judges, an edifying consideration of judicial review in South Africa, an extensive analysis of various judgements pertaining to such development, followed by a comprehensive comparison with the United Kingdom`s application of review proceedings and judicial composition are made. The research methodology is based on a contour of Sidumo, commencing with the Sidumo judgment, followed by three contentious Labour Appeal Court judgments and concluding with a Supreme Court of Appeal judgement, which clarifies the operation of the review test. The contour is interlinked with the notion of reasonableness. The primary research findings are identified in the judgment of Herholdt v Nedbank Ltd (2013) 34 ILJ 2795 (SCA). The judgment, concluding the Sidumo contour, underlines the current position in our law and consequent narrower approach. A comparison made with the United Kingdom, differentiate between such approach implemented by our courts and the strict gross unreasonableness approach applied by Employment Appeal Tribunals, recognising the finding, that our Labour Court judges ardently interfere with the merits of awards. In the conclusion it is submitted that our labour law jurisprudence will constantly evolve, dictated by our courts interpretation of lawfulness, reasonableness and fairness.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
- Authors: Boyens, Marthinus Johannes
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Judicial review -- South Africa , Judgments -- South Africa , Labor courts -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10249 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020117
- Description: The primary purpose of this treatise is to revisit and reconsider the development of the review test set out in the Constitutional Court judgment of Sidumo & another v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd & Others (2007) 28 ILJ 2405 (CC) and consequently ascertain the correct approach to be adopted by our Labour Courts in the application of such test. The secondary purpose, entail the determination of the extent to which Labour Court judges interfere with the merits of awards and the resulting impact on the distinction between appeal and review. In order to establish whether the test for review was correctly developed and to determine whether our review proceedings deter recurrent interference by our judges, an edifying consideration of judicial review in South Africa, an extensive analysis of various judgements pertaining to such development, followed by a comprehensive comparison with the United Kingdom`s application of review proceedings and judicial composition are made. The research methodology is based on a contour of Sidumo, commencing with the Sidumo judgment, followed by three contentious Labour Appeal Court judgments and concluding with a Supreme Court of Appeal judgement, which clarifies the operation of the review test. The contour is interlinked with the notion of reasonableness. The primary research findings are identified in the judgment of Herholdt v Nedbank Ltd (2013) 34 ILJ 2795 (SCA). The judgment, concluding the Sidumo contour, underlines the current position in our law and consequent narrower approach. A comparison made with the United Kingdom, differentiate between such approach implemented by our courts and the strict gross unreasonableness approach applied by Employment Appeal Tribunals, recognising the finding, that our Labour Court judges ardently interfere with the merits of awards. In the conclusion it is submitted that our labour law jurisprudence will constantly evolve, dictated by our courts interpretation of lawfulness, reasonableness and fairness.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
South Africa and the International Criminal Court: investigating the link between complimentarity and implementation
- Authors: Kulundu, Kenneth Wanyama
- Date: 2006
- Subjects: International Criminal Court , International criminal courts , International crimes , International law -- South Africa , South Africa -- Law and legislation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:3679 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1003194 , International Criminal Court , International criminal courts , International crimes , International law -- South Africa , South Africa -- Law and legislation
- Description: Complementarity, the organizing principle of the International Criminal Court (ICC), is a largely untested concept in terms of its ability to instigate State compliance with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The ICC made its debut at a time when States were routinely accused of non-compliance with international law, particularly international criminal law. Due to perennial concerns over the protection of State sovereignty, an ingenious system of allocation of competencies between States and the ICC was evolved. This is embodied by the principle of complementarity. At the heart of complementarity is an arrangement by which States Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC are regarded as the prime fora for the prosecution of crimes of grave concern to the international community. In the event of inaction, however, the ICC is mandated to wrest specific cases from the jurisdiction of national courts and try them. In effect, a carrot-and-stick mechanism has been built into the Rome Statute to induce States to comply with the Statute. This thesis examines the principle of complementarity from a theoretical perspective, bearing in mind contemporary international law structures and institutions. A better understanding of the theoretical assumptions of complementarity, it is suggested, will foster a more effective application of the tenets of the Rome Statute within the municipal system. The thesis argues that complementarity is a catalyst for implementation of the Rome Statute only to the extent to which it alters or re-defines well established and encumbering procedures and norms within the municipal system. In this regard, although South Africa’s status of constitutional democracy may be reason to expect that the obligations imposed by the Rome Statute will be observed, that very fact may increase the inclination to preserve the “baseline of conduct” rather than be swayed by the Rome Statute. An illustrative excursion into South African rules and norms is undertaken, after which the argument is advanced that not much change has been effected to the South African legal landscape through implementation of the Rome Statute. The sole exception to this is the issue of prosecutorial discretion. On this, the South African legislature has uniquely crafted a mechanism for ensuring accountability, presumably with a view to ensuring that South Africa is always able to prosecute the crimes concerned. However, the thesis cautions against complacency, arguing that the tension between national law and international obligations may yet play itself out, owing to insufficient attention to the role of national courts in giving effect to the Rome Statute. The act of implementation may be a response to stimuli such as the perceived need to avoid civil liability for international crimes, or the general inertia of implementing human rights instruments. Therefore, the carrot-and-stick mechanism may be lacking in the compulsive qualities it is presumed to have. Through an exploratory survey of South African law, the thesis illustrates that prosecutorial accountability is the major factor in determining whether a State has fully complied with is obligations under the Rome Statute. However, it also points out that the way courts of law apply the new norms in municipal systems in the future will be crucial.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006
- Authors: Kulundu, Kenneth Wanyama
- Date: 2006
- Subjects: International Criminal Court , International criminal courts , International crimes , International law -- South Africa , South Africa -- Law and legislation
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:3679 , http://hdl.handle.net/10962/d1003194 , International Criminal Court , International criminal courts , International crimes , International law -- South Africa , South Africa -- Law and legislation
- Description: Complementarity, the organizing principle of the International Criminal Court (ICC), is a largely untested concept in terms of its ability to instigate State compliance with the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. The ICC made its debut at a time when States were routinely accused of non-compliance with international law, particularly international criminal law. Due to perennial concerns over the protection of State sovereignty, an ingenious system of allocation of competencies between States and the ICC was evolved. This is embodied by the principle of complementarity. At the heart of complementarity is an arrangement by which States Parties to the Rome Statute of the ICC are regarded as the prime fora for the prosecution of crimes of grave concern to the international community. In the event of inaction, however, the ICC is mandated to wrest specific cases from the jurisdiction of national courts and try them. In effect, a carrot-and-stick mechanism has been built into the Rome Statute to induce States to comply with the Statute. This thesis examines the principle of complementarity from a theoretical perspective, bearing in mind contemporary international law structures and institutions. A better understanding of the theoretical assumptions of complementarity, it is suggested, will foster a more effective application of the tenets of the Rome Statute within the municipal system. The thesis argues that complementarity is a catalyst for implementation of the Rome Statute only to the extent to which it alters or re-defines well established and encumbering procedures and norms within the municipal system. In this regard, although South Africa’s status of constitutional democracy may be reason to expect that the obligations imposed by the Rome Statute will be observed, that very fact may increase the inclination to preserve the “baseline of conduct” rather than be swayed by the Rome Statute. An illustrative excursion into South African rules and norms is undertaken, after which the argument is advanced that not much change has been effected to the South African legal landscape through implementation of the Rome Statute. The sole exception to this is the issue of prosecutorial discretion. On this, the South African legislature has uniquely crafted a mechanism for ensuring accountability, presumably with a view to ensuring that South Africa is always able to prosecute the crimes concerned. However, the thesis cautions against complacency, arguing that the tension between national law and international obligations may yet play itself out, owing to insufficient attention to the role of national courts in giving effect to the Rome Statute. The act of implementation may be a response to stimuli such as the perceived need to avoid civil liability for international crimes, or the general inertia of implementing human rights instruments. Therefore, the carrot-and-stick mechanism may be lacking in the compulsive qualities it is presumed to have. Through an exploratory survey of South African law, the thesis illustrates that prosecutorial accountability is the major factor in determining whether a State has fully complied with is obligations under the Rome Statute. However, it also points out that the way courts of law apply the new norms in municipal systems in the future will be crucial.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2006
South African criminal justice : a paradigm shift to victim-centred restorative justice?
