South African Transport and Allied Workers Union and Others v de Bruin and van Jaarsveld t/a Pressed in Time Laundry (JS303/2011) [2013] ZALCJHB 78 (21 May 2013)
The retrenchment of the applicants was effected without any consultation or advance warning, in direct contravention of section 189 of the Labour Relations Act. The respondents failed to provide any operational justification for the dismissals, and the process followed was not in accordance with statutory...
Source-derived case information.
- Citation
- [2013] ZALCJHB 78
- Parties
- Applicant: South African Transport and Allied Workers Union; Applicant: Motingoe and 29 Others; Respondent: G De Bruin and IG Van Jaarsveld t/a Pressed in Time Laundry
- Court
- Labour Court Johannesburg
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Case Number
- JS303/2011
- Procedural Posture
- Default Judgment / Final Judgment After Unopposed Application for Condonation and Default Judgment
- Outcome
- The applicants' retrenchment was declared procedurally and substantively unfair. Compensation and severance pay were awarded to each applicant, with costs against the respondents.
- Judges
- Lagrange
- Legal Topics
- Unfair Retrenchment, Procedural Fairness, Compensation for Unfair Dismissal, Severance Pay, Section 189 Consultation
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
South African Transport and Allied Workers Union
Applicant
Motingoe and 29 Others
Applicant
G De Bruin and IG Van Jaarsveld t/a Pressed in Time Laundry
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Default Judgment / Final Judgment After Unopposed Application for Condonation and Default Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the retrenchment of the applicants was procedurally and substantively unfair.
- 2 Whether the respondents complied with section 189 of the Labour Relations Act regarding consultation.
- 3 Whether compensation and severance pay are due to the applicants.
Ratio Decidendi
The retrenchment of the applicants was effected without any consultation or advance warning, in direct contravention of section 189 of the Labour Relations Act. The respondents failed to provide any operational justification for the dismissals, and the process followed was not in accordance with statutory requirements. The applicants are entitled to compensation for the unfair retrenchment and severance pay as set out in the attached schedule. The respondents are jointly and severally liable for these payments, as well as the costs of the application.
Court Disposition
The applicants' retrenchment was declared procedurally and substantively unfair. Compensation and severance pay were awarded to each applicant, with costs against the respondents.
Orders
- The dismissal of the second and further applicants by the joint owners of the respondent on 30 June 2009 was procedurally and substantively unfair.
- G De Bruin and IG Van Jaarsveld trading as Pressed in Time Laundry are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation equivalent to seven months remuneration to each of the second to further applicants, as set out in Table A, within 30 days of receipt of this judgment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
38 paragraphs
Not reportable
REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA
THE LABOUR COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA,
IN JOHANNESBURG
JUDGMENT
case no: JS 303/2011
In the matter between:
SOUTH AFRICAN TRANSPORT AND ALLIED WORKERS UNION Applicant MOTINGOE AND 29 OTHERS Second and Further Applicants and G DE BRUIN AND IG VAN JAARSVELD T/A PRESSED IN TIME LAUNDRY Respondent
Heard: 05 September 2012
Delivered: 21 May 2013
Summary: (Default judgment – unfair retrenchment)
LAGRANGE, J
Introduction
The second and further applicants in this matter were employed by the joint owners of a bed business trading as Pressed in Time
Laundry until they were summarily retrenched 30 June 2009.
The applicants only filed their statement of case on 10 May 2011, whereas they ought to have done so by 23rd of August 2010.
Consequently, they filed their statement of case just over eight months late which is a considerable delay. The applicants seek
condonation for the late filing of their statement of case, which is unopposed, as is their application for default judgement.
The applicants’ late filing of the statement of claim was condoned by the honourable Van Niekerk, J on 9 February 2012.
The retrenchment occurred without warning on 30 June 2009 and on the applicants’ version without any consultation being taken prior to the decision to close the business on the same day. The owners state in a termination letter that they were closing the business because they were unable to run it profitably, though there was no evidence of an operational justification before the court and the dismissals appear to have followed an altercation between employees and management..
