Article 48/2021

Labour Edge

Does the LRA impose a duty to bargain?


In Bidair Services (Pty) Ltd v Makgoba NO and Others (2019) 30 SALLR 168 (LC), the labour court recently stated the following:

It should be recalled that the basic structure of the LRA is one that does not impose a duty to bargain. Rather, the constitutional right to engage in collective bargaining finds expression in a strong set of organisational rights (those referred to in s12 to s16 of the LRA) and the right to strike in support of a demand that a party be recognised as a collective bargaining agent, or any other element of what the LRA defines as a refusal to bargain.  If the conceptual integrity of this structure is to be maintained (as it must), then commissioners (and judges) must be cautious not to confuse what are two discrete concepts and thus run the risk of imposing a duty to bargain.  The structure of the LRA is one in which commissioners and judges have no role in determining whether one party should bargain collectively with another, the subject matter of any collective bargaining, the level at which bargaining should be conducted, or the identity of any bargaining partner.

What are the principles governing the vicarious liability of an employer for acts committed by an employee in breach of the EEA, in terms of s60 of the EEA?

The scenario is as follows: only employees working at a bakery and not employees working at a mill were party to the disputes when referred to conciliation.  At arbitration, the union wanted to join the employees working at the mill.

Is such joinder permissible?

What is the test for unfair discrimination formulated in Harksen v Lane and consistently applied subsequently by the various courts, including, recently, Premier FMCG (Pty) Ltd t/a Blue Ribbon Bakery v FAWU (2022) 33 SALLR 277 (LC); (2022) 43 ILJ 1584 (LC)?