- Authors: Apollos, Dumisani
- Date: 2014
- Subjects: Restorative justice -- South Africa , Apartheid -- South Africa -- History , Democracy -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10183 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020078
- Description: The focal point of this treatise is the evaluation of the paradigm shift that has taken place in our South African criminal justice system post 1994. This shift is seen as a move away from a retribution approach to a more victim-centred approach. One needs to remember that the previous regime had unfair and unjust laws: to do away with such laws an interim constitution1 was enacted in Parliament in 1993 and became operational on 27 April 1994. It was the fundamental law of South Africa. This was later repealed by the final Constitution 2 on 4 April 1997. In its preamble it states categorically that it seeks to establish a “society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights” and “(to) lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law”. One of the priorities of democratic government in 1996 was the National Crime Prevention Strategy3 (hereafter referred to as the NCPS). It was designed to reduce the high level of crime in our country and has four pillars: the criminal justice process; reducing crime through environmental design; public values and education and trans-national crime. Pillar one is seen as a move away from retribution as punishment towards a system of restorative justice 4. Furthermore the South African government is a signatory to various international laws, treaties and declarations that uphold victims’ rights. One example would be the United Nations Declaration on the Basic Principle of Justice for Victims of Crime and abuse of Power 1985 - in fact the Victims’ Charter is compliant with this declaration. Yet one cannot negate the fact that in the last two decades the status of victims has altered significantly: there has been some development in the transformation of the criminal justice system. Since 1994 the focus gradually shifted from an adversarial and retributive criminal justice to that of restorative justice. This shift is vindicated by following examples: the adoption of the NCPS; the Truth and Reconciliation Commission 5 (hereafter referred to as the TRC); the adoption of the Service Charter for Victims of Crime 6(hereafter referred to as the Victims’ Charter); the enactment of the Child Justice Act7; and case laws which applied restorative justice principles such as S v Maluleke and S v Saayman. Therefore this treatise will evaluate the application of a restorative system by looking at the definition of restorative justice; government commitments to the system; the enactment of Acts and policies that support the system. This will be done in relation to the victims.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2014
- Authors: Apollos, Dumisani
- Date: 2014
- Subjects: Restorative justice -- South Africa , Apartheid -- South Africa -- History , Democracy -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10183 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020078
- Description: The focal point of this treatise is the evaluation of the paradigm shift that has taken place in our South African criminal justice system post 1994. This shift is seen as a move away from a retribution approach to a more victim-centred approach. One needs to remember that the previous regime had unfair and unjust laws: to do away with such laws an interim constitution1 was enacted in Parliament in 1993 and became operational on 27 April 1994. It was the fundamental law of South Africa. This was later repealed by the final Constitution 2 on 4 April 1997. In its preamble it states categorically that it seeks to establish a “society based on democratic values, social justice and fundamental human rights” and “(to) lay the foundations for a democratic and open society in which government is based on the will of the people and every citizen is equally protected by law”. One of the priorities of democratic government in 1996 was the National Crime Prevention Strategy3 (hereafter referred to as the NCPS). It was designed to reduce the high level of crime in our country and has four pillars: the criminal justice process; reducing crime through environmental design; public values and education and trans-national crime. Pillar one is seen as a move away from retribution as punishment towards a system of restorative justice 4. Furthermore the South African government is a signatory to various international laws, treaties and declarations that uphold victims’ rights. One example would be the United Nations Declaration on the Basic Principle of Justice for Victims of Crime and abuse of Power 1985 - in fact the Victims’ Charter is compliant with this declaration. Yet one cannot negate the fact that in the last two decades the status of victims has altered significantly: there has been some development in the transformation of the criminal justice system. Since 1994 the focus gradually shifted from an adversarial and retributive criminal justice to that of restorative justice. This shift is vindicated by following examples: the adoption of the NCPS; the Truth and Reconciliation Commission 5 (hereafter referred to as the TRC); the adoption of the Service Charter for Victims of Crime 6(hereafter referred to as the Victims’ Charter); the enactment of the Child Justice Act7; and case laws which applied restorative justice principles such as S v Maluleke and S v Saayman. Therefore this treatise will evaluate the application of a restorative system by looking at the definition of restorative justice; government commitments to the system; the enactment of Acts and policies that support the system. This will be done in relation to the victims.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2014
Sports and competition law in South Africa: the need to account for the uniqueness of sport when applying the competition Act 89 of 1998 to the sports industry
- Authors: Sun, Huajun
- Date: 2017
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/7102 , vital:21217
- Description: Regulation of sport as an economic activity has become increasingly prevalent in a number of foreign jurisdictions. This thesis considers the applicability of competition law to the sports industry from a South African perspective. Although the Competition Act 89 of 1998 is yet to be applied in the context of organisation of professional sport, the sector is not free from the scrutiny of competition law authorities. It is necessary to subject sports organisers and governing bodies to competition law in order to ensure that their administrative powers, which effectively place them in positions of market dominance, are not misused for their own commercial interests. On the other hand, the unique characteristics of sports should also be taken into account when applying competition law to the sector. In particular, it should be noted that sporting activities are not purely economic in nature, and that they are also conducted in order to achieve various social objectives. This thesis examines foreign jurisprudence that have dealt with the relevance of purely sporting justifications under competition law, and conclude that South Africa law should take into account the unique nature of sport when determining whether a conduct should be per se prohibited under the Competition Act, as well as when the rule-of-reason enquiry is conducted. This would require an amendment to the Act, a draft of which is proposed in this thesis. Finally, the proposed approach is applied in the context of the player transfer rules in football, in order to highlight problematic aspects of the transfer system even when considered in light of the unique nature of sports.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Sun, Huajun
- Date: 2017
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10962/7102 , vital:21217
- Description: Regulation of sport as an economic activity has become increasingly prevalent in a number of foreign jurisdictions. This thesis considers the applicability of competition law to the sports industry from a South African perspective. Although the Competition Act 89 of 1998 is yet to be applied in the context of organisation of professional sport, the sector is not free from the scrutiny of competition law authorities. It is necessary to subject sports organisers and governing bodies to competition law in order to ensure that their administrative powers, which effectively place them in positions of market dominance, are not misused for their own commercial interests. On the other hand, the unique characteristics of sports should also be taken into account when applying competition law to the sector. In particular, it should be noted that sporting activities are not purely economic in nature, and that they are also conducted in order to achieve various social objectives. This thesis examines foreign jurisprudence that have dealt with the relevance of purely sporting justifications under competition law, and conclude that South Africa law should take into account the unique nature of sport when determining whether a conduct should be per se prohibited under the Competition Act, as well as when the rule-of-reason enquiry is conducted. This would require an amendment to the Act, a draft of which is proposed in this thesis. Finally, the proposed approach is applied in the context of the player transfer rules in football, in order to highlight problematic aspects of the transfer system even when considered in light of the unique nature of sports.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
Statutory regulation of temporary employment services
- Authors: Pauw, Julius Bremer
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Temporary help services -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Temporary employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10245 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1019715
- Description: This treatise specifically explores section 198 of the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995, which regulate temporary employment service. However, before one can assess this section in particular, other legislation has to be considered dealing with temporary employment services, read in conjunction with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996 (hereinafter the “Constitution”), as all legislation is subject thereto. As summarised by Navsa AJ in the judgment of Sidumo& Another v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd & Others: “The starting point is the Constitution. Section 23(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 provides that everyone has the right to fair labour practices”. The Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (hereinafter the “LRA”) is also subject to the Constitution, and section 198 has to be evaluated and assessed against the Constitution as is set out in section 1 of the LRA, which provides that: “The purpose of this Act is to advance economic development, social justice, labour peace and the democratisation of the workplace by fulfilling the primary objects of this Act, which are (a) to give effect to and regulate the fundamental rights conferred by section 27 of the Constitution...” The LRA was drafted while the Interim Constitution was in effect, this being the reason why section 1(a) refers to section 27 of the Constitution, the Interim Constitution, and not the final Constitution, which was enacted in 1996. The Honourable Justice Conradie held in NAPTOSA & others v Minister of Education, Western Cape & others [2001] 22 ILJ 889 (C): “that the effect of section 1(a) is to ensure that the LRA “[marries] the enforcement of fundamental rights with the effective resolution of labour dispute temporary employment service . . . If an employer adopts a labour practice which is thought to be unfair, an aggrieved employee would in the first instance be obliged to seek a remedy under the LRA. If he or she finds no remedy under that Act, the LRA might come under constitutional scrutiny for not giving adequate protection to a constitutional right. If a labour practice permitted by the LRA is not fair, a court might be persuaded to strike down the impugned provision. But it would, I think, need a good deal of persuasion”. The Constitution and the LRA lay the basis for temporary employment services in the South African law context, and are the primary laws dealing with this topic. Although the main focus of the treatise is section 198 of the LRA in dealing with temporary employment services, it is evident that secondary labour legislation also regulates temporary employment services. It is noteworthy that each piece of legislation has different requirements and/or essentials regulating temporary employment services, even though some of the legislation have very similar provisions. Secondly, each of the pieces of legislation also determines and attaches different meanings to who the real employer is. This is important so as to establish who, as between the temporary employment service and its client, may be held liable for obligations arising out of the employment relationship. A tripartite relationship is created by temporary employment service arrangements, in that there is the temporary employment services –client relationship, the temporary employment service’s employer - employee relationship and the client –employee relationship, each with its own rights, obligations, and requirements for termination. A further focus of the treatise is the problems experienced in the employment relationship between the temporary employment service and its employees and the termination of the relationship. The difficulties and potential unfairness arising from termination of the relationship between the temporary employment service and its employees have resulted in legislative developments and proposed amendments, most notably the repeal of section 198. These proposals are discussed herein, including the question of whether section 198 should be repealed, or whether temporary employment services should be more strenuously regulated in order to resolve the problems being experienced with the application of section 198 in its present form. It is proposed in conclusion that temporary employment services be more strenuously regulated, as the repeal of section 198 will not be socially and economically beneficial to the workforce of South Africa, nor the Labour Market. Further, it would be contrary to the Constitution and purpose of the Labour Relations Act.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Pauw, Julius Bremer
