CSS Tactical Pty (Ltd) v SOCRAWU (JA 69/14) [2015] ZALAC 88 (24 June 2015)

CSS Tactical Pty (Ltd) v SOCRAWU (JA 69/14) [2015] ZALAC 88 (24 June 2015)

The Labour Appeal Court held that the Framework Agreement and Memorandum of Agreement did not regulate or preclude bargaining at company level on the remaining demands listed in the strike notice, specifically travelling allowance and payment for attending court as witnesses. The appellant failed to prove that these issues had been tabled, traded off, or negotiated at the national forum, and thus clause 8.5 did not apply. Clause 12 of the Memorandum, while generally reserving bargaining for the national forum, was not all-encompassing and did not clearly exclude the disputed demands from company-level negotiation. As a result, the right to strike on these issues was not limited by...

Citation
[2015] ZALAC 88
Parties
Appellant: CSS Tactical (PTY) Ltd; Respondent: Security Officers Civil Rights and Allied Workers Union (SOCRAWU); Respondent: Zwabesho Mbatha and 302 others
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 June 2015
Case Number
JA 69/14
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Refusing Interdict Against Strike
Outcome
Appeal dismissed with costs.
Judges
Tlaletsi, Ndlovu, Landman
Legal Topics
Protected Strike, Collective Bargaining, Interpretation of Collective Agreement, Limitations on Right to Strike, Framework Agreement, Company Level Bargaining
Labour Law Civil Procedure Protected Strike Collective Bargaining Interpretation of Collective Agreement Limitations on Right to Strike Framework Agreement Company Level Bargaining

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 4 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

CSS Tactical (PTY) Ltd

Appellant

Security Officers Civil Rights and Allied Workers Union (SOCRAWU)

Respondent

Zwabesho Mbatha and 302 others

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Appeal From Labour Court Judgment Refusing Interdict Against Strike

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the demands raised by the union at company level were precluded from strike action by the national Framework Agreement and Memorandum of Agreement.
  2. 2 Whether the right to strike on certain issues was limited by collective agreement under section 65(3)(a) of the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether the Labour Court erred in refusing to stay its decision pending a CCMA ruling on interpretation of the Memorandum.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the Framework Agreement and Memorandum of Agreement did not regulate or preclude bargaining at company level on the remaining demands listed in the strike notice, specifically travelling allowance and payment for attending court as witnesses. The appellant failed to prove that these issues had been tabled, traded off, or negotiated at the national forum, and thus clause 8.5 did not apply. Clause 12 of the Memorandum, while generally reserving bargaining for the national forum, was not all-encompassing and did not clearly exclude the disputed demands from company-level negotiation. As a result, the right to strike on these issues was not limited by...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed with costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed with costs.