20140909 TZHC Dar es Salaam 1

. ,, ... ' -t-e~tk/\At~ IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA /~~ &.PO) ~- LABOUR DIVISION AT DAR ES SALAAM I REVISION NO. 322 OF 2013 15/07/2014 & 09/09/2014 1 Applicant's written submission at p. 1 in Revision No. 322/i013 2 Comn,ission for Mediation and Arbitration award [CMA] at: p. 2 i I I j ., business in Nov~rnber, 20093, two · months before his dpte of · compulsory retirement4 • The applicant filed a trade dispute in the. Commission Vide CMA/DSM/ILAL/08/010/1085 and his main casus be/Ii [cause· of discontent] was being , retrenched in lieu of [i;111:f;~pl~fEg\,;of] :Qeing compulsory retired at 60 years of age which .;::; .,6f1J)i tvJ~i;fuonths due5• i.e. On 31 January 2010, but he was rttftnched-,;~~''November, ·. .. Jiz,:;"' _. · .· 2009. He was also discontended with Jfi~trefreethment benefits ' ~q~~\-. <,:,~?i-.. which according him were meager c:1t[:lan{}~J~:cfmpulsory retirement . .:t:i?f~\~~.,. --4~i.:,,. ~t4t. benefits which had some ad~~ition~f ''s~<j)5~tind stakes' as per the i:1{ ··\ff!.,:.: ii¾ collective agreement6 • That,1 he Wasgw entitled to being retired . . '' {t~·\, ff;:i compulsory and get the go@d reti'fetn~ht benefits. ' , ( f.;('i!t!i_,,, ' - The· Commissidrt%Jo l\. ediation and Arbitration dismissed the ({i;f~~~~i}:~. '•?:t¾;::,~ if~:t:-- da ims anp compf:~intsi:Pf~ne applicant. Hence the present revision ~;¢!;:;_ ./[~?t;~f;,,. ' \\, •·. i:f.t cropped. ll~~ ·ca.~~ ·-swr/Jelli of the applicant as stated above are the co~;ern~T) ,,, ::,olrt, c'est-a-dire [that is to say] the compulsory retif~iJent\ e appli~ant that was knocking at his door with its•good ,,:i\,111il} 3 Termination on operational requirements see s. 38 (i) of the Employment and Labour Relations Act No. 6 of 2004 [Cap 366 R.E. 2002] 4 See Notice of compulsory retirement ref. no. ID/PF. 7086/113 of 01/09/2009 the applicant was to retire at the compulsory retirement age of 60 years en 31 January, 2010 5 ibid 6 ATCL Employment conditions collective agreement · items 14: retirement on attaining age limit especially items 14:4 14:5 14:6 see also p. 4 of applicant writter. submission 2 " ;·:,_ ~">-J,._;,; ,...~ . . .• . . . packages"·of. retfrerrietif ·benefits\- vis-a-Vi!#'' retrenchrr\ent exercise : . with its meager ben.efits and which the applicant is cha.llen·ging that he,·· ough~)o l:J~.T~W~~ co~puisory. that lbe:ng retren~hed 'as. he' was. alrec.1~y .-~.s~_~ed _,~1th a compulsory ~ot1ce of . retirement by th~ emplqyer.- . . •'·. ..The.~~~lica~t's . . ',t . , notite·:was::~ade t . under·R.ule ."'1' ~'<1/'·f<~ (1) 2a: 26 (1) . . .. . ..-- (i)· . . the. Labour Court. Rules and,~2a . . . . . ~f..... l ·a'nd 'IV',,;t~~tiori. '.' .,,,t,. . f~J ~:r .• •. . 8 . . ~~ . -/·,· dl~ the EnJplqyme_nt and Labour Relations-Act 1of,2004~_-_s. ~~½-. -. •.·. . - -_ - . ·11-. r -. -_- ~t - · .Wt!,. ' tii1>< · .·. -,:r,-- . • · . , • ~· ~rt. ,. · · In his notice of applicati.on .the applic~t~yerre'cl.tc3S follows:- .. . ; . That the Ruling. w;s i;posed ~j~'t/J;f1►~7l;)~orfailed to ·,.,_ ·, . realize that the letter ol (etir[/!fl~fJ[~W.f/,Jrioperly issued · - as the document ha. !he lo;npa1.y Raman Resource . ~t · n ,-.,...,10 Y;k ~ , r'011'.,y , · . __:ti · 2. That the Arbitrator was~J:Jnreas0 · Ve biased for holding that the letter fo(J;;,retir"#me . , id not mean -that the · .• respondent was $./!greed to o so by Human Resource P_olicy of the Ci5.i!]r/fia,(·1··. . . ~Yi -~~;. ~~~~- ~-;~ ~t~ · I' I I. _ ., · · . In brief the eVi'Glerf'Ge w'1ich was adduced in the Commission was -· to t~e effect. _.i;t_¥1a,~0.\1} 'T($f;~:ptembetJ. "%.~.~ ~$,,. •~i~@I~~✓ , 2009 the respo~d. ent employer ~J.;;1 1-t~ i\':t_i,.~~ • ~ ·_ received . - "tter fn\ rn the Ministry o · Infrastructure. The letter was I • - adffl< ssing .1,, e financial difficult in the business of the respondent. ' The r ~eflt waS therefore direcr[tJ to embark on reduction of the 7 ! Item 14:5 of ATCL Employment conditions and collecJiv agreement between' ATCL [Respondent] and the Communication and Transportation Workers Union of!Tbnzania [a trade union] COTWU (T) gives ex-gratia payment for compulsory retired employee, item 14:6 giv~ the employee 100 iron sheets and 6 tons of cement 8 ibid note 6 · · Government Notice [GNJ No. 106·ot 2007 ' • 9 ELRA Act No. 6 of 2004 [Cap 366 R.E. 2009] . 10 op. cit note 4 · 11 Two statement of bgal issues as they appear in the applica ts notice of application . 3; ' i · ' J . ~ - ... ----...... . ,. working force by way of operational ·,requirement as a measure of cutting operational costs 12 •· Immediately consultative . meetings . .between the trade union styled COlWU (T) and the respondent as · · employer were done 13 • The outcome of the said meetings resolved that the applicant be retrenched · and indeed he . was;1:-Jerminated · .. ·· I U¾ . [retrenched] and paid the statutory terminal bene,€tf§t~.nd g~l,d~Ei.:::hand , ~ 1'iJ\,,, "'-:i.-:;\\Y 14 shake • The applicant's evidence in ther Commis~i,Qn ."\,\fas as hereunder. .- . . ''i~t i•;i>· ·,\t\, "'10 ·~~\~, ·-,:~;t_~·-·,... ,~;1} • .. .On 01/12/2009 I was given the t.,e.treqchment ,\.,,..(,: -~)!;. letter dated 30/11/2009 after realizingt;/l [''w.f!l*«.?ry sad. I - approached HRM that justiCf#r/fA1fl!lw,qt 'f!