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Temporary help services -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Temporary employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10245 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1019715
- Description: This treatise specifically explores section 198 of the Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995, which regulate temporary employment service. However, before one can assess this section in particular, other legislation has to be considered dealing with temporary employment services, read in conjunction with the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996 (hereinafter the “Constitution”), as all legislation is subject thereto. As summarised by Navsa AJ in the judgment of Sidumo& Another v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd & Others: “The starting point is the Constitution. Section 23(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996 provides that everyone has the right to fair labour practices”. The Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (hereinafter the “LRA”) is also subject to the Constitution, and section 198 has to be evaluated and assessed against the Constitution as is set out in section 1 of the LRA, which provides that: “The purpose of this Act is to advance economic development, social justice, labour peace and the democratisation of the workplace by fulfilling the primary objects of this Act, which are (a) to give effect to and regulate the fundamental rights conferred by section 27 of the Constitution...” The LRA was drafted while the Interim Constitution was in effect, this being the reason why section 1(a) refers to section 27 of the Constitution, the Interim Constitution, and not the final Constitution, which was enacted in 1996. The Honourable Justice Conradie held in NAPTOSA & others v Minister of Education, Western Cape & others [2001] 22 ILJ 889 (C): “that the effect of section 1(a) is to ensure that the LRA “[marries] the enforcement of fundamental rights with the effective resolution of labour dispute temporary employment service . . . If an employer adopts a labour practice which is thought to be unfair, an aggrieved employee would in the first instance be obliged to seek a remedy under the LRA. If he or she finds no remedy under that Act, the LRA might come under constitutional scrutiny for not giving adequate protection to a constitutional right. If a labour practice permitted by the LRA is not fair, a court might be persuaded to strike down the impugned provision. But it would, I think, need a good deal of persuasion”. The Constitution and the LRA lay the basis for temporary employment services in the South African law context, and are the primary laws dealing with this topic. Although the main focus of the treatise is section 198 of the LRA in dealing with temporary employment services, it is evident that secondary labour legislation also regulates temporary employment services. It is noteworthy that each piece of legislation has different requirements and/or essentials regulating temporary employment services, even though some of the legislation have very similar provisions. Secondly, each of the pieces of legislation also determines and attaches different meanings to who the real employer is. This is important so as to establish who, as between the temporary employment service and its client, may be held liable for obligations arising out of the employment relationship. A tripartite relationship is created by temporary employment service arrangements, in that there is the temporary employment services –client relationship, the temporary employment service’s employer - employee relationship and the client –employee relationship, each with its own rights, obligations, and requirements for termination. A further focus of the treatise is the problems experienced in the employment relationship between the temporary employment service and its employees and the termination of the relationship. The difficulties and potential unfairness arising from termination of the relationship between the temporary employment service and its employees have resulted in legislative developments and proposed amendments, most notably the repeal of section 198. These proposals are discussed herein, including the question of whether section 198 should be repealed, or whether temporary employment services should be more strenuously regulated in order to resolve the problems being experienced with the application of section 198 in its present form. It is proposed in conclusion that temporary employment services be more strenuously regulated, as the repeal of section 198 will not be socially and economically beneficial to the workforce of South Africa, nor the Labour Market. Further, it would be contrary to the Constitution and purpose of the Labour Relations Act.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
Strikes in the transport sector
- Authors: Grigor, Marius Hugo
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Strikes and lockouts -- South Africa , Arbitration, Industrial , Right to strike
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10300 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1021100
- Description: Strike action by employees is globally used in matters of mutual interest in order to place pressure on employers to meet their demands although the right to strike is not contained in any of the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) conventions or recommendations. Two conventions of the ILO are however relevant in the context of strikes and lockouts.1 The first is the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention 87 of 1948 and the second convention of importance is the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention 98 of 1949, both of which was ratified by South Africa and accordingly binds South Africa to comply with their provisions. The ILO appointed legal experts to assist the drafters of the Labour Relations Act,2 (LRA) in order to comply with these conventions. Furthermore section 3 of the LRA provides that the LRA must be interpreted in compliance with the international law obligations of South Africa. Section 27 of the Interim Constitution3 made provision for both the right to strike and the right of employers to lockout. In the proposed text of the final Constitution the recourse of the employer to lockout was not included. The text of the final Constitution was submitted to the Constitutional Court (CC) for certification in that it had to decide whether the new text of the final Constitution complied with the constitutional principles agreed to by the different political parties as the inviolable framework for the final Constitution. The CC delivered its judgment in Ex parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa4 and concluded that the omission of a right to lockout from the final Constitution does not conflict with constitutional principles. The CC did not agree with the argument, raised by Business South Africa, based on the proposition that the right of employers to lockout is the necessary equivalent to the right of workers to strike and that therefore, in order to treat workers and employers equally, both should be recognized in the new text. The result of this judgment is that employees’ right to strike is expressly protected by section 23 of the Constitution whilst the right of employers to lockout their employees is not expressly entrenched. The employers’ right is however protected by implication through the express protection of the right to bargain collectively in terms of section 23(5) of the Constitution and section 64 of the LRA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Grigor, Marius Hugo
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Strikes and lockouts -- South Africa , Arbitration, Industrial , Right to strike
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10300 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1021100
- Description: Strike action by employees is globally used in matters of mutual interest in order to place pressure on employers to meet their demands although the right to strike is not contained in any of the International Labour Organisation’s (ILO) conventions or recommendations. Two conventions of the ILO are however relevant in the context of strikes and lockouts.1 The first is the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention 87 of 1948 and the second convention of importance is the Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention 98 of 1949, both of which was ratified by South Africa and accordingly binds South Africa to comply with their provisions. The ILO appointed legal experts to assist the drafters of the Labour Relations Act,2 (LRA) in order to comply with these conventions. Furthermore section 3 of the LRA provides that the LRA must be interpreted in compliance with the international law obligations of South Africa. Section 27 of the Interim Constitution3 made provision for both the right to strike and the right of employers to lockout. In the proposed text of the final Constitution the recourse of the employer to lockout was not included. The text of the final Constitution was submitted to the Constitutional Court (CC) for certification in that it had to decide whether the new text of the final Constitution complied with the constitutional principles agreed to by the different political parties as the inviolable framework for the final Constitution. The CC delivered its judgment in Ex parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa4 and concluded that the omission of a right to lockout from the final Constitution does not conflict with constitutional principles. The CC did not agree with the argument, raised by Business South Africa, based on the proposition that the right of employers to lockout is the necessary equivalent to the right of workers to strike and that therefore, in order to treat workers and employers equally, both should be recognized in the new text. The result of this judgment is that employees’ right to strike is expressly protected by section 23 of the Constitution whilst the right of employers to lockout their employees is not expressly entrenched. The employers’ right is however protected by implication through the express protection of the right to bargain collectively in terms of section 23(5) of the Constitution and section 64 of the LRA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
Substantive equality and affirmative action in the workplace
- Authors: Nconco, Mpumelelo
- Date: 2012
- Subjects: Equality before the law -- South Africa , Discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10196 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1617 , Equality before the law -- South Africa , Discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: During the apartheid era in South Africa there was an unequivocal commitment to white supremacy, segregation and inequality. Discrimination but not on the basis of race was entrenched by the pre-democratic government. The 1980‟s saw the first steps towards reversing such practices through various measures, in the form of formal equality. Formal equality holds that the state must be act neutrally in relation to its employees and must favour no one above another. It assumes that all people are equal and that inequality can be eradicated simply by treating all people in the same way. Formal equality is therefore blind to structural inequality. Substantive equality in contrast to formal equality holds the value that equality is not simply a matter of likeness, that those who are different should be treated differently. The very essence of equality is to make distinction between groups and individual in order to accommodate their different needs and interests. It considers discrimination against groups which have been historically advantaged to be qualitatively aimed at remedying that disadvantage. The Constitution Act 108 of 1996 confers the right to equal protection and benefit of the law and the right to non discrimination. Prohibition of unfair discrimination in itself is insufficient to achieve true equality in a historically oppressed society. Hard affirmative action measures are required, the Constitution further explicitly endorses such restitutionary measures. Affirmative action is a systematic, planned process whereby the effects of colonialism and racial discrimination are being reversed in all areas if life. It is designed to achieve equal employment opportunities. In order to achieve this goal the barriers of the workplace which restrict employment and progressive opportunities have to be systematically eliminated through proactive programmes. Affirmative action is a delicate instrument of social engineering which must be used with caution. The Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 gives effect to the constitutional provisions and to regulate affirmative action measures in employment. The Employment Equity Act spells out the beneficiaries, who should do the protection, and advancement and what may happen to employers if they fail to comply in the view of the Director-General of the Labour. However the explicit constitutional and legislative endorsement of affirmative action comes with its controversy and legal challenges and it has been left to the courts to resolve tension on the one hand and to ensure equal treatment on the other. , Abstract
