South Africa Case Law

Greybe and Others v Public Service Co-Ordinating Bargaining Council (PSBC) and Others (JR1092/2023)

Greybe and Others v Public Service Co-Ordinating Bargaining Council (PSBC) and Others (JR1092/2023) [2024] ZALCJHB 508 (18 December 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR1092/2023

Judge

Prinsloo

The Labour Court reviewed and set aside a PSCBC arbitration award on a grade-progression dispute, refusing condonation for a late answering affidavit and remitting the matter for fresh arbitration.

• Collective Agreement Interpretation
• Condonation
• Arbitration Review
• Job Evaluation
• Grade Progression
• Arbitration-review

Kriel v Department of Public Works and Roads, North West and Others (J 748/23)

Kriel v Department of Public Works and Roads, North West and Others (J 748/23) [2023] ZALCJHB 332 (22 November 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

J 748/23

Judge

Norton

The court found that the Respondents failed to comply with a certified arbitration award requiring the Applicant's grade progression. The Second Respondent's explanations regarding departmental turnover and lack of personal involvement did not constitute a valid defence. The review application was never prosecuted, and no meaningful justification was provided for the prolonged non-compliance. The court held that the elements of contempt were satisfied, and the Respondents' conduct was prejudicial to the Applicant. The Second Respondent was found guilty of contempt, fined, and the fine was sus…

Source excerpt

• Contempt Of Court
• Arbitration Award Enforcement
• Grade Progression
• Practice Manual
• Costs Order

MEC for Public Works and Roads North West and Another v Public Service Co-ordinating Bargaining Council and Others (JR842/17)

MEC for Public Works and Roads North West and Another v Public Service Co-ordinating Bargaining Council and Others (JR842/17) [2023] ZALCJHB 6 (12 January 2023)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR842/17

Judge

V.G. Mkwibiso

The court held that the Commissioner materially misinterpreted the Collective Agreement by disregarding the requirement that grade progression is contingent on the grading of the position through job evaluation. The employees’ positions were graded at salary level 5, not salary level 6, and thus they could not be grade-progressed to salary level 7. The Commissioner’s award was unreasonable as it ignored the principles of job evaluation and grading, which are central to the Collective Agreement and Circular 2 of 2009. The court found that rewarding employees solely for length of service, witho…

Source excerpt

• Collective Agreement Interpretation
• Grade Progression
• Job Evaluation
• Arbitration Review
• Public Service Regulations