£,bne to me. I ... complained in writ~r;Jgbtha(Jusl:i~liwas not done to me... I asked him tha'.i law /:ie.Vpllojed I be paid the ~~ \:••,-".'~.- . .,J.•~'{t retirement benefits... ">f'Ji was tqlcJii,'fly the HRM that I ""'·" should wait for ~'ll1 gen~!i?J,,J(lanager to address my ;.;.' concern but I d[gn't get any response thereafter I referred the ma.ttei+tr;, the Commission... I pray that the respondent·$_(J,oulck;aCRQOWledge my retirement so that I <::~~~,.¾,) will getJJTJ¾:•:.[efi,;fJ!Tltjht benefits as per Human Resource ~tlW ·In his'?ii~2ub'rt\tssibn exparte the applicant alleged that the :J~,, ~ '.!~'-tt~,,-~,,::41 e _loye, iiSQdnaent served him with a notice on compulsory ' ~¢), 1-f:/:t_.. retireAl}~nt ~?~~1,-. \~-atkct ./;J;Y-~ 1st September, 2009 reminding him that he would retire on·<,:i_st January, 2010 for compulsory retirement after attaining 12 S. 38 of ELRA [Employment and Labour Relations Act No. 6 of 2004 ta,ks of termination of employment based on the operational requirements of the employer 13 ibid S. 38 (1) (c ) the employer must consult prior to retrenchment or redundancy exercise 14 CMA Arbitration award at page 3 op. cit 15 The Commission Arbitration proceedings in CMA/DSM/ILALA/08/010/1085 at page 7 4 • the age··•of -~60: years ,:o1d 16 ~.that the notlce of retirement was .in. . . .. . . I :. •. .. ' .. ·' ~ . : I. 1 confo'rmity .. with ·item .. 14:2 of Air , Tanzania -Company :'·Umited ..... .'J • • • ' : • ~·~-~-.:~ .. ~ • • • -rr, '··~1-'" .:.. ·.~ ,. 1 · .. · Employment Condition. of. 2008 1~ •.. ,: . . ' . . . .. ·• . · :, · ., . .... . : : . In . November, 2009 . the Afr .-Tanzani~ . Company ~ Limit~d · ◄ ·~ •, . ., . t. ••. f • • '• • •• ';' ·:- : •A;~ f ... • discovered.that it cannot handle its present labour:, ;orce it\decided to- :.. su~r,~ns ·.~h~ ·.co.mp~·ny's. ·ce~tral Joiht .Ind~stria"I C ·hpmiJ~·t::hich , co~~ri~~~, the ~~nage~~~t/~~d the uhi~-~ to ~)frt ~veri~bdalities on . · f-t.?· ~~~~!t:~!?., . . • .-f• how a number .of. employees could be :·:·rtt(encti~~~- 1to enable the .· .. . . .,. ... .. . --:;~ - ( . company manage the administrative·.of~he -{emainingi iabour' force 18 • • . ; . ,!,,, ~k . 'W,Tu,.' .... ~. ·.... · .. !'Lh • . • .if'ii.,"1112- ~- ..... ' . . ... Selection of those to be re~ved ._. . . I f as&~td?feif i:t 'lf,?Jt,I arid the· reasons were . . indicated in the proceedings [nhin~tes]f'G>fi1tf~e CJIC1~. .. • - . • ,...,_ .. --~t':';>,, ~~ - .~,.~ ~ . '}ff .· •. < • 1,ii ··.,~~'tft~l - . . ~ · The applicant furtq~~~ybrnitted- that on the 30th Nove~ber, 2009 1 the Air Tanzania Man~~ '" ~\,l;,fissued 1btters of termination to all those . tffl,~,:,,,,. fii:'8,r • t . .. • 11 listed for,'-' retrenfh;,t:n ~,... ~if, 1~ cluding ·· the · applicant ' 1· . and listed . down . .' ~b> ':.::'h, ~'It,•;!"-. '1:,,_'7,,.,..';:'~~- "'••, 'tS!,",l:,,. !i;l; J&;' j , terminal •b,eR~fits\~rertetl. The letter_ '\to _applica~t stated that he was b~J,!19 te~fn t1:c... \~,tty way of retrenchment, while in th'e □IC minutes pr.;t\· .dings~tit reason for the appli&ant's termination was indicated· . . .J.-~~ ' . • as "Ret,reffient" where the terminal benefits for the applicant could - 11- have been different. He qu0ted ite~s 14:5 and 14:6 of ATCL t~~ 16 Annexture 'A' Notice of retirement Ref. No. ID/PF. 7086/113 dated 1' September · 1 l 1 I 17 1 Annexture 'B' to the applicant written submissions the.ATCL Employment condition document is a form of ~ collective agreement of 2008 Op. cit note 1 at page 2 . ., 19 Central Joint Industrial Committe~ [CJIC) annexture 'B' to the applicant submission 5 . ~t . 1 ' \ ... t -. . • 'I ·. I .- - - - ~~--........·--~~-:• ... •. . . . i,.' _,.,• •' _-.. I ~.;,ll'} . . ., -~-- -1-------- -- -r-- t,\ .....' j,/, ·. . . ' J·'.-f ·- employment . condition . c6flective .. agreement which contained the ben·efits he could have got as.. retirement benefits and which lack in · retrenchment benefits:- · ... Item 14:5 employees who have more then [sic] 30 years of service shall be paid an ex-gratia payment of one month~ basic salary for every year of servie,/or t!J,~ first 30 years and0.5 months basic salary for,@fJty yea~, of service up to retirement dati1°. The appllclh.tfs 'in'.1~,,. :li'" this category [ emphasis provided by the applicaiti:J1;,.. :tr· . . ;;\... 'S:i~¼}1 Item 14:6 Employment with comp'ulsomDe \~ment shall also be entitled for 100 iron sheets 2B~auge·'alJl}lP tons of cement. This item also con~efin <it"•,..},!pp/,cant21 [Emphasis provict,edby th.e applic'lii!JJl·· . ,..;, "✓.f:? . ,,.,,,,,.. !,}fih1ltt:1):'\\\t\,;,;{ti~·H .The applicant concludediifriat e¥.~ri'~mployee had the reason of ~~i-; -t::;{l~"{l\t?f;, being retrenched indicated inii,tthe . re• IIC proceedings; They were .~0- '<-(•Z:J~~:;- . "utendaji wa kazi" [wo~W,; appra1 ] "ufinyu wa nafasl' [limited . ~t¼ •:.~~ft¾ . 1 vacancy] and for oth~r,s·" tt)£. F~psons was FILO 22 • It was the view of 1 the applicant in ~:j§}r~~i~e_Jj!it1bmission that the respondent employer A~ ~,t~\.,_ ~i\ for giving" h;i. · '\ ,..,,t&JJgjry letter of termination was intended to avoid. , 1 ~~ the payrJ;)_em :i-above listed terminal benefits23 as contained in the :ff ' atfa'Ghed· <Y<Tanzanla Company Ltd. Employment. conditions . . 'J~,%\.. ~ 24 documtlfltiiP'' way of collective agreement of 2008 which were better. ,.'-!