SACTWU and Others v Ahleza Blankets (Pty) Ltd (C658/2008) [2010] ZALC 46 (19 March 2010)

SACTWU and Others v Ahleza Blankets (Pty) Ltd (C658/2008) [2010] ZALC 46 (19 March 2010)

The court found that the strike action was unprotected and constituted misconduct. However, the respondent acted with undue haste in dismissing the employees, particularly given the short duration of the strike and absence of violence. The evidence showed that the two weeks leave policy was commercially justified and agreed to by shop stewards, but the respondent could have waited and afforded the employees a hearing before dismissal. The dismissal of the morning and afternoon shift employees was substantively unfair but procedurally fair, while the dismissal of the night shift employees was both substantively and procedurally unfair due to lack of ultimatum. Reinstatement was ordered as...

Citation
[2010] ZALC 46
Parties
Applicant: SACTWU; Applicant: L M Dlaza & 53 Others; Respondent: Ahlesa Blankets (Pty) Ltd
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
19 March 2010
Case Number
C658/2008
Procedural Posture
Dismissal Dispute / Trial
Outcome
The dismissal of the individual applicants was found to be substantively unfair but procedurally fair for the morning and afternoon shifts, and both substantively and procedurally unfair for the night shift employees. Reinstatement was ordered with effect from 1 December 2009, without loss of benefits from that...
Judges
G.N Moshoana
Legal Topics
Unprotected Strike, Substantive Fairness, Procedural Fairness, Collective Agreement, Reinstatement, Disciplinary Sanction
Labour Law Unprotected Strike Substantive Fairness Procedural Fairness Collective Agreement Reinstatement Disciplinary Sanction

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 5 Authorities cited 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

SACTWU

Applicant

L M Dlaza & 53 Others

Applicant

Ahlesa Blankets (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Dismissal Dispute / Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the dismissal of employees for participation in an unprotected strike was substantively and procedurally fair.
  2. 2 Whether the respondent was required to consult with the union or shop stewards before implementing the two weeks leave policy.
  3. 3 Whether reinstatement is the appropriate remedy for the dismissed employees.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the strike action was unprotected and constituted misconduct. However, the respondent acted with undue haste in dismissing the employees, particularly given the short duration of the strike and absence of violence. The evidence showed that the two weeks leave policy was commercially justified and agreed to by shop stewards, but the respondent could have waited and afforded the employees a hearing before dismissal. The dismissal of the morning and afternoon shift employees was substantively unfair but procedurally fair, while the dismissal of the night shift employees was both substantively and procedurally unfair due to lack of ultimatum. Reinstatement was ordered as...

Court Disposition

The dismissal of the individual applicants was found to be substantively unfair but procedurally fair for the morning and afternoon shifts, and both substantively and procedurally unfair for the night shift employees. Reinstatement was ordered with effect from 1 December 2009, without loss of benefits from that...

Orders

  • The dismissal of the individual applicants is substantively unfair but procedurally fair in respect of the morning and afternoon shift. The dismissal of the night shift employees is both substantively and procedurally unfair.
  • The respondent is ordered to reinstate the individual applicants with effect from 1 December 2009, without loss of benefits from the effective date of reinstatement.