South Africa Case Law

Jacobson v VITALAB (JS1042/19)

Jacobson v VITALAB (JS1042/19) [2019] ZALCJHB 157; (2019) 40 ILJ 2363 (LC) (28 May 2019)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS1042/19

Judge

Van Niekerk

Section 187(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act, as amended, is designed to protect the collective bargaining process and does not apply to individual dismissal disputes. The provision's wording and legislative intent, as clarified in the Explanatory Memorandum, restrict its application to situations where an employer seeks to compel acceptance of a demand by multiple employees. In this case, the applicant was the sole employee affected, and the dispute did not concern collective bargaining. Even if the demand to sell shares could be considered a matter of mutual interest, the statutory protect…

Source excerpt

• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Section 187 1 C
• Exception To Pleadings
• Collective Bargaining
• Mutual Interest
• Remittal To Ccma

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Members v Aveng Trident Steel (A division of Aveng Africa) (Pty) Ltd and Another (JS596/15)

National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA) obo Members v Aveng Trident Steel (A division of Aveng Africa) (Pty) Ltd and Another (JS596/15) [2017] ZALCJHB 513; [2018] 5 BLLR 500 (LC); (2018) 39 ILJ 1625 (LC) (13 December 2017)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JS596/15

Judge

GN Moshoana

The court found that the applicants failed to produce credible evidence that their dismissal was for refusal to accept a demand, as required by section 187(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act. The evidence showed that the employer's reason for dismissal was operational requirements due to economic decline and the need to restructure. The redesigned job descriptions and offers of alternative employment were genuine attempts to avoid retrenchment, and the applicants' refusal was primarily motivated by financial demands rather than a substantive objection to the new roles. The court held that the…

Source excerpt

• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Operational Requirements
• Section 187 1 C
• Collective Bargaining
• Restructuring
• Severance Pay

Mkhize v Umhlanga Spar (D01/07)

Mkhize v Umhlanga Spar (D01/07) [2012] ZALCD 24 (16 April 2012)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D01/07

Judge

Cele

The Labour Court found that the employer dismissed the applicant by ending his employment after he refused to sign a new contract with less favourable terms.

• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Section 197 Transfer
• Section 187 1 C
• Reinstatement
• Protected Employment Rights
• Contractual Variation

Lesolo v Petro South Africa Ltd (C204/2009)

Lesolo v Petro South Africa Ltd (C204/2009) [2010] ZALCCT 11 (23 February 2010)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C204/2009

Judge

Cheadle

The court found that the applicant failed to demonstrate that his dismissal was automatically unfair under section 187(1)(c) or (d) of the Labour Relations Act. There was no evidence that the dismissal was intended to compel the applicant to accept the settlement agreement, nor was the dismissal conditional upon acceptance of any demand. The settlement offer had lapsed months before the dismissal, and the applicant himself confirmed that it was no longer open for acceptance at the time of the charges and dismissal. Furthermore, the actions for which the applicant claimed protection were not r…

Source excerpt

• Automatic Unfair Dismissal
• Section 187 1 C
• Section 187 1 D
• Section 5 1 Lra
• Conditional Dismissal
• Settlement Agreement

Fry' Metals (Pty) Limited v National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa and Others (JA9/01)

Fry' Metals (Pty) Limited v National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa and Others (JA9/01) [2002] ZALAC 25; (2003) 24 ILJ 133 (LAC); [2003] 2 BLLR 140 (LAC) (6 December 2002)

Court

Labour Appeal Court

Case number

JA9/01

Judges

Zondo JP, Nicholson JA, Hlophe AJA

The Labour Appeal Court held that the dismissals effected by the appellant were not intended to compel the employees to accept the proposed changes to their terms and conditions of employment, but were genuine retrenchments based on operational requirements. The evidence, including correspondence and affidavits, demonstrated that the employer's intention was to permanently replace employees unwilling to work under the new shift system, not to use dismissal as leverage to force acceptance of demands. The court found that section 187(1)(c) of the Labour Relations Act only applies where the purp…

Source excerpt

• Automatically Unfair Dismissal
• Operational Requirements
• Section 187 1 C
• Retrenchment
• Lock Out Dismissal

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Mazista Tiles (Pty) Ltd (JS1109/01)

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Mazista Tiles (Pty) Ltd (JS1109/01) [2002] ZALC 176 (17 October 2002)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

JS1109/01

Judge

Francis

The Labour Court held that the dismissals were automatically, substantively, and procedurally unfair and ordered reinstatement without loss of benefits.

• Automatic Unfair Dismissal
• Section 187 1 C
• Procedural Fairness
• Operational Requirements
• Reinstatement
• Consultation Process

National Construction Building and Allied Workers Union v Hernic Premier Refactories (Pty) Ltd (J3232/00)

National Construction Building and Allied Workers Union v Hernic Premier Refactories (Pty) Ltd (J3232/00) [2002] ZALC 162; (2003) 24 ILJ 837 (LC); [2003] 1 BLLR 50 (LC) (12 August 2002)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J3232/00

Judge

Francis

The Labour Court held that dismissals used to force acceptance of new employment terms were automatically unfair and ordered reinstatement and costs.

• Automatic Unfair Dismissal
• Mutual Interest Dispute
• Retrenchment
• Collective Bargaining
• Section 187 1 C
• Unilateral Change Of Conditions

NUMSA and Others v Zeuna-Starker Bop (Pty) Ltd (J 2325/99)

NUMSA and Others v Zeuna-Starker Bop (Pty) Ltd (J 2325/99) [2002] ZALC 46; [2003] 1 BLLR 72 (LC); (2002) 23 ILJ 2283 (LC) (29 May 2002)

Court

Labour Court

Case number

J 2325/99

Judge

Ngcamu

The Labour Court found that the employees were dismissed to compel acceptance of a wage proposal, making the dismissal automatically unfair under section 187(1)(c).

• Automatic Unfair Dismissal
• Lock Out
• Section 187 1 C
• Reinstatement
• Compensation
• Procedural Fairness