Skip to content

Sa Collective Agreement

Section 23(1)(d) is one of many sections of the LRA that contain the legislative policy choice of the majority. This choice is based on the legislator`s assumption that it would best serve the LRA`s main objectives of peace and orderly collective bargaining (Aunde South Africa (Pty) Ltd v NUMSA [2011] 10 BLLR 945 (LAC) Par 32; See Cohen “Limiting organizational rights of minority unions: POPCRU v Ledwaba 2013 11 BLLR 1137 (LC)” (2014) 17.5 PER 2211. See also Du toit (ed) et al Labour Relations Law (6th ed) (LexisNexis 2015) 283-284). Of the 27 Member States of the European Union (EU), 21 have legal provisions to extend collective agreements to non-contracting parties (“Extension of collective agreements in the EU: background document” by Kerckhof 2011 Eurofound 1 available under www.bollettinoadapt.it/old/files/document/15105EF_collectivebar.pdf (called 06.06.2018). Collective agreements are an effective instrument for regulating conditions of service and other matters of mutual interest (Du Toit (ed) et al Labour Relations Act (6). 1)) (LexisNexis 2015) 309). These collective agreements may be extended to other parties who have not signed them. Two possibilities for extension are provided for in Article 23(1)(d) and Article 32 of the LRA. Section 23(1)(d) provides that a collective agreement is binding on workers who are not members of the trade union or trade union which is a party to the agreement, provided that three conditions are met, namely that the workers are indicated in the agreement; the agreement expressly binds the staff; and the union or trade unions concluding the agreement are predominantly employed in that workplace (cf. Fakude, inter alia, against Kwikot (Pty) Ltd [2012] ZALCJHB 169, at para. 34). The extension provided for in section 32 concerns collective agreements concluded within a council of collective agreements, which require the agreement of the Minister in order for them to be extended to an entire sector.

In AMCU v Chamber of Mines of South Africa CCT87/16 [2017], the Constitutional Court was faced with a controversial extension of section 23(1)(d), applicable at the employment level. On 21 January 2016, a collective agreement was signed with the Icelandic Employers` Association (SA). The agreement was adopted by 91.28% of the vote cast in the vote that ended on 24th February 2016. The agreement is based on the purchasing power of wages that increase over their duration; whereas interest rates fall significantly and remain low; and that the government keep its promises. These conditions will be assessed in September 2020 and September 2021. The evaluation committee will be composed of 3 representatives of the trade unions and 3 representatives of the employers. The contract may be cancelled in the absence of conditions.1 The following agreements are available in PDF format. You can click the table of contents to skip to certain sections or to perform basic word searches to find information. The vast majority of PRC members work in accordance with the VR and SA agreements.

The AMCU argued that each mine and each operation is a separate `workplace` within the meaning of Article 23(1)(d) and that the collective agreement does not extend to establishments where it has a majority and is therefore entitled to strike in those mines or operations. . . .