~i~> 20 op. cit note 2 and 12 at page 4 21 ibid page 4 the Air Tanzania Ltd. Employment condition [collective agreement of 2008) items 14:5 and 14:6 provide the benefits of compulsory retirement 22 FILO stands for first in last out, a criteria used in retrenchment exercise by employers 23 op. cit note 12 at page 4 24 op. cit note 6 item 14:5 and 14:6 6 ,. t ·~-The ·:-respondent .did n9t file .,c;l,rY .written sup~_is~ion~, a.~ ~~\?,. ·~ revision. _proce~qed e?(pa~e.Jo_llowing .~q~ apse.~fia -~f .t~e.,.r;~sl?.~nde~t 1 ••.~ I at no apparent reason. However the. respondent.h~d~file ,a .-1'1otice, of.., opposition as reqµir,ed by the LaboJr Cou1t Rules~\ ;~i-s no~ice ·~~·s ~ .. ·. : .. I duly supported . by an: affidavit" of 'one-' Eliezer' MYJaS~J~ :'[Counter l: · . I· . , • · 4°¥r·{if!' -1iff~ · ~-. . r ... 1, •·· ~=i1, -· 1-• '--'tr /:i•-:__ . Affidavit] on important·version reads that:-· · -~!!"ti;,,_ ! ' •·. T;;e .Re~,;;;;~ni· conten~s .,that the ~ur.p.--~;~ "-t;J~Jhe. ~~/:f I . ~ . ,· .,.,,.,. ' retrenchment was never concealed froiffj.rt~e. applicant f" . · and attributing· by implication~ lthe resd,lflli~{J/'s .action 4• as being .influenced by bad, faith nqife1>:, :the~dffsi(e to _ cut cos f 6... .· • ·. J t.,,~~ •)~ • ~< ·~i.i ~~ •~e, :. · . .. f' , : I I ,,.,. ....~ ••~f,o ... ' •£._.~ .~_:"t,1.. . 1~ -, p \ ., ,,,,_ • • aflica(f 'I. ..... I, ft~~ ..... , , .. • • .,.,.( •. Now, _1 note tha~ the ~mei'iow to-~ le~~~~ -~xtent challenging the retrenchment rotes,~1iJ hit at his door•'instead of reti~~ent process t~~t .fu.!d ·_ ~·earne~ ·h'.m·. ~?cid .reti~~~~n~· benefits as we have seera'"'ea'.fil.1er 1 • Although in his written submrssron th~t appl.icant i~ ,. •. .ac;:kn.iw,:~,-~} that !J "meeting. w~s ·held in b~tween . ~:.,S.~~~tl: - tl?-. ~~f;;.,. ~<h.. --~~~:, ,£1 •:.~f:l!, , . ,' • . , I , O 29~30 N~yembe ·2o~J3 · to discuss the names of those to · be . . . ,,,,,, .• _»f . I . . retrenche \' re · .- . 1'&wtabled and the ·selection was made of those to •· ·&<); li. I b "'> - ~t~e reaso.ns for th~i I being included Iin ttie exercise emdl Mt.· '· ..jh l were •' dica~~(t 'lf in the proceedings mihutes of the meeting 28 ,. there is a 25 Government Notice No. 106 of 2007 Rule 4 (4) requires the respondent to file a notice of application and or a counter affidavit within fifteen days :: Paragraph No. 4 of the Respondent counter affic~avit . , , l . · op. cit note 7 28 Annexture 'C' to applicant written submissicn "Muhtasar.i wa Kikao cha Baraza Kuu la Majadiliano [CJIC] · kilichofanyika November 30, 2009 ATC House [Central Joint Industrial Committee [CJIC) meeting held on 30, November at Dar Es Salaam ATC House \ 7 ., ---------- ----! i' need at this juncture to visit the notion of termination on operational requirement of the business Le. retrenchment, albeit in brief. : However before the trek and visit on retrenchment, there are t:v.Jo nagging questions which need to be considered in the process by this court:- n{P:t~~:" . 1. . Whether or not an employee who is abo~t tJl?:fr§.fire [retirement knocking at his doot;J,f:;,,cannot '','b,f terminated .for operational requir~/!J~[J/S of .. the business [retrenched] in lieu [in~?/2laceJV;;cQ0"being ,1,.;~... ·f/~:~,";;,,_9• retired. Procedural fairness ,;ot . ·,.:,'!°;:~-.. termination -...:i,;;.,.,. for operational reasons, whethe"'ii,,feiet{o.J!b;wed by the employer. . . 1 ;ifit;:ih..''4 t~;;,,_, J-1;. 2. What could be f:{Jle'· pot[tioritt;:f'n'&te a collective agreement entafli_ better11vt~CJ/Jpulsory retirement benefits package \t.ban t!Jpstf envisaged in the contract of ~(iJjPlo{tri'e.fi!~tf.iihr in the retrenchment benefits pacKage? r,.e. where retrenchment benefits are meagr€tlcqli"tAil,ave no ex-gratia benefits] can the emp/qye~'?,\/tidge [Court] or the Arbitrator [Cogfitli~sleilf!,J,,grant ..,..,< ,i'!?::, v,:t.,;,-~,;" the employee retrenched the ex-g.catia'·'Wl),eri&fits as per the collective agreement 9 r,~\c ftlh.0retiredr/@mployei2 ? AYt,·" 1:,';"i_, .,,::;:t;h '«~fr/; '(.• . • T#,, In {,r~,ti,~o;it?nswer the above issues I will mostly deal with the ···•"· .,,:;. .:,,,,,, proceg_ural1iigJBness of a termination for operational reasons albeit in a . -~¥.;t,~t~. ;~~t}'~--·~·..- nutshell?tf:ither than substantive fairness because as I have found the applicant casus be/Ii is rooted on the procedural aspect of 29 op. cit note 7 Item 14:5 Employees who have more than 30 years of service shall be paid an ex-gratia payment of one month's basic salary for every year of service for the first 30 years and 0.5 month basic salary for every year of service up to the retirement date Item 14:6 Employee with compulsory retirement shall also be entitled for 100 iron sheets 28 gauge and 6 tons of cement 8 • . •,'\. retrenchment· by and- large: In -so ,dolpg I ca~npt. also _clr5~rn~ ~t ,the ... 0 . . . • • 7 • . ·1 l ., • caps of the Employment~ . . . ,. and. . Labour _ .... Relations -, Act' as well as the .. •: . . • ·: , '1,·(r ._. . ,. ~'~ ,. ,4''··; .. ~-- .• • Employment and Labour Reiations Co.de of Good Practice \ . : ~ ; : ,, •.•· t • ~ •• . ' 3 note. bien on retrenchment for operational ·requirements. ifhe·1Ernployrr\ent and Labo~r: Relations Act [h.erein the·. ELRA] reads in is~"7~io11~ 37. (2) . , .. · that:- . . . .. ii-~ Ji. ,g'tt 'tt 1t .· ;i; -( . · 1 ·~,. 