Intercape Ferreira Mainliner (Pty) Ltd and Another v NUMSA and Others (C 179/2015) [2015] ZALCCT 22 (2 April 2015)

Intercape Ferreira Mainliner (Pty) Ltd and Another v NUMSA and Others (C 179/2015) [2015] ZALCCT 22 (2 April 2015)

The court found that the additional duties imposed on drivers by the applicants do not amount to a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment. The tasks required of drivers, such as assisting with seat allocations, checking manifests, issuing tickets, and making announcements, are either already contemplated in their contracts or constitute minor changes to work practices. The evidence did not show that the nature of the drivers' work had been fundamentally altered. The managerial prerogative allows for reasonable changes in work methods, and the contracts of employment envisaged possible changes. The union's reliance on section 64(4) of the Labour Relations Act was...

Citation
[2015] ZALCCT 22
Parties
Applicant: Intercape Ferreira Mainliner (Pty) Ltd; Applicant: Muntashe Training and HR Services (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: NUMSA; Respondent: Persons Listed on Annexure “A”
Court
Labour Court Cape Town
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
2 April 2015
Case Number
C 179/2015
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Return Day of Rule Nisi, Anticipated by Respondents
Outcome
The rule nisi issued on 20 March 2015 is confirmed. The strike is declared unprotected under section 64(4) of the Labour Relations Act.
Judges
Steenkamp
Legal Topics
Unilateral Change to Terms and Conditions, Protected Strike, Section 64 Lra, Managerial Prerogative, Contractual Obligations, Basic Conditions of Employment
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unilateral Change to Terms and Conditions Protected Strike Section 64 Lra Managerial Prerogative Contractual Obligations Basic Conditions of Employment

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 14 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Intercape Ferreira Mainliner (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Muntashe Training and HR Services (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

NUMSA

Respondent

Persons Listed on Annexure “A”

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Return Day of Rule Nisi, Anticipated by Respondents

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the changes to drivers' duties constitute a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment.
  2. 2 Whether the strike called by NUMSA is protected under section 64(4) of the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether the additional duties imposed on drivers are so fundamental as to alter the nature of their employment contracts.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the additional duties imposed on drivers by the applicants do not amount to a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment. The tasks required of drivers, such as assisting with seat allocations, checking manifests, issuing tickets, and making announcements, are either already contemplated in their contracts or constitute minor changes to work practices. The evidence did not show that the nature of the drivers' work had been fundamentally altered. The managerial prerogative allows for reasonable changes in work methods, and the contracts of employment envisaged possible changes. The union's reliance on section 64(4) of the Labour Relations Act was...

Court Disposition

The rule nisi issued on 20 March 2015 is confirmed. The strike is declared unprotected under section 64(4) of the Labour Relations Act.

Orders

  • The rule nisi issued on 20 March 2015 is confirmed.
  • No order as to costs.