Protekon (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C335/2003) [2005] ZALC 75; (2005) 26 ILJ 1105 (LC); [2005] 7 BLLR 703 (LC) (17 May 2005)

Protekon (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C335/2003) [2005] ZALC 75; (2005) 26 ILJ 1105 (LC); [2005] 7 BLLR 703 (LC) (17 May 2005)

The Labour Court held that the travel concessions constituted employment benefits within the meaning of section 186(2)(a) of the LRA, even though they were discretionary and not contractually guaranteed. The CCMA had jurisdiction to scrutinise the fairness of the employer's conduct in withdrawing the benefit and substituting it with monetary compensation. The commissioner was correct to find procedural unfairness due to the lack of consultation with affected employees regarding the compensation amount. However, the commissioner exceeded his powers by ordering consultation with employees not party to the dispute and by granting relief that unsettled the interests of the majority who had...

Citation
[2005] ZALC 75
Parties
Applicant: Protekon (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Commissioner Dave Wilson N.O.; Respondent: Neil Robert Marinus
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
17 May 2005
Case Number
C335/2003
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award
Outcome
The Labour Court reviewed and set aside the commissioner's award and substituted it with an order for compensation to the third respondent.
Judges
C F N Todd
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Employment Benefits, Procedural Fairness, Remedies for Unfair Labour Practice
Labour Law Unfair Labour Practice Employment Benefits Procedural Fairness Remedies for Unfair Labour Practice

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

Parties

Protekon (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Commissioner Dave Wilson N.O.

Respondent

Neil Robert Marinus

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of CCMA Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the withdrawal of travel concessions and substitution with monetary compensation constituted unfair conduct relating to benefits under section 186(2)(a) of the LRA.
  2. 2 Whether the CCMA had jurisdiction to scrutinise employer conduct where the benefit was discretionary and not contractually guaranteed.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner exceeded his powers by ordering consultation with employees not party to the dispute and by granting compensation.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court held that the travel concessions constituted employment benefits within the meaning of section 186(2)(a) of the LRA, even though they were discretionary and not contractually guaranteed. The CCMA had jurisdiction to scrutinise the fairness of the employer's conduct in withdrawing the benefit and substituting it with monetary compensation. The commissioner was correct to find procedural unfairness due to the lack of consultation with affected employees regarding the compensation amount. However, the commissioner exceeded his powers by ordering consultation with employees not party to the dispute and by granting relief that unsettled the interests of the majority who had...

Court Disposition

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside the commissioner's award and substituted it with an order for compensation to the third respondent.

Orders

  • The respondent is ordered to pay the applicant an amount of R23,890 (twenty three thousand eight hundred and ninety rand), bearing interest from 21 May 2003 to date of payment at the prescribed rate for judgment debts.
  • The applicant is ordered to pay the amount due within 14 days of this order.