1:fo.1.lr' · ...A termination of employment by an employer is ;Jhtg/r .;"r if the epployc:t fails to prove:- _ ~~f \. . .: ·- ~~- l/a, C/ 1 ,, •• ·_ ,. •. . . .. . .• . ... . " ,., ... • ~ ~0.: <;t,.. "t:11· :: . •, - -~ ~- f (bJ ... Tha,t th'e _reason ts•'fJ falr reaicfif!k · ··•. '1tr~- .•-: . (i) . ... , •.. •. .'-t\\; (ii/.Based• -on· 'the oper'Jtion' the emplo~{ an· . . _ (c)·'That · the enf:}1oym .~. ijS terminated , in, accordance wit · fair p'fbe,(J.,_f/l!Jre.-.. ·. . . ,. , · ' . ·~ !1" ' . . . ' • ·. The law speak~ tha · term·i attg'f, for -operational .requirements [commonly k~own ·. a~-- ·,\~i,,... tren~hme·nt] means termination of ~. .. •. !>::~~!:'} •. t.:~vt. . ·. .. . . . employment arisira-ff r· " he... ORerational · requirements of the '11 , - @,\k;~~~ra~onal requirehient · is d_efined in the Act as ~.,. •t1' t?;,:£~1 ,.,,,,., . . · n economic, technological, structural or similar "ployer3 3 • The law further defines that:~·- ··;p;fono1!7i~ needs relate to financial managemenfof the· f.Yi/enterpnse' ... I .. ... Te_chnological needs refer tol_ the introduction of hew technology which affects... existing jobs redundanf5•• •, 30 Act No. 6 of 2004 Cap 366 R.E. 2002 31 Government Notice GN No. 42 of 2007 32 ibid section 23 (1) 33 op.cit note 30 section 4 · 34 op. cit note 31 Rule 23 {2) (a) 35 · op. cit note 31 Rule 23 (2) (b) . ' -f,o,~ f - .. 7"'-.,..,. • - rr...-r- , •' 4 .. .Structural needs that arise from restructuring of ,the business as a result of a number of business related causes such as the merger. of business,. a change in the nature of the business36••• 7 However neither the Empioyment and Labour Relations Act: nor the Employment and Labour Relations [Code of Goqd Pc9p:ice] 2007 . .. ~-~iffit'; ;.:;,Jr:t-' t~¾~. __ Rules define what is meant by the words "or siJt'il~,r rie~i~.,,f9f the 38 7 employer" in as far as the definition of operation.\ 1eguif~;;,ent 1s ··(i;1t~f/1 · '"{:\fi:: concerned. The words similar needs 0'1,i.;frt:H'~. employer, which - .. it{t1 - ·.";}t~~&.~t?·/it . appear to be the forth operational requiretgJ~n't11Jotne'rs are economic, technolo9ical and . structura\ neeo,§1'"':'.\i~i ' ~- '·wide conceipt and t-, . - _,-!,-~,-•. . -~~•f:..-;-,,J.'f~\h-~ '".':\. . unexhaustive is as correctly gofnted;toufttt>Y rofessor Annali Sasson lj; ~t;ft~('~~ , -Jt} y. and Professor Pak Le Roux e/taJin theff~\5ook39 that:- -?-~ --~\l~¾:t:'i~z••: . .,._;:f/j} ... Similar needs [at/'the employer] is an extremely broad [category] conq~Tp~,>,.that must be determined with regard to thfiJ,.,circu,(JJsl:aqces of each case. It is a factual questiorzrillJ,1t7{tfs !rnpossible to provide an exhaustive list of wl;at cepsfitfites similar needs or reasons40••• \;i;,;.. J1is;t;1k"','1)fz+;;,, ]~ Ne~:i~lJ!sr§\'.!½~Hf'' courts and scholars of Labour Laws have 1 att mptefd Ja);;,plffi.pbint out several categories of what may be the !M. 'Nt;, . neeasf of the employer which I entirely and respectively 36 op. cit note 31 Rule 23 (2) (c) 37 op. cit note 9 38 op. cit note 31 39 Essential Labour Law Vol. 1 individual Labour Law (2002] South Africa 40 ibid 10 subscribe, they are as follows . . [among others]:-: a) Special operational need of business· Here a South· African Labour Court gave an example in the case of Steel Engineering and Allied Workers Union· of S.A. and Others V. Irident Steel [PTY] Ltd. 41 That the nature of the btisiness·may for example rjemand for employees ~o work on overtime f,_qr ·economic success - or survival ·or. the bflsinessi. ('(>."fil •• , ~~- ~ _Ef!1ployees i!J.abi!ity or refusal to comply :.fYil/J.J,.~these\ ..r.,.,,'i;_. requirements may jeopardize the well being,,_ of \/;t~· 7 . 12 ' ·•:~,. - busmess . - - . . . ;~- - .,. ,,~ b) The employee's actions or presenc"/ii~ffects thi b us,ness- ·1 . ,&t.~j; negative y r1~· ·'.Qt1,,,,.,fic. _ An employee's actions creating disharmo'IJX amongst co- workers by either antagoni4/!Jg~1\yj,.,°1'W,_grkers by .unpalatable .remarks or seXU.l!kit.fiJJarft- may fall on '"h1·'S part.. ,, _,- .,&i,,J:. if!'' ··'<-h, _, h'• ·t~~"l;.,,.~- . .J1 . _..,<f:',,..-;;"' ~~:! . ti'•'t. · c) The employee's conduct liaiJelfr./ to a breakdown of the trust relation\lJ_ip ~?';;~':/if Here mistrust is reg_ardetif;?1s a.lcounterproductive to the ~ ~, .,. ..,~,,,...... , ~l"r~ operation of the ~&siness11:it.¾,l,:? ' -- ':•°:::"t°' ,j~> ~'<~; ~ it-.. ~.'.'}~). ~·1 -Another similar\~1,ne~ds'~\\0f the employer may be that the .r,1[f!Jt:> •;~-ft.it-..:._ \~-t~-. enterprise's busi~~ss"{tt;.eqttfrements are such that changes must be ! . ~1i~, ~Jt~. ~. --~:%t. Yi made to tlie~jmp'l@Sreef§terms and condition of employment. . . .-~;,,::tii1%1h:,~:,; 4 \ 1 On t~f,f~_q;ttion of mistrust it is possible for the employer to -~ ¾""r. r,t; • termi~,~perational requirement based on the employer's similar needs when employee's conduct has lead to a breakdown of the trust relationship as noted above [see paragraph c]. The same view was 41 [1986) IU [LC) 42 See al$o Rev. No. 27 of 2012 between Sandvick Mining Construction Tanzania Ltd. V. Joseph Mlaponi pp 18 -19 [unreported] 43 op. cit note 39 at page 230 11 also reached by the supreme court of the Republic of the Philippiness in Bristol Myers Squibb [Phils] Inc. V~ Baban44 in a labour matter where the five .justices of the supreme Court held that:- ... [AJ s a general rule employers are allowed a wider latitude of discretion in terminating the services of employees who perform functions by which thei,;.natl/lJ?