This is the first alert notice of those issues that will cause YOU to slip and definitely trip in 2024.
These issues will be incorporated into our famous seminar textbook as well as our highly sought-after PowerPoint presentation. The attached notice deals with the following ‘tricky issues’:
reinstatement and re-employment in terms of a settlement agreement , the granting of organisational rights to minority unions, the entitlement to commission even after and the employment relationship comes to an end the powers and functions of a presiding officer to an internal disciplinary enquiry.
We look forward to YOU being part of this continuing learning event – secure YOUR seat, register here.
- The doctrine of res judicata is based on the policy consideration that there should be finality in litigation and an avoidance of multiplicity of litigation or conflicting judicial decisions on the same issue or issues. What are the requirements to be met for this doctrine to be applicable?
- With reference to, inter alia, Natal Joint Municipal Pension Fund v Endumeni Municipality 2012 (4) SA 593 (SCA), what were the factors recently taken into account by the supreme court of appeal to determine whether the parties in a settlement agreement envisaged re-employment or reinstatement?
- In terms of s21(8C)(b) of the LRA, a commissioner in arbitration proceedings may grant s12, s13 or s15 organisational rights to a trade union or a coalition of trade unions that do not meet thresholds of representativeness required by a collective agreement in terms of s18 of the LRA, if such union or coalition of unions represent a significant interest or a substantial number of employees in the workplace. How did the labour court recently:
- determine the interaction between a ‘significant interest’ or ‘substantial number of employees in the workplace’?
- what were the factors taken into account by the labour court to determine that the coalition of minority unions represented a significant interest in the workplace, although not amounting to a substantial number of employees, and thus being entitled to organisational rights in terms of s12, s13 and s15 of the LRA?
- What are the factors recently taken into account by the labour court to determine whether or not an employee is contractually entitled to claim commission?
- What were the factors taken into account when the labour court determined whether commission paid is calculated with regard to sold gross profit or actual gross profit?
- With reference to, inter alia, McWilliams v First Consolidated Holdings (Pty) Ltd 1982 (2) SA 1 (A) and Collen v Rietfontein Engineering Works 1948 (1) SA 413 (A), how did the labour court recently, when dealing with the issue as to how commission is to be calculated, consider the fact that the employer did not dispute the employee’s version as to such calculations, during such employee’s employment, but only challenged same when there was a dispute?
- What approach is to be adopted if the original agreement does not spell out in full the requirements to qualify for a commission but same are dealt with in subsequent correspondence between the parties?
- With reference to, inter alia, Zabop (Pty) Ltd v CCMA and Others (2016) 37 ILJ 1882 (LAC) and Emetonjor v Kintetsu World Express SA (Pty) Ltd C736/16 (2018), what are the factors to be considered when determining whether or not an employee is still entitled to commission after the employment relationship comes to an end?
- To what extent is a presiding officer of a disciplinary enquiry entitled to relook and amend or change his original decision?
- To what extent is the presiding officer of a disciplinary enquiry entitled to challenge the decision of an employer not to comply with such presiding officer’s findings and recommendations?
- To what extent is the doctrine of functus officio applicable to a presiding officer of an internal disciplinary enquiry?
