Article 20/2023

What is the effect of the BCEA Amendment Act 2018 on the dispute-resolution path for monies owed in terms of the National Minimum Wage Act, a contract of employment, sectoral determination or collective agreement?


Scenario 1: if the employee or worker earns above the threshold, so established in terms of s6(3) of the BCEA (currently R224 080.48)

  • in such instance, the employee or worker has various alternative dispute avenues, namely, the labour court, or the high court, or the magistrates’ court, or the small claims court

Scenario 2: if the employee earns below the aforesaid threshold

  • in such instance, the only dispute-resolution threshold is compulsory con-arb – this, amongst other things, entails that, before such amendment to s73A of the BCEA, if monies were owed to the employee or worker in terms of a contract of employment, he or she was obliged to recover such monies by following a civil litigation path, whereas, now, compulsory con-arb is the prescribed avenue

On what basis will a client of a labour broker be held vicariously liable for the injuries suffered by an employee employed by a labour broker when such employee performs functions at the client’s workplace?

Is an employer vicariously liable where its employee is sexually harassed by a superior employee?

It is well-established that an employer is vicariously liable (faultlessly liable) for the wrong committed by an employee during the course/scope/sphere of employment (Feldman v Mall 1945 AD 733).