~1? .;,-.:•-;.~~ ,(:,:::.$,, require the employer's full trust and confidenriil' Mere:: -"'1:lir>:•,:,i.._ ':\~ existence of basis for believing that the erfl/ili:lf€.f! has''t <,+, breached the trust and confidence of the emplofe,f, is ·!1.i/'" sufficient and does not require proof befb!jj/- reasonable doubt. . Thus when an employee hasiJeel!. guilty of · breach of trust or his employer halI'.tJmp?i!-i!(lf!ason to distrust him a labour tribunat?carlnot deny the employer the authority to dis'ih,t~s·,.,1,1,,ij;¢;;"& ~,?> .h.-,,•. [emphasis mine] ,11_,,~ "01t,. )f"+ . . -~ti'?o,c. . \.t,, '{,)~(11. ''":ii~lf Now reverting back to f~:~ proced,y,fral fairness of a termination ·=:1it:· ,•, t¥~ for operational reasons;. ;,;;to w1t~2,1fi,~tirenchment there are several Z:''1,_~~i~; . procedural requirement$;;,Jhqt an employer must comply they are 7 identified in Act Noi!.,i;f5t~a,01· ~ap 366 R.E. 2002 thus:- tit,.;- ·;.~,~~t~t\:.. J~?;Ht:1.tj . ,:i,Ji) . Glve ndf{ce of the intention to retrench as soon as '"~\:14,~ft--.;?:,t1t.i1'ftffflJJt~nchment] ~ontemplated'5• ,,,,lii}'!!;t:,.·,::J-.;,_ Piiqr . ~,-<?.t\:.:~... /(.., consultation4 . ff''""(iii. ~ -\~!fempt to reach consensus over certain ~ g ' ,, ,matters . tJ'+:,vi;* · Written disclosure of relevant information48• · ·,; Allow an opportunity to make representation and consider representation49• 44 GR No. 167449 December 17, 2008, 574 SCHA 198 at 208 - 209 citing, Atlas Fertilizer Corporation V. National Labour Relations Commissioner, GR No. 120030 June 17, 1997, 273 SCRA 551 45 op. cit note 12 S. 38 (1) (a) 46 op, cit note 12 S. 38 (1) (c) 47 op. cit note 12 S. 38 (1) (c) (ii) 48 op. cit note 12 S. 38 (1) (b) 49 op. cit note 12 S. 38 (1) (d) (ii) - (iii) 12 • ... (vi) . Selection of employees for terminatiorf0• . (vii) Severance pay1• i . The words contem_plate in ·section 38 (1) (a) of Act No. 6.of 2004 ELRA ,. indicates that the employer must consult with the employees or. their representatives the earliest.P~ipe(~:r~ri thetf,;. final ..fi};~ ' ,f.-=.. ~·t,, decision has been reached, but the possibility of rit(encn.p:1~nt has .;t(¾',., "-tv:>tf only been foreseen. This point is _well: _illustrate~JPY the r!apour Appeal ~;4. Couit of Sout~ Africa [which I entirely and r#jpe~~~~~ supscribe]. In , ... , ~ - t?t... ~~t '-'-.~;;)•' . the case of National Union Workers,~jpf?-~~l1t:u. Africa v. Atlantic . '. ··.:1~,};'.· ... ·~•:, "'- •. Engines [PTY] ltd 52 · thus·- • ~i;}:1:&;."'~·4~1{!,;r.''•1th. ~)J.f~fi'4 I • ~~~rJ~~ .. .It simply means th!/[ an edJ~l9,yJ~ who senses that it might have to· retreH¢.{1 emp(ofte"g}s in order to meet · operational o_b}ef{/ves}z~fl?JJ,.tt consult with th~ employees like/Jf to fie affected [or the1r representativesJti1t:t/1e earliest opportunity in order to .c~C.-., • '·'.·J,. advise them;,~ or-•{!Je i::;'!Jossibility of retrenchment and <' .\~",,:) "- .. \ttx ~:·-.,~ reason ~iF:ff.t.. ~':\ r;/"! . >7At, , The im~ortaoce·'""bf the above: requirements as noted in the , ·~;;?;:,~ lf~ l1 qu._ ted ,, ej~1-~ ~'~iil'pra is that it ensur~s that the employees are 1 l~\ 12-~~:. . affor . ,9·th'!\;0pportunity and chance to influence the employer in his '•.· --{~fr .(,w· final dec,slbn to terminate or not53 • . I 50 op. cit note 12 S. 38 (1) (c) (iii) 51 op. cit note 12 S. 38 (1) (c) (v) 52 [1993] 14 IU 642 [LAC) 53 op. cit note 39 13 In the , case at hand, the applicant · acknowledges that the · respondent .made the so called ~onsul_tation with the Central · Joint: Industrial Committee .which comprised the management and the union [i.e. OIC and COTVVU (T)]54 that was in November, 2009. ·.over the contemplated retrenchment: Although the E"'plo~n,ent and . ~~iiFY' cJt(,f'l tj~,~ ,z,r.~ Labour Relations Ad: does not define wha,f·;(J~ conjulfation . . ·- ~~;\ijli}.... '~t}l~p mean a good definition of what is meant b,X the terrnb~ortsultation _ . - ,_ _ ·::11~t~{?} _ ··,:1tr may be borrowed from the decision of the 1;{2a'bijJ.ir Appeal Court of . -it;;~, ··~.\~\~.--:i\. ·. South Africa [South Africa Labour Laws are'''i,~~_parimateria with our ' . f+~~ ' -~'{¾i~-- . ' . . .(' labour laws and actually heavily bor . ·e~(~it,~-,,$$~QJ ·south Africa] in the . Land Mark case of Visser V .sJ~ fs~ , 1 ••.,oo'f'J 55 in which the Labour Appeal Court stated in respect~~'; consultation that:- .. , The employer a.ch' the ot ·vnsulting parties must ... Engage in ·~~1;;,ri1:::~(lingfu/ Joint consensus seeking process anf/4. a'tlf(;F1/fb1,, to reach consensus... for the process tosPl}irJf;Jahingful it must not be a mere sham, a going t~fou~h~fh'-etrootions. The employer must consult ' tst{[! gpqgi;T-a,j(."1 )rj. that it must not have made up its mind 1 prft tcfJ.~~ns7!illation to dismiss'6 .,, '-"i.1{,J,lef)~v~/J . e-lijJDlbyer must be prepared to the serious consultation .,,\;;- ,·':-"-~:'J., accordihg¥tb the above decision. He must [employer] be prepared to keep an open mind with rE~gard to the representation made by the 54 COTWU (T) a trade union namely cornmunic;ition and Transport Wor:,ers Union of Tanzania 55 (2001) 22 IU 666 [LAC) 56 ibid at page 672 . 14 ' '' ! - ' employee~s party~?:::-The other party 1.e. employees or trade union representatives . in': far as the term ·consultation is· concerned, the !. : Labour Appeal· CotJrt- en1phas1zed and remarked as follows:.: j .