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2012
- Authors: Nconco, Mpumelelo
- Date: 2012
- Subjects: Equality before the law -- South Africa , Discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10196 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1617 , Equality before the law -- South Africa , Discrimination in employment -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: During the apartheid era in South Africa there was an unequivocal commitment to white supremacy, segregation and inequality. Discrimination but not on the basis of race was entrenched by the pre-democratic government. The 1980‟s saw the first steps towards reversing such practices through various measures, in the form of formal equality. Formal equality holds that the state must be act neutrally in relation to its employees and must favour no one above another. It assumes that all people are equal and that inequality can be eradicated simply by treating all people in the same way. Formal equality is therefore blind to structural inequality. Substantive equality in contrast to formal equality holds the value that equality is not simply a matter of likeness, that those who are different should be treated differently. The very essence of equality is to make distinction between groups and individual in order to accommodate their different needs and interests. It considers discrimination against groups which have been historically advantaged to be qualitatively aimed at remedying that disadvantage. The Constitution Act 108 of 1996 confers the right to equal protection and benefit of the law and the right to non discrimination. Prohibition of unfair discrimination in itself is insufficient to achieve true equality in a historically oppressed society. Hard affirmative action measures are required, the Constitution further explicitly endorses such restitutionary measures. Affirmative action is a systematic, planned process whereby the effects of colonialism and racial discrimination are being reversed in all areas if life. It is designed to achieve equal employment opportunities. In order to achieve this goal the barriers of the workplace which restrict employment and progressive opportunities have to be systematically eliminated through proactive programmes. Affirmative action is a delicate instrument of social engineering which must be used with caution. The Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 gives effect to the constitutional provisions and to regulate affirmative action measures in employment. The Employment Equity Act spells out the beneficiaries, who should do the protection, and advancement and what may happen to employers if they fail to comply in the view of the Director-General of the Labour. However the explicit constitutional and legislative endorsement of affirmative action comes with its controversy and legal challenges and it has been left to the courts to resolve tension on the one hand and to ensure equal treatment on the other. , Abstract
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2012
Substantive equality and proof of employment discrimination
- Authors: Loyson, Madeleine
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Discrimination in employment -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10208 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1059 , Discrimination in employment -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: This dissertation is a journey through the legislative changes and case law in order to analyse and evaluate the changing nature of South African jurisprudence in respect of the notions of equality, discrimination and affirmative action and the manner in which these issues are proved and dealt with in our courts. It focuses firstly on the emergence of the post-Wiehahn labour laws and the developing jurisprudence concerning discrimination in South Africa towards the end of a long period of isolation from the international world. It witnesses the growing cognizance which was taken of international guidelines and their slow and gradual incorporation into our jurisprudence before the institution of the new democratic government, in the days when the country was still firmly in the grip of a regime which prided itself on its discriminatory laws. It also deals in some depth with the new laws enacted after the first democratic government was installed, especially in so far as the Constitution was concerned. The first clutch of cases dealing with discrimination which were delivered by the Constitutional Court and their effects on decisions of the labour courts thereafter, are dealt with in great detail, indicating how important those judgments were and still are ten years later. A special chapter is devoted to the Harksen case, still a leading authority on how to deal with allegations of unfair discrimination. Having traversed several of the judgments of the labour courts after Harksen, several observations are made in the conclusion of the study which, it is hoped, summarize the major areas of concern in respect of the task of testing claims of unfair discrimination arising in our Courts.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
- Authors: Loyson, Madeleine
- Date: 2009
- Subjects: Discrimination in employment -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10208 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1059 , Discrimination in employment -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa , Affirmative action programs -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: This dissertation is a journey through the legislative changes and case law in order to analyse and evaluate the changing nature of South African jurisprudence in respect of the notions of equality, discrimination and affirmative action and the manner in which these issues are proved and dealt with in our courts. It focuses firstly on the emergence of the post-Wiehahn labour laws and the developing jurisprudence concerning discrimination in South Africa towards the end of a long period of isolation from the international world. It witnesses the growing cognizance which was taken of international guidelines and their slow and gradual incorporation into our jurisprudence before the institution of the new democratic government, in the days when the country was still firmly in the grip of a regime which prided itself on its discriminatory laws. It also deals in some depth with the new laws enacted after the first democratic government was installed, especially in so far as the Constitution was concerned. The first clutch of cases dealing with discrimination which were delivered by the Constitutional Court and their effects on decisions of the labour courts thereafter, are dealt with in great detail, indicating how important those judgments were and still are ten years later. A special chapter is devoted to the Harksen case, still a leading authority on how to deal with allegations of unfair discrimination. Having traversed several of the judgments of the labour courts after Harksen, several observations are made in the conclusion of the study which, it is hoped, summarize the major areas of concern in respect of the task of testing claims of unfair discrimination arising in our Courts.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2009
Substantive equality and the challenge to affimative action as justification for unfair discrimination
- Authors: Delport, Petrus Jacobus
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Discrimination in employment , Affirmative action programs , Equality
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/15467 , vital:28256
- Description: South Africa’s history as a nation is replete with examples of inequality and unfair discrimination. The working arena was no exception to the rule. In fact, it was one of the areas where inequality was most prevalent. Discriminatory legislation was promulgated under the Apartheid regime. These laws enforced differential treatment of employees along racial lines. After 1994, the newly democratic South Africa, through the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Constitution”), regarded all people as equal before the law and entitled to equal benefit and protection under the law. National legislation was subsequently promulgated to give effect to this constitutional objective. The Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the “EEA”), specifically, gave effect to all employees’ constitutional right to equality in the workplace. Under the EEA, unfair discrimination was forbidden. The EEA also required employers to implement measures to eradicate the injustices of the past. Subsequent to the enactment of the EEA, the Courts reiterated two tests to determine whether unfair discrimination had taken place in the workplace. It also tested whether an affirmative action measure could justify such unfair discrimination. These two tests, referred to in Harksen v Lane NO and others (CCT9/97) [1997] ZACC 12 (11) BCLR 1489 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Harksen test”) and Minister of Finance v Van Heerden 2004 (11) BCLR 1125 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Van Heerden test”), were unfortunately applied by the Courts in an inconsistent manner. This created confusion about which test found application in specific circumstances. The Constitutional Court then clarified the confusion through the South African Police Service v Solidarity obo Barnard (2014) ZACC 23 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Barnard” decision”). It is important to note that this study does not seek to evaluate the correctness of the Barnard decision, nor does it consider the cases prior to the Barnard decision. Rather, this study considers the extent to which the Barnard decision informed later cases dealing with unfair discrimination and affirmative action. In the remaining chapters of this treatise the writer will attempt to answer this question as follows: In chapter two, the legislative framework applicable to issues of unfair discrimination and the application of affirmative action is discussed. Chapter three comprises of a detailed analysis of the Barnard decision. In chapters four and five the writer investigates how the Barnard decision informed four recent cases concerning affirmative action and unfair discrimination in the workplace. These discussions enabled the writer to, in the final chapter; conclude that all four cases were indeed informed by the Barnard decision. The Department of Correctional Services case, however, reiterated the Barnard decision to its fullest extent.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
- Authors: Delport, Petrus Jacobus
- Date: 2017
- Subjects: Discrimination in employment , Affirmative action programs , Equality
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/15467 , vital:28256
- Description: South Africa’s history as a nation is replete with examples of inequality and unfair discrimination. The working arena was no exception to the rule. In fact, it was one of the areas where inequality was most prevalent. Discriminatory legislation was promulgated under the Apartheid regime. These laws enforced differential treatment of employees along racial lines. After 1994, the newly democratic South Africa, through the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996 (hereinafter referred to as the “Constitution”), regarded all people as equal before the law and entitled to equal benefit and protection under the law. National legislation was subsequently promulgated to give effect to this constitutional objective. The Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 (hereinafter referred to as the “EEA”), specifically, gave effect to all employees’ constitutional right to equality in the workplace. Under the EEA, unfair discrimination was forbidden. The EEA also required employers to implement measures to eradicate the injustices of the past. Subsequent to the enactment of the EEA, the Courts reiterated two tests to determine whether unfair discrimination had taken place in the workplace. It also tested whether an affirmative action measure could justify such unfair discrimination. These two tests, referred to in Harksen v Lane NO and others (CCT9/97) [1997] ZACC 12 (11) BCLR 1489 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Harksen test”) and Minister of Finance v Van Heerden 2004 (11) BCLR 1125 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Van Heerden test”), were unfortunately applied by the Courts in an inconsistent manner. This created confusion about which test found application in specific circumstances. The Constitutional Court then clarified the confusion through the South African Police Service v Solidarity obo Barnard (2014) ZACC 23 (CC) (Hereinafter referred to as the “Barnard” decision”). It is important to note that this study does not seek to evaluate the correctness of the Barnard decision, nor does it consider the cases prior to the Barnard decision. Rather, this study considers the extent to which the Barnard decision informed later cases dealing with unfair discrimination and affirmative action. In the remaining chapters of this treatise the writer will attempt to answer this question as follows: In chapter two, the legislative framework applicable to issues of unfair discrimination and the application of affirmative action is discussed. Chapter three comprises of a detailed analysis of the Barnard decision. In chapters four and five the writer investigates how the Barnard decision informed four recent cases concerning affirmative action and unfair discrimination in the workplace. These discussions enabled the writer to, in the final chapter; conclude that all four cases were indeed informed by the Barnard decision. The Department of Correctional Services case, however, reiterated the Barnard decision to its fullest extent.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2017
