The Plight of First Responders Suffering from Mental Disorders: Will an Amended Workers’ Compensation Act Relieve their Predicament?

The Plight of First Responders Suffering from Mental Disorders: Will an Amended Workers’ Compensation Act Relieve their Predicament?

Author Karin Calitz

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Professor Emeritus and Research Fellow, Department of Mercantile Law, Stellenbosch University
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 46 Issue 3, 2025, p. 1523 – 1550

Abstract

First responders are at great risk to contract Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD), because of the nature of their work. This often leads to suicide or homicide-suicide, involving family members.
The process of claiming benefits from the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act 130 of 1993 (COIDA), often exacerbates the PTSD symptoms because the onus of proof that PTSD arose out of and in the course of employment rests on the employee. Claiming compensation often takes years, partly due to the lack of expertise of commissioners and tribunals, leaving employees no other choice but to appeal to the High Court.
Legal comparison indicates that certain provinces in Canada, and some states in the US and Australia, have adopted presumptive legislation which relieves first responders of the onus to prove that PTSD arose out of their employment.
The Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Amendment Act 10 of 2022 (COIDAA), which is not in force yet, for the first time includes PTSD (but no other mental illness) in the definition of an occupational disease. COIDA’s draft Schedule 3 lists PTSD as an occupational disease that will be covered by a presumption but does not limit the presumption to any categories of injured or diseased employees. This means that any employee suffering from PTSD will be covered by the presumption as soon as it is established that the person suffers from PTSD. In light of the fact that the Compensation Fund (CF) experiences serious financial difficulties, the article agrees that rehabilitation and return-to-work measures introduced by the COIDAA are laudable, but at present financially unattainable. More informal, less costly measures, such as online psychoeducation training of first responders, peer groups and families to recognise the symptoms of PTSD and how to deal with those, can nurture resilience of first responders and empower those closest to them to support them. By ensuring a psychosocial safety climate, employers can do much to prevent PTSD. A code of good practice could include these recommendations.
The article further recommends that the presumption should at first only cover first responders as a matter of urgency until the CF becomes financially viable again.

‘Just and Equitable’ Grounds for Review in Section 158(1B) of the LRA

‘Just and Equitable’ Grounds for Review in Section 158(1B) of the LRA

Author Andrea Joy Zitzke

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: BA Law (Pretoria), LLB (Pretoria), LLM (Stellenbosch), LLD candidate (Free State)
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 46 Issue 3, 2025, p. 1550 – 1573

Abstract

When will a court find it ‘just and equitable’ to intervene during incomplete proceedings in terms of s 158(1B) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA)? It is becoming more and more commonplace, contrary to the purpose of the LRA, to bring reviews during incomplete Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) and bargaining council proceedings. It is therefore necessary to clarify when a court will exercise its discretion to review proceedings before their finalisation. Since determining what is ‘just and equitable’ has been a ‘difficult horse to ride’ for the court and litigants alike, it is necessary for principles to be extracted from previous decisions in order to produce concrete rules that will assist with establishing when a court may intervene during incomplete proceedings in terms of s 158(1B) in accordance with legal certainty and stare decisis. In this contribution, the history of case law is traced in an attempt to distil relevant concrete principles that can assist practitioners and courts in this determination.

Unfounded Accusations of Racism as Workplace Discrimination: Solidarity on behalf of K v Western Cape Education Department & others [2024] ZALCCT 59

Unfounded Accusations of Racism as Workplace Discrimination: Solidarity on behalf of K v Western Cape Education Department & others [2024] ZALCCT 59

Author Marius van Staden

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Associate Professor, School of Law, Wits University
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 46 Issue 3, 2025, p. 1573 – 1589

Abstract

This case note examines a Labour Court judgment concerning unfounded accusations of racism in the workplace, focusing on the intersection between misconduct and discrimination. The case raises important questions about the interpretation of the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 and employer liability for discriminatory conduct. Through analysis of the court’s reasoning, this note identifies three significant problematic elements: the failure to recognise unfounded accusations of racism as inherently discriminatory, an overly technical approach to employer liability under s 60, and a questionable treatment of the severity threshold for harassment. Drawing on established jurisprudence, the analysis demonstrates how the judgment diverges from existing legal principles regarding workplace discrimination. The note argues that the court’s approach potentially undermines the protective purpose of anti-discrimination legislation and may set concerning precedents for future cases involving unfounded allegations of racism in workplace disputes. It concludes that a more purposive interpretation of anti-discrimination provisions is necessary to balance addressing genuine racial discrimination effectively and preventing the weaponisation of racial allegations.

Parental Leave for All: Van Wyk & others v Minister of Employment & Labour (Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria & others as Amici Curiae) (2024) 45 ILJ 194 (GJ)

Parental Leave for All: Van Wyk & others v Minister of Employment & Labour (Centre for Human Rights, University of Pretoria & others as Amici Curiae) (2024) 45 ILJ 194 (GJ)

Author Asheelia Behari

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer, Department of Public Management, Law & Economics, Durban University of Technology; LLB LLM PhD (UKZN)
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 46 Issue 3, 2025, p. 1589 – 1606

Abstract

This case note examines the court decision to declare the various provisions of leave from work for the purpose of caregiving in the Basic Conditions of Employment Act unconstitutional on the basis of a violation of the rights to equality and dignity because it differentiates between categories of parents. The resulting order made by the High Court was to award four months of parental leave to be shared between the mother and father of a newborn baby. The case note discusses the implications of this decision in light of the awaiting Constitutional Court judgment, which will make a final determination as to the constitutionality of maternity leave.