• I! .I I I ~~>;.Where one or more employees are to be selected for · ,} ,, rmination from a number of employees, the criteria •.,,,, for their selection sh;1JJ be agreed with the trade union. If criteria are not agreed the criteria used by the employer shall be fair and obj~ctive60• I I ' 57 op. cit note 39 58 op. cit note 55 at page 672 59 See 60 op. cit note 31 Rule 24 (1) 15 In my view, the criterfr:l as mentioned by the applicant in his 62 written submissions61 and in the minute or proceedings of .the OIC i.e.- FIL063 "kuomba kupunguzwa [volunteers], kustaafu kwa hiari [voluntary retirement] some not productive [efficiency ability-capacity] utendaji kazi [altitude in vvork and experience] spme "ufinyu wa .,....,,,f/j.:"J) "tf.:;.. ;!°.. 64 nafasi"[seniority LIF0] • /\ii these criteria men\if~~1~ ; as\l~f,a~,,1,,a's the• . ~ ~8 record and evidence is concerned were by anct,large fa'lltt~J1d''iobjective ·. . "·:.0-~ . >?:""· in terms of Rule 24 (1) of the Code of Good.,-ir ?•:.Jfe Rules 2007: GN ·~\\t( ·--~~~•-.·-A~ No. 42 of 2007 quoted above65 • Perhags'V,t. fore1VI come to the ~~f examination of the examples of -se , ·~'ilt~na the applica·nt: :had· : - ;-;::;,;:·;;\:\~ '1,~~}._ Jjf mentioned supra, it must be n~ted t t~~ reason for applicant being · ?t:. ·. , ·Jtii . retrenched according to his wrHten suJ5m'lssions at page 3 paragraph• ,:Jt: '~f}(~;}t.~?·fa:xt?ff! 2 and which reason appe~fed in \};:;_ •{~t ,' ttre· OIC proceedings or minutes is written RETIRE. It ist't,:1.th(~;;},Jnclusion of the word retire on the applicant's name ,~~t:'.~asuJd ~;m to claim that he ought to have been retired an~1~fck~t~~::+It!:f~ ~-rr~am benefit package of retirement rather ,:,.t;J . '%l - than bei.@~%C¢ti':i;QQ~ed and given the meagre retrenchment benefits . .~~ if([ ,Jfr~1, -?t\;t:tr:~.-· ~ He*~",bmittlcf"~hat:- ~t~f~ziJf •The applicant's reasons for retrenchment in page 7 number 43 of the attached proceedings were indicated as retire which c/e,-:.,rly meant that the committee after 61 op. cit note 1 at p. 3 62 OIC proceedings annexture 'C' sec also op. cit note 1 at page 2 63 First in last out criteria 64 op. cit note 1 page 3 65 op. cit note 31 Rule 24 (3) fair criteria include length of service the need to retain key jobs, experience or skills, affirmative action and qualifications 16 .'it' had -gone through the records of the applicant decided to include his name· to be· retired since his · :relevant:, n~tice to · retire •had already been. given to ,_;_&6 . ..__ hfrn ,, . ;·.•· W.ith. great respect to the applicant, the employer putting of the word retire;as a reason for· termination does not.mean . . . Jhat he was ·~ . ·'..':, ,;#.J')' W: . . : ~:.~· \#, .,., supposed Jo be r~tired . . ,.1. id not .retrenched 1 ti~ 'i:,"?;,terniiia~id'f~ '-;,~ •r.c'-.:·,,$.}): on operational requirements or the busines? be~ause it istti}tEf?law ~~d ''! "~: practice in operational . requirements of tb~,--- . ,~1usiness that thos~ . . ,~- -~i t .. . . ' . employees .. ·who have reached the mini; · · rJefr'§ment . age are . #.:.... . identified. _as t~e first target popula,9,.~:& nthn:ent. Then. after . these- employees . have be':'0Jrfetre~ch~~~r ·"IFO is applied to the remaining elliployees67 . · The iJ;gwinQ}'r!fsome of the criteria_:- .4f,;'.¾ ~ii a) Senfarity: Hey£~ UFO ffr"itfoilowed that is to say long term emplorlt,es!\fre retained at the expense of those with sho1J,_((jr-.fe!i.1?c'e.tc?r less skilled _ b) Early:s.setf~~m'i:fpt:· . .1,W:,,.. s,,. ''t(>,._ . ' Those who have attained . the miniQJur(°1r~ [etiEement age are the first target f . .CJ£J,'f,~~~r1 be r:?trenched. · ·<;;1,,. Th~fa • -"'~·c '% alls under the above early retirement criteria for ·~ ~; . ''\::• - be1r1 - retr :.'1ti, J,ed by the er: iployer respondent, other criteria which !,,~$;;· .air and objective applied by the employer respondent as per Rule 24 (3) of GN, No. 42 of 2007 are hereunder listed:- c) Conduct: Conduct will bel regarded as a fair and objective crite, /on if the employee was at all times 66 op. cit note 1 at page 3 paragraph 2. The a<:t of being retre~ched "chilled" the prospects of the applicant of getting ex-gratia benefits for compulsory retirement 67 Last in first out criteria 17 made c:wa ··e th: t the employer found such conduct unacceptD. /c E 1 the criterion was based on objectil 1ity :i2te, 1ir:ed conduct such as attendance records a.. _.j pre · 'US vvarnings. d) Efficienc; : Af, · ty, skills capacity, productivity altitude iti •11ork id experience. e) Valunr-ec;?· Tl ;e employees who volunteer to be ~ ~ . ~ . reLrenc ,ec . . , .1\, f) FIFO: Fi ::-/: t ·. Ip!oyees to be emplQM~d ,,;-fp~L earmar/er :,~,e I'.· i -'-o be retrenched ,,_rr•r, ·-·if/1-.. \\~::,'_,_~_-.·,·.·~:,:.-~_g,tt,. , \ i.,,,t ... ' - • ,. • , • '-~~;;~:;' .- . . ,,:I . ''.t~f,,,',\- •,·•,,{/tYf¼}~ ·,r The criteria of Fr:=-o, e· J is, first in firstgO(t,as !~\~ been suggested /~ ;1}; as not good and acce 1.. c0blE: :ritetia. In thl~/'l~§e . ~~ ·t tfi:, ··"\l:~ ~ftllnited Peoples 1 Union of S.A.V. GrL :2,ke Doras~t~::;\~i(~r'i,~◊,al11ple [South African ~ )~,- ···::~,\>:.. '·'l~~~:·-;.,):f Case]. Facts vvere th:-~ th.· 4111bn -~Hggeite'cf that the longer service \\~ ·~\{;;r'!/•'..