Arcelormittal South Africa Limited v National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa and Others (JR2748/22) [2025] ZALCJHB 96 (7 March 2025)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
JR2748/22
Judge
L Erasmus
The Labour Court granted Arcelormittal leave to appeal against a ruling upholding an essential-services designation. The court found the issue important and open to differing interpretation.
National Union of Mineworkers v Essential Services Committee and Others (JR 1147/16) [2019] ZALCJHB 82 (10 April 2019)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
JR 1147/16
Judge
Tlhotlhalemaje
The Labour Court found that the ESC had developed and applied a legally sound test for determining minimum services, consistent with constitutional, statutory, and international standards. The ESC considered the evidence and submissions, including job profiles and operational needs, and reasonably concluded that the five Human Resources positions at Eskom are critical to maintaining essential services and public safety. NUM's approach, seeking to exclude all such positions from minimum services, was inconsistent with prior agreements and the integrated nature of Eskom's operations. The ESC's…
Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union v Sibanye Gold Limited t/a Sibanye Stillwater and Others (J 353/19; J 380/19) [2019] ZALCJHB 89; (2019) 40 ILJ 1607 (LC); [2019] 8 BLLR 802 (LC) (20 March 2019)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
J 353/19; J 380/19
Judge
Prinsloo
The court held that section 23(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act does not require that the extension of a collective agreement to non-party employees be incorporated at the time of the agreement's conclusion. The extension may be effected subsequently, provided the majority threshold and other statutory requirements are met. The retrospective application of the extension is permissible, and once extended, the collective agreement binds non-party employees as if they were parties to the agreement. The deprivation of the right to strike is a lawful consequence of majoritarianism, and AMCU membe…
Witkoppen Health & Welfare Centre v NEHAWU and Others (J552/18) [2018] ZALCJHB 202 (21 June 2018)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
J552/18
Judge
B Whitcher
The Labour Court confirmed an interim interdict against a strike only for employees doing essential healthcare and welfare work, following an ESC ruling.
National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others v Arcelormittal South Africa Ltd (JA43/2017) [2018] ZALAC 62 (7 June 2018)
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Case number
JA43/2017
Judges
Musi, Jappie, Savage
The Labour Appeal Court held that the employer did not initiate a section 189 process, as no section 189(3) notice was issued and no retrenchments were contemplated. The consultation process between the employer and the union occurred outside the statutory framework of section 189. The union was entitled to strike to force meaningful consultation, as the dispute concerned a matter of mutual interest and there is nothing in the Labour Relations Act that precludes such industrial action. The Labour Court erred in confirming the rule nisi, as the consultation process was not concluded and the un…
City of Johannesburg Metropolitan Municipality v South African Municipal Workers Union (SAMWU) and Others (J1799/17) [2017] ZALCJHB 292; [2017] 12 BLLR 1244 (LC) (10 August 2017)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
J1799/17
Judge
Myburgh, AJ
The court found that the municipality had established, on a prima facie basis, that the threatened strike by SAMWU was unprotected. This was primarily due to the failure to provide the required seven days’ notice to a state employer under section 64(1)(d) of the LRA, and the existence of a contractual dispute actionable under section 77(3) of the BCEA, which may invoke the section 65(1)(c) limitation on the right to strike. The court noted conflicting judgments on whether such disputes are hit by the limitation, but held that the municipality had at least established a prima facie right to re…
Johannesburg Metropolitan Bus Services SOC Ltd v South African Municipal Workers Union and Others (JR2844/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 65 (23 February 2017)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
JR2844/16
Judge
GN Moshoana
The court found that both the applicant and the third respondent acted within their rights: the applicant was entitled to seek the discharge of the rule nisi, and the third respondent was entitled to oppose the application and bring a counter-application, even if ultimately withdrawn. The law and fairness requirements under section 162 of the Labour Relations Act dictate that costs do not automatically follow the result in labour matters, especially where there is an ongoing relationship and the opposition is not unreasonable. The discharge of the rule nisi is equivalent to a dismissal of the…
Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union and Others v Chamber of Mines of South Africa and Others (CCT87/16) [2017] ZACC 3; (2017) 38 ILJ 831 (CC); 2017 (3) SA 242 (CC); 2017 (6) BCLR 700 (CC); [2017] 7 BLLR 641 (CC) (21 February 2017)
Sasol Mining (Pty) Ltd v Association of Mineworkers and Construction Union (AMCU) and Another (J1902/16) [2016] ZALCJHB 408; (2017) 38 ILJ 969 (LC) (25 October 2016)
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Case number
J1902/16
Judge
Prinsloo
The Labour Court held that Sasol’s wage agreement was not validly extended to AMCU members under section 23(1)(d) of the LRA, so the strike remained protected.
Transport and Allied Workers Union of South Africa obo Ngedle and Others v Unitrans Fuel and Chemical (Pty) Ltd Limited (CCT131/15) [2016] ZACC 28; 2016 (11) BCLR 1440 (CC); [2016] 11 BLLR 1059 (CC); (2016) 37 ILJ 2485 (CC) (1 September 2016)
The Constitutional Court held that the strike was protected throughout its duration, as the demands pursued were those permitted by the Labour Appeal Court, and the inclusion of impermissible demands did not render the strike unprotected. The worker solidarity principle entitled all workers to participate in support of the Shell seven workers' wage cut demand. The respondent's promise to restore the Shell seven's wages did not constitute full compliance with the demand, as actual payment of backpay was required. The dismissals were found to be automatically unfair, as they were effected for p…
