Skip to main content

Article 11/2022

What is the content of the common law duty of the employer to take reasonable care of its employees?

_____________________________________

It is well-established that there is a common law duty of reasonable care on an employer in respect of its employees (e.g. Van Deventer v Workmen’s Compensation Commissioner 1962 (4) SA 28 (T), Vigario v Afrox Ltd 1996 (3) SA 450 (W) and Media 24 Ltd and Another v Grobler 2005 (6) SA 328 (SCA)).

The above obligation to take reasonable care exists in respect of protecting employees against physical harm as well as protecting employees against psychological harm.

Employees have available to them both statutory and common law remedies.

Section 41(2) of the BCEA regulates the entitlement of an employee, dismissed for reasons based on the employer’s operational requirements, to severance pay.

In terms of s41(4) of the BCEA, an employee, who unreasonably refused to accept the employer’s offer of alternative employment with that employer or any other employer, is not entitled to severance pay ito s41(2).

How does the assistance provided by the retrenching employer to a retrenched employee affect such employee’s entitlement to severance pay?

What is the short test to be applied to determine whether there is compliance with the reasonable decision-maker test?

When determining whether or not the arbitrator of the CCMA or bargaining council behaved like a reasonable decision-maker, what are the ‘questions to be asked’?

What is the test recently applied to determine whether an arbitration award should be set aside on review?

In the scenario where a group of employees, participating in a demonstration, picket, strike, etc, are participating in unlawful conduct, but a number of other employees, who are also participating in such demonstration, picket, strike, etc, are not participating in such unlawful conduct, will the employer be entitled to obtain an interdict against both groups of such employees?