·•·i}~;~· employees should te t"le n. ,ntg be ~elected for retrenchment. The union suggested this ,·:rl~~( · n [~il=oflbecause many of its members were recruited frorr p':. 2)lg .•JJ"Io /; had recently started to work for the ;· ··~;- . employer. The cqtlit:,[ ·:ilcLJ j t it was not an acceptable criterion. We also subsctJ,p~tO,;~J1·c-tl.J .siti ,_: 1. •;:{t~ii, '·,·,~ti. \ \:.,~~/; 4~\li']i!l\, <'.:, \;,.. -c£ ~};~-, The· ~~ttentffrner : of :he applicant was therefore c.orrect ·in 1 0(\, :r. :,.. ~ acc~1&anc;-~:ilI~'ith · the critc ;on provided by the employer. The '<;'' Jt/f:t applicant-cannot claim co bc:: ·etired as the aim of the employer was to cut costs by way of re., :·enci:ng employees for operation requirement of the business. The s .;:2cti . 1 criteria as shown by the applicant were 68 All the above criterion were listed ';y the .;;,.iii cant in his written submissions p. 3 as used by the employer to retrench them 69 [1988] 19 IU 107 [LC] South Africa 18 by and large fair and obj(;ctive .as per Rule 24 (1) of the Code of Good Practice Rules, 20J7 70 The- ~ords " ... the criteria used by the employer shall be ,f~ir_. .. " _i~; defined under Rule 24 (3) of the code that7 1:- ·: .Selection criteria zh~t are generally accef:!te~!C't,,as_ f_~( mclude length of setv1ce, the need to retam .K_ey JO'fgYJ,_ .,;,. experience .. or · s:'d/1s, affirmative aefr~n~0:,,, and\ ,lf;.,~~t· qua/iflcation7£ 't::'i,,. it,,,t'· ••• r;;. ~l\~~, .:.•· -,,.{,A._ I}?. '~·~•ii. ' ~· # ·In ·other \N'ords ·the ·iil~•~rpretation of t )%term --~ fairness under ' Rule· 24 (3) entails thatthe criterion use· ,., · t~trJ~~h ,,<,. should not be .. · arbitrary; but relevant·in tha: it relat~?1 J~1igttf~~J.1t'es or conduct of the, -· :z::, -· - ~;~~~ (,_~~·i{r· employee such . as · lengthf·Jrof 'llse~~~;~-*rability, capacity and .J1 ·-;~'.:t.. Ji~~ , ;Ji ·,~;t/tf.!$ 3 productivity? • However theY\¥'fOrds/4,,a!,,,~f:.the criteria used by the \t(..?$;-. .J::.::;:: employer shall be ·... obJeit/v,~... ,;--,f~'JjAtt defined in the Code of Good ' '-If.~ 1 '.~~Ji.'~6 i~ Government Notice No. 42 of 2007 Practice Rules or in t~1~ ' <fa.. ,.,:- Or in the_ Emplot~Et~:; ~9.H. Labour: Relations Act No. 6 of 2004] .. Objectivi~:e (til~Jhis fi:ule 24 cP) of the Code of Good Practice would m.~a ~.' tto.~~~~tif~8.orrow the words bf jj Professor Annal Sasson . et al thBb· - ~!' --~~~~ ''<'l, 'Pf : i¾» .;..J, 'ii",•. "'·,1~~ '{,,~~.4t,"#Objectivity entails u'Jat the' criteria should not depend 'ffJtlon the objective prejudices ,of the person making the selection.. .in other words , the persqn making the seledion should not use the pretext of redundancy to dismiss an emp!oye,3 who is regarded as a ''troub(e 70 op. cit note 60 71 op. cit note 31 72 op. cit note 31 Rule 24 (30 73 op. cit note 29 at page 249 19 ·rnaker/r or because the· employee belongs to a union or . is a shop stewarf1 ... I entirely and respectfully subscribe to the interpretation of the term "criteria used by_ the employer shall be "objective" in the retrenchment process as shown above. ,,[/ft~:(h _'h ·,tii~i]:~~;;~1b,. '\~{, A1tf.-' In the event and on the foregone it follows, ther~,fore?ithat the ,f~h~;,;,~fJ- ··\~ii\ first issue as to whether an employee . ,to;0i,_is about to retire • I "i.?th~.... :if';. . .[retirement knocking at his door] cannot b~~,r t1;.~ncfYecl i.e. terminated· -·~ . "~Y.\.;c.,. '•·ftf:1:::-; for, operational requirements of th§ :H~~,ine~;~,,,,"''l's answered in the · affirmative that such an ernpt0yee \., :'[j: ·¾~f.:, r~;;:i,,it~tt~ in our hand can be '::if retrenched in so far as the ci:lfre..rion ftj"r:+:i!'rly retirement is one of the:· \tf}\.,.. jf1i retirement criteria's in term'.rnationtfer'r'Operational requirements75 , and. ::~t.. "•,.i~;rr~. . on the strength th tfl¾t.crittrion of early retirement_ population is the first to be spoptretqJ~P'ld}t1r-;;ted for retrenchment7 6 • It was correct ~1!'. ':;.~.\-,. ·~'>J;:::&~t•·: · for the ap', ic ,nt-:to,,;., ·% argeted for retrenchment therefore, since he , . "l\f-, ;.,1;:_,, . was not J~rJ:~~d with a retirement letter as correctly pointed out by~\be Lea g;,,~)~b~itrator in tt1e award 7~. '\,,p" ,r 74 op. cit note 29 Professor Basson A. was discussing section 189 (2) (b) of the Labour Relations Act to South Africa 1995 which is in parimateria with the our En,ployrnent and Labour Relations [Code of Good Practice] Rules 2007 Rule 24 (1) 75 op. cit note 31 see Rule 24 (1) see also note 2g Centr.il Joint Industrial Committee [CJIC) minutes annexture 'c; ~ . op. cit note 39 at page 252 77 op. cit note 2 at page 4 20 . The secon~d -~ricf lasfquestibn·to;be answered.in the chain of my arg·uments in this judgment is that:- ... What ·r:ould :_be· the . oosition where a . collective . a9..r~~17Jent entails better" retirement benefits .package ·. '. · [c6lnpuls6ry retifernent] than those envisaged in th~ , . contract of employment or in the retrenchment benefits package? [i.e. wh_ere retrenchment . be~e !'/:s .r-ilt1 meagre and ha.ve no ex-gratia benefitsj 8••• · -~~ r~'\, . . ' '.: • ... --~ . •. I , ' . "~t\f;iW . \!.t .The first matter to _consider here is th .al of tnl~i1,1.operational . • • ~ ·..; ,. '"' • . 't •• : ' ; '. ' . • •. •"Y,,f requirement of the busiriess·. ! • , • • '.. ··, ' • The ·comJITT.tt W•all/i ·:G!n <it..,_ • found that. the · ~ • .1 r · . · ,. · ~-tr.; ;:U,i.