No consultation as envisaged in section 189 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 ('the LRA') took place, nor was there any advance warning of the individual applicants’ retrenchment. Therefore, the applicants’ retrenchment was undoubtedly procedurally unfair, and sometime compensation should be paid to them for this. According to the letter of termination of the applicants would only receive an amount equal to half their June salary in addition to the June salary owing to them.
Order
[6] In light of the above:
6.1. The dismissal of the second and further applicants by the joint owners of the respondent, G De Bruin and IG Van Jaarsveld, on 30 June 2009 was procedurally and substantively unfair.
6.2. G De Bruin and IG Van Jaarsveld trading as Pressed in Time Laundry are jointly and severally liable to pay compensation equivalent to seven (7) months remuneration to each of the second to further applicants, as set out in Table A, which payment must be made
within 30 days of receipt of this judgement.
6.3. G De Bruin and IG Van Jaarsveld trading as Pressed in Time Laundry are jointly and severally liable to pay the second to further
applicants’ severance pay in the amounts, as set out in Table A attached to this order, within 30 days of receipt of this judgement.
6.4. G De Bruin and IG Van Jaarsveld trading as Pressed in Time Laundry are jointly and severally liable to pay the applicants’
costs, the one paying the other to be absolved.
_______________________
R LAGRANGE, J
Judge of the Labour Court of South Africa
APPEARANCES
APPLICANT: Ms N Hanif of Mitti Attorneys
RESPONDENT: No appearance
NO NAME POSITION Date of Employment SALARY Computation of salary Severance pay Total 1. MAKOBALO K L General Worker 18/4/2002 1200 8400 2100 10 500 2. SENYANE V General Worker 1/3/2006 1200 8400 900 9300 3. MOLETSE S General Worker 4/8/2005 1500 10 500 1500 12000 4. MOLETSE R General Worker 16/4/2007 1000 7000 500 7500 5. BOB . L General Worker 2/2/2007 1000 7000 500 7500 6. CHABANE R General Worker 11/10/2006 950 6650 712 7362 7. DIPHOLO .E General Worker 10/1/2007 1000 7000 500 7500 8. FINGER B General Worker 1/11/2004 700 4900 875 5775 9. KHASEMENE T General Worker 1/12/2004 1200 8400 1500 9900 10. LESEA E General Worker 3/10/2007 900 6300 450 6750 11. LETSABA J General Worker 14/9/2007 900 6300 450 6750 12. DUBE E General Worker 3/10/2007 900 6300 450 9750 13. MAYEKISO E General Worker 4/3/2005 1000 7000 1000 8000 14. MEKO E General Worker 10/1/2007 1100 7700 550 8250 15. MOKHESANG E General Worker 14/9/2005 1000 7000 1000 8000 16. MODISE A General Worker 15/1/2007 900 6300 450 6750 17. NXHOSANA S General Worker 28/2/2008 900 6300 225 6525 18. MOTSELAMADI M General Worker 16/5/2005 800 5600 800 6400 19. PHAMO L General Worker 10/2/2006 900 6300 675 6975 20. SEKATI P General Worker 5/5/2005 1000 7000 1000 8000 21. MPEOA S General Worker 15/10/2008 800 5600 200 5800 22. NKETSI M General Worker 14/6/2008 1000 7000 250 7250 23. SEKONYELA J General Worker 10/1/2007 1000 7000 500 7500 24. TITI M General Worker 7/3/2007 800 5600 400 6000 25. LUTLO C General Worker 13/9/2007 900 6300 450 6750 26. MOTINGOE J Driver 10/9/2005 3301 23 107 3301 26 408 27. MOTINGOE B Supervisor 1/6/2004 5126 35 882 6407.50 42 289.50 28. BIKWANE N Driver 1/3/2006 3461 24 227 2595.75 26 822.75 29. BEN Driver 10/1/2007 2420 16 940 1210 17 700 30. MOKEKI F General Worker 1/6/2008 1000 7000 250 7250
GRAND TOTAL R313 257.25