The structure of parking in sectional titles schemes

ARTIKEL

The structure of parking in sectional titles schemes

Author: CG Van der Merwe

ISSN: 1996-2207
Affiliations: Research Fellow, Department of Private Law, University of Stellenbosch, Emeritus Professor in Civil Law, University of Aberdeen and the Law Faculty, University of Stellenbosch
Source: Tydskrif vir die Suid-Afrikaanse Reg, Issue 3, 2025, p. 439-453
https://doi.org/10.47348/TSAR/2025/i3a1

Abstract

Parkering in deelskemas is dikwels ’n omstrede, netelige en verwarrende saak. Die aanhou van twee of meer motors en dikwels groter voertuie, veroorsaak dat huidige deeltitelskemas nie voldoende ruimte het om die aanvraag na parkeerplekke te bevredig nie. Dit veroorsaak chaos en dwing trustees om informele parkeerreëlings te tref sonder inagneming van toepaslike wetgewing en die ooreenstemmende regulasies.
Parkeerplekke en gemeenskaplike motorhuise kan slegs op nege maniere wettig gestruktureer word. Parkering vir motors op parkeerstaanplekke of in motorhuise kan as gedeeltes van dele, individuele dele of as geregistreerde uitsluitlike gebruiksgebiede gestruktureer word deur dieselfde nommer, individuele nommers of unieke nommers soos P1 en P2 op die deelplan aan te toon. Verder kan dit gestruktureer word as geverfde parkeerplekke op die gemeenskaplike eiendom waar die stelreël eerste kom, eerste maal geld, of as uitsluitlike gebruiksgebiede wat op gedragsreëls gebaseer is. Nog verder kan staanplekke vir voertuie ingevolge ’n spesiale besluit of ingevolge ’n eenparige besluit én toewysing deur die eienaars as huurkontrakte van tot tien jaar of langtermynhuurkontrakte van meer as tien jaar gestruktureer word. Nogeens kan parkering gestruktureer word as grondserwitute ten gunste van buureienaars as vergoeding vir die verslapping van soneringsvereistes. Ten slotte kan parkering deur skriftelike trusteegoedkeuring, gewoonlik in noodgevalle, ingevolge skemagedragsreëls gestruktureer word as tydelike parkering.
Voorbeelde van meer omvattende regulering van parkering in die skemagedragsreëls is die vasklamping en wegsleep van voertuie wat onwettiglik geparkeer is en die verbod op die drup van olie op ’n parkeerplek of die aftakeling van voertuie in ’n motorhuis. Verder reguleer verskeie gedragsreëls die spoedgrens, en die hinderlike gebruik van toeters en die speel van harde musiek in staande voertuie op die perseel wat ’n oorlas daarstel. Ten slotte bepaal die gedragsreëls dat geen persoon in enige voertuig, of in ’n motorhuis of parkeerplek mag woon of slaap nie of dat ’n motorhuis as ’n slaapplek vir huispersoneel gebruik mag word nie.
Behalwe Kaapstad se Munisipale Beplanningsverordening van 2015 wat die minimum aantal besoekerparkeerplekke in deeltitelskemas bepaal, bepaal slegs een skemagedragsreël dat ’n eienaar of okkupeerder behalwe in ’n noodgeval, geen besoeker mag toelaat om ’n ander parkeerplek as ’n besoekerparkeerplek vir ’n bepaalde tyd te gebruik nie, sonder om besoekerparkeerplekke verder te reguleer.
Daarom word besoekerparkeerplekke dikwels meer omvattend in die skemagedragreëls vervat. Voorbeelde is dat die aangewese besoekerparkeerplekke uitsluitlik vir die korttermyn gebruik van bona fide besoekers is en dat eienaars of inwoners nie daarop mag parkeer of onpadwaardige voertuie daar mag berg nie; dat besoekerparkeerplekke nie vir langer as vier uur sonder vooraf bespreking beset mag word nie en dat identiteitskyfplakkers op alle besoekervoertuie aangebring moet word.
Laastens, moet parkeerplekke slegs vir parkeerdoeleindes gebruik word en nie vir enige ander doeleindes nie. Indien dit gebeur, mag die regspersoon die CSOS (ombud ingevolge Wet 9 van 2011) nader vir die verwydering van enigiets wat onregmatig op die parkeerplek geplaas is. Hierdie beginsel word verder uitgebrei in bykomstige skemagedragsreëls wat onder andere kan bepaal dat motorhuise primêr vir parkering gebruik moet word en nie vir residensiële doeleindes of as stoorruimte nie en dat geen sleepwaens, karavane of bote op die toegewese besoekerparkeerplekke of enige ander deel van die gemeenskaplike eiendom geparkeer of gestoor mag word nie.
My slotsom is dat kopers van eenhede in ’n deeltitelskema eerstens moet verseker dat die parkeerrregte wat hulle verkry fisies identifiseerbaar is en duidelik aangedui word in die koopooreenkoms. Daarvoor moet die deelplan, die geregistreerde skemareëls of die betrokke notariële sessie van die parkeerregte in die eienaar se naam noukeurig geraadpleeg word. Tweedens is die inhoud van addisionele gedragsreëls nou verbonde aan die karakter en fisiese eienskappe van die spesifieke skema.
In die praktyk word motorafdakke en veral motorhuise in die vorm van ’n tussenvloer aan die agterkant van die motorhuis dikwels gebruik om tuingereedskap en oortollige besittings te stoor. Ek stel voor dat hierdie populêre gebruik gelegitimeer word in die vorm van geregistreerde motorhuis cum bergings-uitsluitlike gebruikareas.