Substantive equality and the defence of affirmative-action
- Keith-Bandath, Rasheed Ethan
- Authors: Keith-Bandath, Rasheed Ethan
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Equality before the law -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/3899 , vital:20474
- Description: Giving effect to the constitutional right to equality and the peculiar nature thereof in a heterogeneous society such as South Africa has proved to be a perplexing task. This is apparent when analyzing case law on the subject which demonstrates that our courts are regularly confronted with complex equality claims, and as a consequence, naturally have to make difficult decisions which in turn contribute toward our emerging and developing equality jurisprudence and ultimately the achievement of the constitutional standard of equality. This treatise considers substantive equality as a species of equality in the workplace and the defence of affirmative-action justification in terms of section 6 of the Employment Equity Act. In doing so, it outlines the seemingly peculiar application of affirmative action in a society that was once divided along racial and gender lines, a society that has once experienced one of the most severe forms of racial discrimination in the form of apartheid and its associated laws, policies and practices. This oppressive political regime had the effect of entrenching a deep legacy of racism, deprivation, exclusion and discrimination into the social fabric of society, which in turn had a disproportionate impact on the majority of people or categories of people relative to an elite minority. The legacy of this oppressive political system remains alarmingly evident today. The treatise reveals the challenges and difficulties a society faces in attempting to break with past patterns of disadvantage and its efforts to build a society that is non-racist, non-sexist, socially just and inclusive. The Constitution with its transformative vision should be considered the genesis of this credible and abiding process of redress. It is this exercise of redress coupled with the Constitution’s transformative mandate that raises difficult issues of restoration and reparation for past injustice, and the most appropriate and accommodating manner to do so. In addition to the Constitution, Parliament has enacted national legislation as a transformative agent in the workplace. The EEA as a legislative instrument was designed to give effect to the constitutional right to equality in the workplace. It emphatically prohibits unfair discrimination, but also obliges designated employers to implement affirmative-action measures. For such measures not to be unfairly discriminatory, they must be consistent with the purpose of the EEA. A plain reading of the EEA reveals that it does not provide sufficient guidelines for valid affirmative action. However, the EEA provides an interpretive injunction in that it must be interpreted in light of the Constitution and international law. In this regard the Constitutional Court in Minister of Finance v Van Heerden 1 in interpreting the Constitution, developed a test to assess whether a restitutionary measure such as affirmative action is in fact and in law a valid measure. To date this test is generally not followed, despite the authority of the judgment. In this regard, the courts have developed sound, but sometimes inconsistent principles and standards to test for the validity of affirmative action and to adjudge whether such measures are compliant with the Act. The test has also recently been reaffirmed in the recent judgment of South African Police Service v Solidarity obo Barnard.2 It is anticipated that affirmative-action case law will henceforth develop along the same lines. In this we appreciate judicial guidance and supervision in interpreting and pronouncing upon the legitimacy and validity of affirmative-action measures.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
- Authors: Keith-Bandath, Rasheed Ethan
- Date: 2015
- Subjects: Equality before the law -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/3899 , vital:20474
- Description: Giving effect to the constitutional right to equality and the peculiar nature thereof in a heterogeneous society such as South Africa has proved to be a perplexing task. This is apparent when analyzing case law on the subject which demonstrates that our courts are regularly confronted with complex equality claims, and as a consequence, naturally have to make difficult decisions which in turn contribute toward our emerging and developing equality jurisprudence and ultimately the achievement of the constitutional standard of equality. This treatise considers substantive equality as a species of equality in the workplace and the defence of affirmative-action justification in terms of section 6 of the Employment Equity Act. In doing so, it outlines the seemingly peculiar application of affirmative action in a society that was once divided along racial and gender lines, a society that has once experienced one of the most severe forms of racial discrimination in the form of apartheid and its associated laws, policies and practices. This oppressive political regime had the effect of entrenching a deep legacy of racism, deprivation, exclusion and discrimination into the social fabric of society, which in turn had a disproportionate impact on the majority of people or categories of people relative to an elite minority. The legacy of this oppressive political system remains alarmingly evident today. The treatise reveals the challenges and difficulties a society faces in attempting to break with past patterns of disadvantage and its efforts to build a society that is non-racist, non-sexist, socially just and inclusive. The Constitution with its transformative vision should be considered the genesis of this credible and abiding process of redress. It is this exercise of redress coupled with the Constitution’s transformative mandate that raises difficult issues of restoration and reparation for past injustice, and the most appropriate and accommodating manner to do so. In addition to the Constitution, Parliament has enacted national legislation as a transformative agent in the workplace. The EEA as a legislative instrument was designed to give effect to the constitutional right to equality in the workplace. It emphatically prohibits unfair discrimination, but also obliges designated employers to implement affirmative-action measures. For such measures not to be unfairly discriminatory, they must be consistent with the purpose of the EEA. A plain reading of the EEA reveals that it does not provide sufficient guidelines for valid affirmative action. However, the EEA provides an interpretive injunction in that it must be interpreted in light of the Constitution and international law. In this regard the Constitutional Court in Minister of Finance v Van Heerden 1 in interpreting the Constitution, developed a test to assess whether a restitutionary measure such as affirmative action is in fact and in law a valid measure. To date this test is generally not followed, despite the authority of the judgment. In this regard, the courts have developed sound, but sometimes inconsistent principles and standards to test for the validity of affirmative action and to adjudge whether such measures are compliant with the Act. The test has also recently been reaffirmed in the recent judgment of South African Police Service v Solidarity obo Barnard.2 It is anticipated that affirmative-action case law will henceforth develop along the same lines. In this we appreciate judicial guidance and supervision in interpreting and pronouncing upon the legitimacy and validity of affirmative-action measures.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2015
Substantive fairness in dismissals based on operational requirements
- Authors: Hokwana, Tina
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/30331 , vital:30931
- Description: This treatise interrogates the concept of substantive fairness in dismissals based on operational requirements and commences with the background and rationale to the study. It intends to achieve by virtue of specific research questions identified in the first chapter. The second chapter focuses on a discussion defining the term operational requirements and the circumstances in which employers have sought to justify dismissals based on operational requirements together with the courts’ interpretation of the term. Following an in-depth look at the South African courts’ interpretation of operational requirements, the third chapter analyses the jurisprudential development of the law of substantive fairness and assesses how the courts have applied statutory provisions relevant to operational requirement dismissals. The third chapter is then followed by a discussion on the aspects relating to selection criteria as pronounced by South African labour-law jurisprudence and deals specifically with the concept of LIFO and the employment universe. The fourth chapter also raises the various forms of fair and objective selection criteria, as well as the concept of bumping in light of the Employment Equity Act. The final chapter concludes that the primary areas requiring reform relate to the test for substantive fairness that does not include a proportionality analysis to weigh up the competing interests of the employer and the employees. The treatise further concludes with recommendations in dealing with dismissals based on operational requirements.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
- Authors: Hokwana, Tina
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/30331 , vital:30931
- Description: This treatise interrogates the concept of substantive fairness in dismissals based on operational requirements and commences with the background and rationale to the study. It intends to achieve by virtue of specific research questions identified in the first chapter. The second chapter focuses on a discussion defining the term operational requirements and the circumstances in which employers have sought to justify dismissals based on operational requirements together with the courts’ interpretation of the term. Following an in-depth look at the South African courts’ interpretation of operational requirements, the third chapter analyses the jurisprudential development of the law of substantive fairness and assesses how the courts have applied statutory provisions relevant to operational requirement dismissals. The third chapter is then followed by a discussion on the aspects relating to selection criteria as pronounced by South African labour-law jurisprudence and deals specifically with the concept of LIFO and the employment universe. The fourth chapter also raises the various forms of fair and objective selection criteria, as well as the concept of bumping in light of the Employment Equity Act. The final chapter concludes that the primary areas requiring reform relate to the test for substantive fairness that does not include a proportionality analysis to weigh up the competing interests of the employer and the employees. The treatise further concludes with recommendations in dealing with dismissals based on operational requirements.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
Substantive fairness in dismissals for operational requirements cases
- Authors: Camagu, Asanda Pumeza
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10214 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1008114 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa
- Description: Part II of the International Labour Organisation Convention 158 recognises operational requirements of an organisation as a ground for dismissal. Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act describes operational requirements reasons as requirements based on the economic, technological, structural or related needs of an employer. The employer‟s needs in case of operational requirement dismissal must be separated from the other reasons for dismissal, such as misconduct and incapacity. Operational requirements dismissals are governed by section 189 of the LRA. The LRA draws a distinction between small and large scale dismissals and regulates them separately. Section 189 control small scale dismissals, while section 189A pertains to large scale dismissals For substantive fairness of a dismissal for operational requirements, the employer must prove that the said reason is one based on operational requirements of the business. The employer must be able to prove that the reason for the dismissal falls within the statutory definition of operational requirements. Employers are not allowed to use retrenchment to dismiss employees who they believe to have performed unsatisfactorily. This means that employers are not entitled to retrench for ulterior reasons, than those of operational requirements.The Labour Court has held that an employer may not under any situation retrench an employee on a fixed-term contract if the termination takes place before the contract of the employee ends, unless the contract of employment makes provision for termination at an earlier date. Retrenchment in this situation will amount to a breach of contract. Another point of interest in dismissals for operational requirements is that the Labour Relations Act states that it is not unlawful to dismiss a striking employee for reasons based on the employer‟s operational requirements. In relation to the selection criteria to be used during these dismissals, the Labour Relations Act again states that if an agreement cannot be reached between the consulting parties, then the employer must use criteria that are fair and objective.
