Adcorp Workforce Solutions (Pty) Ltd v CCMA and Others (D1280/19) [2021] ZALCD 68; (2021) 42 ILJ 2411 (LC); [2021] 12 BLLR 1222 (LC) (13 August 2021)

Adcorp Workforce Solutions (Pty) Ltd v CCMA and Others (D1280/19) [2021] ZALCD 68; (2021) 42 ILJ 2411 (LC); [2021] 12 BLLR 1222 (LC) (13 August 2021)

The Labour Court held that once the applicant and third respondent concluded a settlement agreement deeming the employees as permanent employees of the fourth respondent, any further reliance on section 198D to resolve disputes about uniforms was misplaced. Section 198D is intended for disputes arising from the interpretation or application of section 198A prior to such settlement. The arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to entertain complaints about uniforms under section 198D, as the legal status of the employees had already been resolved. Any dissatisfaction regarding uniforms should be addressed through ordinary internal processes available to permanent employees, not through the CCMA...

Citation
[2021] ZALCD 68
Parties
Applicant: Adcorp Workforce Solutions (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Pillemer, B N.O.; Respondent: NUMSA obo AS Dlamini & 40 Others; Respondent: Sacks Packaging (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court Durban
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
13 August 2021
Case Number
D1280/19
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment
Outcome
The CCMA lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute; the award regarding uniforms is reviewed and set aside; no order as to costs.
Judges
Whitcher
Legal Topics
Jurisdiction of Ccma, Settlement Agreement, Section 198a Lra, Interpretation and Application Disputes
Labour Law Jurisdiction of Ccma Settlement Agreement Section 198a Lra Interpretation and Application Disputes

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Adcorp Workforce Solutions (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

CCMA

Respondent

Pillemer, B N.O.

Respondent

NUMSA obo AS Dlamini & 40 Others

Respondent

Sacks Packaging (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the CCMA had jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute regarding uniforms after a settlement agreement declared the employees permanent employees of the fourth respondent.
  2. 2 Whether the dispute about uniforms constituted a dispute arising from the interpretation or application of section 198A of the LRA.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator was competent to award relief under section 198D of the LRA after the settlement agreement.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court held that once the applicant and third respondent concluded a settlement agreement deeming the employees as permanent employees of the fourth respondent, any further reliance on section 198D to resolve disputes about uniforms was misplaced. Section 198D is intended for disputes arising from the interpretation or application of section 198A prior to such settlement. The arbitrator lacked jurisdiction to entertain complaints about uniforms under section 198D, as the legal status of the employees had already been resolved. Any dissatisfaction regarding uniforms should be addressed through ordinary internal processes available to permanent employees, not through the CCMA...

Court Disposition

The CCMA lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute; the award regarding uniforms is reviewed and set aside; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The CCMA lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate the dispute.
  • The ruling regarding the uniforms is reviewed and set aside.