RAM Transport (SA) (Pty) Ltd v South African Transport Allied Workers Union (J106/2011) [2011] ZALCJHB 3; (2011) 32 ILJ 1722 (LC) (29 January 2011)

RAM Transport (SA) (Pty) Ltd v South African Transport Allied Workers Union (J106/2011) [2011] ZALCJHB 3; (2011) 32 ILJ 1722 (LC) (29 January 2011)

The court found that the change to shift times did not amount to a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment, as the contracts of employment expressly permitted reasonable flexibility in working hours. The affected employees were required to work the same number of hours, with only the starting and ending times adjusted by one hour. There was no evidence of a vested contractual right to specific shift times. Consequently, the strike action was unprotected under the Labour Relations Act. The court also noted that the applicant failed to comply with the notice requirements under section 68(2), but this was rendered moot by the substantive finding on the nature of the dispute....

Citation
[2011] ZALCJHB 3
Parties
Applicant: RAM Transport (SA) (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: South African Transport and Allied Workers Union; Respondent: Motor Transport Workers Union; Respondent: The individuals listed in Annexure A
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
29 January 2011
Case Number
J106/2011
Procedural Posture
Urgent Application / Final Order Following Interim Interdict and Supplementary Application
Outcome
The strike action by the third to further respondents, at the instance of the first respondent, is declared unprotected and unlawful. The respondents are interdicted from participating in the unprotected strike. No order as to costs.
Judges
Van Niekerk
Legal Topics
Unprotected Strike, Unilateral Change to Terms, Interdict, Collective Agreement, Condonation of Non Compliance
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unprotected Strike Unilateral Change to Terms Interdict Collective Agreement Condonation of Non Compliance

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

RAM Transport (SA) (Pty) Ltd

Applicant

South African Transport and Allied Workers Union

Respondent

Motor Transport Workers Union

Respondent

The individuals listed in Annexure A

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Urgent Application / Final Order Following Interim Interdict and Supplementary Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the change to shift times constituted a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment.
  2. 2 Whether the strike action was protected under the Labour Relations Act.
  3. 3 Whether the applicant complied with the procedural requirements for urgent relief, including notice under section 68(2).

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the change to shift times did not amount to a unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment, as the contracts of employment expressly permitted reasonable flexibility in working hours. The affected employees were required to work the same number of hours, with only the starting and ending times adjusted by one hour. There was no evidence of a vested contractual right to specific shift times. Consequently, the strike action was unprotected under the Labour Relations Act. The court also noted that the applicant failed to comply with the notice requirements under section 68(2), but this was rendered moot by the substantive finding on the nature of the dispute....

Court Disposition

The strike action by the third to further respondents, at the instance of the first respondent, is declared unprotected and unlawful. The respondents are interdicted from participating in the unprotected strike. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The strike action embarked upon by the third to further respondents, at the instance of the first respondent, is unprotected and unlawful.
  • The respondents are interdicted from participating in the unprotected strike.