Labour Law

Employers too often misuse disciplinary warnings or avoid using them at all because they are unsure of how the law allows them to use such warnings. In labour law the main purpose of giving warnings is to remind employees of the employer’s standards of conduct and work performance and to give them a chance to improve.

The CCMA, from time to time, suffers case backlogs and delays in resolving disputes. One of the reasons for this is the fact that the CCMA is overloaded with cases, and the caseload is constantly increasing.

On 4 April 2022, the Minister of Cooperative Governance and Traditional Affairs (“the Minister”) terminated the national state of disaster. 

After spending four years in college, students graduate with their degree and hope to land a coveted position as a lawyer within a firm. But what happens when your dream career doesn't work out? 

In my previous article I explained that the New Code of Practice: Managing Exposure To Covid In The Workplace, 2022 requires employers to conduct a special health risk assessment (HRA) and to implement a plan to protect its employees from contracting Covid.

On 18 March 2022, the Minister of Employment and Labour (Minister) published the ‘Code of Good Practice on the Prevention of Elimination of Harassment in the Workplace’ (Harassment Code). The Harassment Code is effective from 18 March 2022. The Minister has, simultaneously, repealed the ‘Amended Code of Good Practice on the Handling of Sexual Harassment Cases in the Workplace’.

Double Jeopardy occurs where an employee is punished twice for the same incident of misconduct or poor performance. Normally, such discipline would be found to be unfair. However, one view is that a second disciplinary process might be justified if the employer is able to present evidence that:

In common law employers and employees have the obligation to treat each other fairly and within the law. 

Where the employer fails to attend an arbitration hearing the arbitrator is entitled to continue without the employer unless the arbitrator is aware of an acceptable reason for the employer’s absence. As the arbitrator has little or no way of testing the truth of the employee’s evidence he/she will most often accept the employee’s version and find against the absent employer. This is called a default judgement.

Whether the dismissal of an employee who accused a fellow employee of racism and threatened and intimidated her was substantively and procedurally fair.

Dishonesty has traditionally been seen as a serious offence and one that could render an employment relationship intolerable. This is because dishonesty damages the ability of the employer to trust the employee. 

When an employer contemplates retrenching employees it is required by the Labour Relations Act (LRA) to first consult about this prospect before making any decision to retrench. Where the relevant employees belong to a trade union the employer is required to consult with that union on a number of issues, the most important of which is any means of avoiding job losses. 

The presiding officer (PO) of a disciplinary hearing must hear the evidence from both sides properly in order to be able to consider it once the hearing is adjourned for purposes of a verdict. The PO then assesses the evidence collected at the hearing in order to decide whether the employee is guilty or not guilty of the charges. 

Even without the effects of Covid absenteeism is a most problematic form of misconduct because it reduces productivity. Most employers therefore require employees who are absent from work due to alleged illness to provide proof, in the form of a medical certificate and/or a positive Covid test result, that they were genuinely ill and not abusing sick leave for purposes unrelated to illness. 

On Friday 21 January 2022, the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) delivered a much anticipated first pronouncement on the fairness of a dismissal following an employee’s refusal to receive the Covid-19 vaccination.

Losing income can be extremely stressful. This stress can be compounded without the relief you are entitled to from the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF). 

Employment contracts serve as a record of your employment terms. Your written contract also legally indicates that you agreed to the terms and conditions of your work.

Labour law accepts the firing of guilty employees only if dismissal is the last resort. The Code of Good Practice: Dismissal provides that, where employers are considering dismissing an employee they should be able to justify this drastic sanction by proving that the employee’s misconduct is so serious that it makes continued employment intolerable. One factor that could constitute such intolerability is the employee’s breach of the trust relationship.

Having your work time reduced is extremely difficult. This as reduced time often means you will receive less pay while your expenses remain the same.

 Every month, workers contribute to the Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF). This money can be accessed should they require short term financial relief if they lost their job.