- Full Text:
- Authors: Camagu, Asanda Pumeza
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10214 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1008114 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa
- Description: Part II of the International Labour Organisation Convention 158 recognises operational requirements of an organisation as a ground for dismissal. Section 213 of the Labour Relations Act describes operational requirements reasons as requirements based on the economic, technological, structural or related needs of an employer. The employer‟s needs in case of operational requirement dismissal must be separated from the other reasons for dismissal, such as misconduct and incapacity. Operational requirements dismissals are governed by section 189 of the LRA. The LRA draws a distinction between small and large scale dismissals and regulates them separately. Section 189 control small scale dismissals, while section 189A pertains to large scale dismissals For substantive fairness of a dismissal for operational requirements, the employer must prove that the said reason is one based on operational requirements of the business. The employer must be able to prove that the reason for the dismissal falls within the statutory definition of operational requirements. Employers are not allowed to use retrenchment to dismiss employees who they believe to have performed unsatisfactorily. This means that employers are not entitled to retrench for ulterior reasons, than those of operational requirements.The Labour Court has held that an employer may not under any situation retrench an employee on a fixed-term contract if the termination takes place before the contract of the employee ends, unless the contract of employment makes provision for termination at an earlier date. Retrenchment in this situation will amount to a breach of contract. Another point of interest in dismissals for operational requirements is that the Labour Relations Act states that it is not unlawful to dismiss a striking employee for reasons based on the employer‟s operational requirements. In relation to the selection criteria to be used during these dismissals, the Labour Relations Act again states that if an agreement cannot be reached between the consulting parties, then the employer must use criteria that are fair and objective.
- Full Text:
Substantive fairness in the context of dismissal for team misconduct
- Authors: Gcayi, Siziwe
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: South Africa -- Labour Relations Act, 1995 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Unfair labor practices -- South Africa Labor discipline -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/22134 , vital:29852
- Description: Employees have inherent common law duties towards their employers. These duties include: obedience, care, competency and good faith.1 An employee has a duty to act in good faith towards the employer. For purposes of this treatise, focus will be on competency and good faith. Section 188(1) of the Labour Relations Act,2 provides three grounds on which dismissal can be considered to be fair. These grounds are: misconduct, capacity and an employer’s operational requirements. For purposes of this research paper, focus will be on misconduct. Capacity and employer’s operational requirements will not be discussed. For purposes of the present discussion misconduct can be divided into two broad categories namely, individual misconduct and group misconduct. Individual misconduct refers to transgression by a single employee who by his or her conduct violates the company policy or valid rule in the workplace. When the employer contemplates dismissing the employee for misconduct, it has to prove on the balance of probabilities that the employee concerned is guilty of misconduct and that the misconduct concerned justified a dismissal in the sense that it had irretrievably destroyed the requisite trust element in the employment relationship. Group misconduct refers to transgression that has been committed by group of employees. The following forms part of what can be categorised as falling within group misconduct: collective guilt, derivative misconduct, common purpose and team misconduct. Ideally the manner in which group misconduct is dealt with should be different from the way individual misconduct is handled. Individual misconduct refers to a single employee or misconduct of more than one employee who can be isolated and charged/handled as individuals, whereas group misconduct refers to a number of employees, whose conduct has offended the rules of the employer. In respect of group misconduct, the employer does not have to prove individual liability for each of the 1 Module 8 CCMA candidate commissioner notes. 2 66 of 1995. affected employees. An employer may after fulfilling certain requirements penalize them as a group.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
- Authors: Gcayi, Siziwe
- Date: 2018
- Subjects: South Africa -- Labour Relations Act, 1995 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa Labor laws and legislation -- South Africa Unfair labor practices -- South Africa Labor discipline -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10948/22134 , vital:29852
- Description: Employees have inherent common law duties towards their employers. These duties include: obedience, care, competency and good faith.1 An employee has a duty to act in good faith towards the employer. For purposes of this treatise, focus will be on competency and good faith. Section 188(1) of the Labour Relations Act,2 provides three grounds on which dismissal can be considered to be fair. These grounds are: misconduct, capacity and an employer’s operational requirements. For purposes of this research paper, focus will be on misconduct. Capacity and employer’s operational requirements will not be discussed. For purposes of the present discussion misconduct can be divided into two broad categories namely, individual misconduct and group misconduct. Individual misconduct refers to transgression by a single employee who by his or her conduct violates the company policy or valid rule in the workplace. When the employer contemplates dismissing the employee for misconduct, it has to prove on the balance of probabilities that the employee concerned is guilty of misconduct and that the misconduct concerned justified a dismissal in the sense that it had irretrievably destroyed the requisite trust element in the employment relationship. Group misconduct refers to transgression that has been committed by group of employees. The following forms part of what can be categorised as falling within group misconduct: collective guilt, derivative misconduct, common purpose and team misconduct. Ideally the manner in which group misconduct is dealt with should be different from the way individual misconduct is handled. Individual misconduct refers to a single employee or misconduct of more than one employee who can be isolated and charged/handled as individuals, whereas group misconduct refers to a number of employees, whose conduct has offended the rules of the employer. In respect of group misconduct, the employer does not have to prove individual liability for each of the 1 Module 8 CCMA candidate commissioner notes. 2 66 of 1995. affected employees. An employer may after fulfilling certain requirements penalize them as a group.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2018
Substantive fairness of dismissal for misconduct
- Authors: Toba, Wilson
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11063 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/355 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: In the employment context employers may view certain conduct/behaviour committed by an employee or a group of employees to be repugnant and unacceptable resulting in the disciplinary action that may lead to a dismissal sanction taken against such employee or employees. Even though the employer has a right to discipline the employees for a contravention of a rule or a policy and even dismiss the employee/s involved, such a disciplinary action and dismissal must be based on a certain procedure where the principle of fairness must be adhered to. The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (“the Act”) and Schedule 8 of the Code of Good Practice deals with the aspects of dismissals related to conduct and capacity, however, each case is unique, it has to be approached on its own merits. Schedule 8(3) states that, “formal procedures in disciplinary measures do not have to be invoked every time a rule is broken or a standard is not met”. It is therefore necessary that there should be a disciplinary code which guides the workers and the employers, it must be clear and be understood by all the parties. The disciplinary code of conduct serves as the foundation of good discipline because everybody knows the consequences of his/her contravention of those guidelines enumerated in the Code of Conduct. The Code of Good Practice under Schedule 8(3), states that “while employees should be protected from arbitrary action, employers are entitled to satisfactory conduct and work performance from their employees”, so a very good relationship between the two parties is most important if there is to be stability and industrial peace in the workplace.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
- Authors: Toba, Wilson
- Date: 2004
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:11063 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/355 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor discipline -- Law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: In the employment context employers may view certain conduct/behaviour committed by an employee or a group of employees to be repugnant and unacceptable resulting in the disciplinary action that may lead to a dismissal sanction taken against such employee or employees. Even though the employer has a right to discipline the employees for a contravention of a rule or a policy and even dismiss the employee/s involved, such a disciplinary action and dismissal must be based on a certain procedure where the principle of fairness must be adhered to. The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (“the Act”) and Schedule 8 of the Code of Good Practice deals with the aspects of dismissals related to conduct and capacity, however, each case is unique, it has to be approached on its own merits. Schedule 8(3) states that, “formal procedures in disciplinary measures do not have to be invoked every time a rule is broken or a standard is not met”. It is therefore necessary that there should be a disciplinary code which guides the workers and the employers, it must be clear and be understood by all the parties. The disciplinary code of conduct serves as the foundation of good discipline because everybody knows the consequences of his/her contravention of those guidelines enumerated in the Code of Conduct. The Code of Good Practice under Schedule 8(3), states that “while employees should be protected from arbitrary action, employers are entitled to satisfactory conduct and work performance from their employees”, so a very good relationship between the two parties is most important if there is to be stability and industrial peace in the workplace.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2004
Suspension as an unfair labour practice
- Authors: Share, Hanli
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Labor laws and legislation , Unfair labor practices
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10273 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1018655