·..-i~ a.1i~er.~~:!~@.1~' : . • · : : ;e~p~n~en~ .. e~p!oyzr _received . . '·the Ministry of Infrastructure., the letter had add,ie.s,~¢"'et~<?~~i-the difficult: financial . .. .; . 1,/ffe,, :t --;~~ (©;:~~: . .- situatio~. of th~ r~~p-~ndent \~d ·a~~~ ,asure 1 o:. cutting costs the respondent was directed to em~ark a~, reduction of the working force . . . . 79 ~~-- by way of the operation~i.__ requi;1~ent of the business • · Indeed • - ·• ·%,1, 'v,~ , there were economic~e~ls"'tftat relate to the financial management of . the en,t~r:is:~~;~,,~ta~~iail ~ifficlllties. · The employer and t~e employees~g('-~t t~~fepresenta~1Je were aware of the financial p~blem~ ":~vspom!ent and ~e impo~n~e 0~ the operational re~ eme~tf<>ugh the Joint me+ng. In this s1tuat1on the employer may p ··~tne benefits entailed · tn the collective· agreement if the economic or financial position ' . , ~f/ the enterprise would allow. Each case will be determined on its h¼n facts. In the case at hand the applicant through the consultative t . meeting paid the applicant I 78 _ op. cit note 29 (the collective agreement have bet~er retirement benefits package. See item 14:5 and 14:6] 79 op. cit note 2 at par,e 3 [CMA award] : 21 - . -·-··---------------- J~ • • - --- ·--- _ _ _, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - . - . . ; _.... •· > . . ' j statutory benefits and go!dc.n handshake80 • Therefore it will mostly on depend with the financiaLG;;pabi:ity of the employer at the time being. I am mindful that c:o!'.ective agreement is binding, that is, they have· a binding effect, sectir_;n 71 of the Employment and Labour Relations Arr states that:- 1 ,;J?~:::\. (2) .. .A collective Pgreement shall be binding o'ht; a) The p,rties io the agreement. At, '\!111\., b) Any members of the e/fkZ~s to tile . , ici"'' '',h, a::JI ,nn:.,r::,,m,-:,•,f- \,......., ....,. /; L.- ·;:,1-;J~.:. .,,_~;,,__ ·, c) Any emp/oyees who are::,1,(!d~hm.". of a (~.... ··,1/,-,,-- erl/l!f'llts trade unicn party to;z,"t./7fP'a9.J/Pe_q,ent if the trade union is r~fjf!Q(!7'Z~f/_ iiJ+;the exclusive bargainin):f1gen~Tof tfrq/e#e'fhployees under section 6;~;:- ·•wt: :~~-:i•,~,; ?~~- · :.~(-. ' ir? There are effects qJt a 'c:@U~g::rve agreement on terms and .. _.:}/'- '''fl.'•" condition of employment§l~L example where the parties ar~ bound by the collective agre~. it.,_·;;/'ltl·rt- - ifl: ~Wi[{-·::;~4 ). . . (/yJ:-1f '<,_'(.,,. · ',,f! -~~,, con::.ract of employment does not :JJlff~,Te.flJ/.1.iite an .,;sue and that issue is regulated '{fky a colfecUve agreement, the provision of the .:'''oflective a_:_rreement become part of the · individual er;-,p!oyment contract even after the collective agreement /apse:fl3 (ii) If the tctms and conditions of employment on a contri,ct ,re less favourable than those contained i1: a collective agreement, the contractual ;:.:.'DVision will be invalid. Again the 80 op. cit note 2 at page 3 [CMA award] 81 Act No. 6 of 2004 Cap 3G6 R.E. 2009 82 ibid S. 67 (1) A registered trade union that rcpr .'.sen ts the majority of the employees in a appropriate bargaining unit shall be entitled to be recognized as thee ·/c1sive bargaining ar,c~nt of the employees in that unit 83 op. cit note 39 Vol. II Collective Labour Law [; ~/;2] South Africa p. 67 22 f r ; prov1s10n.'i Jf the collective agreement will ·. · become pc:.·i .: · of the employment contract!14• Those are just few . , •f th.e binding effect of the collective agre~~ent ~owevei as Ir: ·,e just discussed above that the grar,ting of ex-gratia benefits entail:: in the collective agreement... will depend ~ ;;-~ -··W'~-'- With the circumstances of c, .ch case and the finan~Jtf c!pa\~J_lity .:~f the ~-- ~'. ?i(k; t? '-i?W° <)J ""' employer to met the bindin J effects of the collective ·13:g1eement. In . -.l~, ~· -~tfr the instant case the appli . _·mt was paid the. 1s~tutory b~nefits and i~+ ,;,~~- golden handshake as righ· .y pointed out Bfti th~tlearned arbitrator • , . . . "tl, ~ :•'ih . ' ~. I?.} --~- th ~- fj,.. ~ • . , . ,i;M1.ii.)t*":7~~;~" .!~) ... To that effect Ni ' c9psultative 'rh~.fftifgs involving the trade union COTV/ 1 di/) were'1'tl~[Z~;) Outcome of that is the retrenchment f th.,e comp{amc1nt from the service. Following his term -;~aal//#JtJ.1~l/9mp/ainant was paid the statutory terminaf: enefits andgolden handshake85••• In the event • ~~r,.~ foregone, I found that the present ~-· ~~- !_~~ $(.~ ~1,·..;,· [· revision lacks m ·---~. l~. ..Jr>, ~?,,. ·11cl' ~'. "•, ~e appjicant's claims were rightly rejected 1 by the Co~:~ri~i8q,~I:;J~~, d equa~e the efforts of the applicant in this revision :.~~h:~§~~efman t:- ·ow unlo the sea of a "kokold' fishing net w~ l, if it fa)~ ~ot catch fish it ~ill" come with debris from the sea this is· ~ithas happene: to the/ applicant, he did not get the fish he expected. Moreover he 1as anpther chance to throw the ''kokold' fishing net unto the sea L appea:ing to the Court of Appeal. 84 ibid page 67 85 op. cit note 2 at page 3 paragraph 1 [C.'- ·\ award) 23 ~• -r--•-------------•--•, ' The revision application is dismissed and the .CMt\86 ,. arbitration j • award is confirmed as a result thereof. \~~~ I.S. Mip~wa JUDGE 09/09/2014 86 Commission for Mediation and Arbitration see also the arbitration award Ref. No. CMA/DSM/ILALA/08/010/1085 24 .