Advertisement

bargaining councils

Employees do sometimes lay frivolous and vexatious claims against employers at the CCMA.  However, employees who do so may be ordered to pay the employer's legal costs. Even so, the employer should not give employees easy claims by failing to behave legally and responsively; and should definitely not underestimate the importance of preparing a response - even if the employees claims are spurious.

This week Ivan Israelstam explains why employers get into - expensive - difficulties at the Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration, or bargaining councils by incorrectly using fixed-term contracts. Why does this happen, and what should employers take into account to ensure that they can defend their actions if a dispute is lodged against them?

Ivan Israelstam expresses the opinion that labour laws are restrictive and that although the intention is to help employees, the effect is to increase unemployment.

This week Ivan Israelstam points out that the CCMA and bargaining councils do have the jurisdiction to decide upon retrenchment disputes, if there is a failure to agree at conciliation. This arises from the amendments to the Labour Relations Act in 2002. It is critical that employers follow a fair procedure and not simply go ahead with retrenchments without engaging in a fair consultation process.  

Ivan Israelstam

It is often very difficult for employers to provide sufficient proof to the CCMA or bargaining council commissioner that the employee is guilty of the misconduct for which he was dismissed. The employer has the full onus (legal responsibility) of proving that the dismissal is fair. Employers often believe that video or camera footage will provide sufficient evidence for a dismissal. This week Ivan Israelstam explains the complexities involved in using this technology in disciplinary hearings.

Advertisement

Subscribe to bargaining councils