- Description: Suspension as a form of an unfair labour practice can be of two categories. There could be a situation where an employer suspends an employee as a disciplinary sanction after an employee has committed an act of misconduct. This is often referred to as a punitive suspension. An employer may also suspend an employee pending a disciplinary hearing. In this case the employee has not yet been found guilty because the investigation into the alleged misconduct is still on going. The employee may be suspended as a way of preventing him from interfering with the investigation process into the alleged misconduct. This form of suspension is often referred to as a preventative suspension. It is very important to note the distinction between the two forms of suspension because the processes that are followed when effecting them are different. Failure to acknowledge the difference might result in a situation where an employer might be effecting a preventative suspension but the consequences might be that of a punitive suspension and end-up being an unfair labour practice. Suspension is a disciplinary measure, and it is important to note that in the event that the employer elects to implement a suspension, its conduct must be disciplinary in nature and intent and should be corrective rather than punitive.Unlike dismissals where the Code of Good Practice of the Labour Relations Act, No 66 of 1995 provides guidance on what constitutes procedural and substantive fairness, there are no guidelines on what constitutes procedural and substantive fairness when it comes to suspensions. This has resulted in a situation where suspension is treated as a minor aspect of disciplinary measures that is frequently abused as it is often on full remuneration. This, however, does not allow an employer to suspend employees at will, without merit and without following proper procedure. Suspension could have severe adverse effects on employees and often affects their reputation, goodwill, human dignity, self-esteem and the right to meaningful association and work. It is for this reason that suspension must be effected in a way that is procedurally and substantively fair.Punitive suspension is implemented as a sanction and is often without pay and is a last resort prior to dismissal. Preventative suspension occurs prior to a disciplinary hearing, with the aim of temporarily removing the employee from the workplace to enable the employer to conduct a proper investigation without interference. Unfortunately preventative suspensions are often abused by employers in that they protract over extended periods of time, making the preventative suspension punitive in nature, to the extent that the courts have been forced to intervene and lay down stringent requirements that must be met in order to prevent such abuse.There are various requirements for suspension which range from the intention of the employer, the audi alteram partem rule, sufficient reasons prior to suspension to period of suspension. Most employment relationships are governed by disciplinary codes or collective agreements, which often place limitations on the concept of suspension. Some codes provide for special leave at the option of the employee, which the employer often abuses instead of utilizing the preventative suspension option. This, however, is more often than not to suit a political agenda.In the event of non-compliance by an employer, an employee is not left remediless. An unfair suspension constitutes an unfair labour practice and an employee has the right to refer such dispute to the relevant labour forums like the CCMA or the relevant bargaining council. Employees are cautioned not to refer their disputes to the Labour Court for final relief, but rather to only approach the courts for urgent interim relief, like interdicts.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Share, Hanli
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Labor laws and legislation , Unfair labor practices
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10273 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1018655
- Description: Suspension as a form of an unfair labour practice can be of two categories. There could be a situation where an employer suspends an employee as a disciplinary sanction after an employee has committed an act of misconduct. This is often referred to as a punitive suspension. An employer may also suspend an employee pending a disciplinary hearing. In this case the employee has not yet been found guilty because the investigation into the alleged misconduct is still on going. The employee may be suspended as a way of preventing him from interfering with the investigation process into the alleged misconduct. This form of suspension is often referred to as a preventative suspension. It is very important to note the distinction between the two forms of suspension because the processes that are followed when effecting them are different. Failure to acknowledge the difference might result in a situation where an employer might be effecting a preventative suspension but the consequences might be that of a punitive suspension and end-up being an unfair labour practice. Suspension is a disciplinary measure, and it is important to note that in the event that the employer elects to implement a suspension, its conduct must be disciplinary in nature and intent and should be corrective rather than punitive.Unlike dismissals where the Code of Good Practice of the Labour Relations Act, No 66 of 1995 provides guidance on what constitutes procedural and substantive fairness, there are no guidelines on what constitutes procedural and substantive fairness when it comes to suspensions. This has resulted in a situation where suspension is treated as a minor aspect of disciplinary measures that is frequently abused as it is often on full remuneration. This, however, does not allow an employer to suspend employees at will, without merit and without following proper procedure. Suspension could have severe adverse effects on employees and often affects their reputation, goodwill, human dignity, self-esteem and the right to meaningful association and work. It is for this reason that suspension must be effected in a way that is procedurally and substantively fair.Punitive suspension is implemented as a sanction and is often without pay and is a last resort prior to dismissal. Preventative suspension occurs prior to a disciplinary hearing, with the aim of temporarily removing the employee from the workplace to enable the employer to conduct a proper investigation without interference. Unfortunately preventative suspensions are often abused by employers in that they protract over extended periods of time, making the preventative suspension punitive in nature, to the extent that the courts have been forced to intervene and lay down stringent requirements that must be met in order to prevent such abuse.There are various requirements for suspension which range from the intention of the employer, the audi alteram partem rule, sufficient reasons prior to suspension to period of suspension. Most employment relationships are governed by disciplinary codes or collective agreements, which often place limitations on the concept of suspension. Some codes provide for special leave at the option of the employee, which the employer often abuses instead of utilizing the preventative suspension option. This, however, is more often than not to suit a political agenda.In the event of non-compliance by an employer, an employee is not left remediless. An unfair suspension constitutes an unfair labour practice and an employee has the right to refer such dispute to the relevant labour forums like the CCMA or the relevant bargaining council. Employees are cautioned not to refer their disputes to the Labour Court for final relief, but rather to only approach the courts for urgent interim relief, like interdicts.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
Suspension in the disciplinary process
- Authors: Grigor, Charles Miller
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Employees -- Suspension , Labor discipline
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10255 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020966
- Description: Employers often wrestle with whether or not to suspend an employee and the issue is what needs to be done before an employee could be suspended. Suspending an employee means to deprive him or her from entering the work place for a period of time, due to alleged misconduct which, due to the nature of the alleged misconduct and in the opinion of the employer, warrants the employee not to be in or near the workplace. Section 23 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, affords every employee the right to fair labour practices and this right should be affected by the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (LRA). Unfortunately the LRA only deals with the unfair suspension under the definition of an unfair labour practice in section 186(2) by stating that the meaning of unfair labour practice is any act or omission that arises between an employer and an employee involving the unfair suspension of an employee or any other unfair disciplinary action short of dismissal in respect of an employee. The focus of this document thus is to scrutinise the lack of legislative guidelines relating to the procedural fairness of suspension of employees. It would thus necessitate an overview of the nature of suspension which would be discussed in length by way of referring to the right to suspend an employee as well as the application of the courts in such cases, the distinction between suspension as a preventative, or as a punitive measure and the possibility of suspension resulting in an unfair labour practice. The distinction between preventative and punitive suspensions are highlighted. Since it is not clear when, how and for how long an employee may be suspended, in the absence of clear guidelines, employers have to turn to the courts’ interpretation to get the necessary guidance on the application of a suspension. In order to ensure that the employer, experiencing unnecessary difficulty with the implementation of procedural fairness of suspensions, in a meaningful way, be assisted by the proposal that legislature consider to address this by including clear guidelines under Item 3 of Schedule 8 of the LRA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
- Authors: Grigor, Charles Miller
- Date: 2013
- Subjects: Employees -- Suspension , Labor discipline
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10255 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/d1020966
- Description: Employers often wrestle with whether or not to suspend an employee and the issue is what needs to be done before an employee could be suspended. Suspending an employee means to deprive him or her from entering the work place for a period of time, due to alleged misconduct which, due to the nature of the alleged misconduct and in the opinion of the employer, warrants the employee not to be in or near the workplace. Section 23 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, affords every employee the right to fair labour practices and this right should be affected by the Labour Relations Act, 1995 (LRA). Unfortunately the LRA only deals with the unfair suspension under the definition of an unfair labour practice in section 186(2) by stating that the meaning of unfair labour practice is any act or omission that arises between an employer and an employee involving the unfair suspension of an employee or any other unfair disciplinary action short of dismissal in respect of an employee. The focus of this document thus is to scrutinise the lack of legislative guidelines relating to the procedural fairness of suspension of employees. It would thus necessitate an overview of the nature of suspension which would be discussed in length by way of referring to the right to suspend an employee as well as the application of the courts in such cases, the distinction between suspension as a preventative, or as a punitive measure and the possibility of suspension resulting in an unfair labour practice. The distinction between preventative and punitive suspensions are highlighted. Since it is not clear when, how and for how long an employee may be suspended, in the absence of clear guidelines, employers have to turn to the courts’ interpretation to get the necessary guidance on the application of a suspension. In order to ensure that the employer, experiencing unnecessary difficulty with the implementation of procedural fairness of suspensions, in a meaningful way, be assisted by the proposal that legislature consider to address this by including clear guidelines under Item 3 of Schedule 8 of the LRA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2013
