Skip to main content

Article 15/2021

Labour Edge

Although claims under the LRA and the BCEA are distinct and based upon different causes of action, can they be heard in a single hearing before the labour court?


The labour appeal court recently, in Baise v Mianzo Asset Management (Pty) Ltd (2019) 30 SALLR 158 (LAC), held as follows: Civil claims are entertained because of the concurrent jurisdiction of the labour court with the high court and that competence is not susceptible to being blended with remedies sought under the LRA.  Claims under both regimes can indeed be heard in a single hearing, but the claims themselves remain distinct, along with the need to discern distinct causes of action.

 

 

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?