Taking gendered harms seriously : the utility of rape trauma syndrome evidence in dispelling rape myths in criminal trials
- Authors: Nkala, Amanda Nothabo
- Date: 2016
- Subjects: Rape trauma syndrome Women -- Crimes against Rape -- Psychological aspects
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10353/13458 , vital:39668
- Description: Rape is a violent crime marked by underreporting and low conviction rates. Notwithstanding the fact that most rape laws have been made to be gender-neutral, the statistics of rape are still devastatingly high even on a global scale. The majority of the victims are still predominantly females especially in the context of acquaintance rape. It is an uncontestable fact that rape usually occurs in secret making it possible for one to falsely accuse another and effectively rendering it difficult to refute. In light of this, victims who have managed to reach the courts have come face to face with a myriad of stereotypical beliefs and rape myths about rape victims. These have dealt a blow to their cases once their credibility is doubted because they may have exhibited behaviour that does not match with the classic or real rape victim as expected by the society. However rape is an egregiously unique crime that presents with serious psychological issues for the victim. As such it is possible for a rape victim to exhibit counterintuitive behaviour that can only be sensibly explained by an expert who has delved in human behavioural sciences. The alleged victim will be questioned on things like lengthy delay in reporting, returning to the scene of the crime, asking for taxi money the morning after the rape or even failing to scream and fight off the alleged assailant. Unfortunately, the psychological effects of rape have more often than not been overlooked in our criminal justice system giving way for blame shifting in that the female victim is called upon to account for why the rape may have happened to her. These psychological reactions, responses and counterintuitive behaviour have been characterized as Rape Trauma Syndrome by specialists in psychology and psychiatry. In the context of this study, Rape Trauma Syndrome is a form of expert opinion evidence which is relevant, helpful and necessary because it can dispel rape myths and stereotypical beliefs about rape victims by educating the courts about the psychological reactions of rape victims. Against this backdrop, this research project investigates the utility of Rape Trauma Syndrome evidence in dispelling rape myths in rape trials, focusing especially on the admissibility and use of that syndrome as evidence in other jurisdictions at the level of comparative analysis in order to establish whether it can be utilised in the South African context.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2016
- Authors: Nkala, Amanda Nothabo
- Date: 2016
- Subjects: Rape trauma syndrome Women -- Crimes against Rape -- Psychological aspects
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: http://hdl.handle.net/10353/13458 , vital:39668
- Description: Rape is a violent crime marked by underreporting and low conviction rates. Notwithstanding the fact that most rape laws have been made to be gender-neutral, the statistics of rape are still devastatingly high even on a global scale. The majority of the victims are still predominantly females especially in the context of acquaintance rape. It is an uncontestable fact that rape usually occurs in secret making it possible for one to falsely accuse another and effectively rendering it difficult to refute. In light of this, victims who have managed to reach the courts have come face to face with a myriad of stereotypical beliefs and rape myths about rape victims. These have dealt a blow to their cases once their credibility is doubted because they may have exhibited behaviour that does not match with the classic or real rape victim as expected by the society. However rape is an egregiously unique crime that presents with serious psychological issues for the victim. As such it is possible for a rape victim to exhibit counterintuitive behaviour that can only be sensibly explained by an expert who has delved in human behavioural sciences. The alleged victim will be questioned on things like lengthy delay in reporting, returning to the scene of the crime, asking for taxi money the morning after the rape or even failing to scream and fight off the alleged assailant. Unfortunately, the psychological effects of rape have more often than not been overlooked in our criminal justice system giving way for blame shifting in that the female victim is called upon to account for why the rape may have happened to her. These psychological reactions, responses and counterintuitive behaviour have been characterized as Rape Trauma Syndrome by specialists in psychology and psychiatry. In the context of this study, Rape Trauma Syndrome is a form of expert opinion evidence which is relevant, helpful and necessary because it can dispel rape myths and stereotypical beliefs about rape victims by educating the courts about the psychological reactions of rape victims. Against this backdrop, this research project investigates the utility of Rape Trauma Syndrome evidence in dispelling rape myths in rape trials, focusing especially on the admissibility and use of that syndrome as evidence in other jurisdictions at the level of comparative analysis in order to establish whether it can be utilised in the South African context.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2016
Termination of employment contract by operation of law in the education sector: the constitutionality and validity of the deeming provisions
- Authors: Mpati, Lungisa
- Date: 2012
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor contract -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Educational law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10200 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1600 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor contract -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Educational law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: Fundamental to any contract of employment is the obligation that rests on an employee not to be absent from work without justification. Under the common law, if an employee did that, the employer would be entitled to dismiss him or her on notice. The International Labour Organization Convention (ILO) 158 of 1982 provides that the employer must have a reason for a dismissal and sets out broad categories or reasons for dismissals . Section 23 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996(Act 108 of 1998) provides that “Everyone has the right to fair labour practices”. Section 33 of the Constitution provides that “Everyone has the right to administrative action that is lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. The Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA) is designed to give effect to just administrative action. Section 1 and 3 of the Labour Relations Act,1995(Act 66 of 1995)(LRA) require compliance with Article 7 and 8 of the ILO Convention 158 of 1982, when the employment of a worker has been terminated by his or her employer. The LRA protects employees against unfair dismissal. In the Department of Education, Section 14(1)(a) of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 provides for the discharge of an educator in the event that he or she absents himself or herself from work for a period exceeding 14 consecutive days without the permission of the employer. A similar provision, Section 17(5)(a)(i) of the Public Service Act, 1994 provides for the discharge of an officer other than an educator who absents himself or herself from his or her official duties without the permission of the Head of Department for a period exceeding one calendar month. Section 14(2) of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 and 17(5)(b) of the Public Service Act,1994 afford an employee who has been deemed discharged to show good cause why he or she should be reinstated. Against this background, the critical legal question is the constitutionality of the deeming provisions. The study will examine the validity of these provisions in relation to the ILO Conventions, Constitution, LRA and PAJA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2012
- Authors: Mpati, Lungisa
- Date: 2012
- Subjects: Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor contract -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Educational law and legislation -- South Africa
- Language: English
- Type: Thesis , Masters , LLM
- Identifier: vital:10200 , http://hdl.handle.net/10948/1600 , Employees -- Dismissal of -- Law and legislation -- South Africa , Labor contract -- South Africa , Unfair labor practices -- South Africa , Educational law and legislation -- South Africa
- Description: Fundamental to any contract of employment is the obligation that rests on an employee not to be absent from work without justification. Under the common law, if an employee did that, the employer would be entitled to dismiss him or her on notice. The International Labour Organization Convention (ILO) 158 of 1982 provides that the employer must have a reason for a dismissal and sets out broad categories or reasons for dismissals . Section 23 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996(Act 108 of 1998) provides that “Everyone has the right to fair labour practices”. Section 33 of the Constitution provides that “Everyone has the right to administrative action that is lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. The Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA) is designed to give effect to just administrative action. Section 1 and 3 of the Labour Relations Act,1995(Act 66 of 1995)(LRA) require compliance with Article 7 and 8 of the ILO Convention 158 of 1982, when the employment of a worker has been terminated by his or her employer. The LRA protects employees against unfair dismissal. In the Department of Education, Section 14(1)(a) of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 provides for the discharge of an educator in the event that he or she absents himself or herself from work for a period exceeding 14 consecutive days without the permission of the employer. A similar provision, Section 17(5)(a)(i) of the Public Service Act, 1994 provides for the discharge of an officer other than an educator who absents himself or herself from his or her official duties without the permission of the Head of Department for a period exceeding one calendar month. Section 14(2) of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 and 17(5)(b) of the Public Service Act,1994 afford an employee who has been deemed discharged to show good cause why he or she should be reinstated. Against this background, the critical legal question is the constitutionality of the deeming provisions. The study will examine the validity of these provisions in relation to the ILO Conventions, Constitution, LRA and PAJA.
- Full Text:
- Date Issued: 2012