Note: Private Acts in Public Spaces: The Impact of Social Media on the Workplace and the Business of the Employer

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I4

Note: Private Acts in Public Spaces: The Impact of Social Media on the Workplace and the Business of the Employer

Author Simphiwe Phungula

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Senior Lecturer, Department of Commercial Law, University of Cape Town
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 4, 2022, p. 2237 – 2250

Abstract

Social media in the workplace directly affects the employer-employee relationship. While employees have rights to privacy and freedom of expression, their social media misconduct both on and off duty has been sanctioned by dismissal or suspension, especially where the conduct impacts adversely on an employer’s business. Such misconduct may extend to former employees and independent contractors, and includes third-party posts. Public pressure via social media commentary poses a particular challenge for employers dealing with social media misconduct. This note critically analyses social media pressure, and the factors which an employer should consider in order to ensure a fair outcome when sanctioning an employee or others closely associated with its business for such misconduct.

Labour Dispute Resolution: Jurisdictional Potholes, Pitfalls and Dongas: Reflecting on Recent Jurisprudence

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I3

Labour Dispute Resolution: Jurisdictional Potholes, Pitfalls and Dongas: Reflecting on Recent Jurisprudence

Authors Rochelle le Roux & Peter le Roux

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Professor, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town; Executive Consultant at ENSafrica
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 3, 2022, p. 1443 – 1472

Abstract

Jurisdiction refers to the ‘power’ or competence of a court (or other dispute resolution fora) to hear and determine a matter. In the case of labour dispute resolution, the observance of prior procedures, the causes of action pleaded, the characterisation of (and reasons for) disputes, the observance of time periods, the completion of formalities, and the existence of certain pre-determined events or conditions, might all be relevant when determining jurisdiction. While it has been held that unlawful dismissals (as opposed to unfair dismissals) cannot be pursued under the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA), the binary divide between unlawfulness and unfairness continues to be challenged at labour dispute resolution fora. With the help of eleven narratives, each focusing on a particular jurisdictional issue and prefaced by a key question and/or statement, this article considers the jurisprudence of the last five years or so that has either added to, or settled, some of these jurisdictional challenges in labour dispute resolution. Among others, the article also addresses the fallacy that the Labour Court has jurisdiction over all disputes that arise in the context of an employment relationship and considers the extent to which disputes based on unlawfulness can be pursued in terms of the LRA.

Pregnancy and Marital Status Discrimination

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I3

Pregnancy and Marital Status Discrimination

Authors Marius van Staden & Amanda Boniface

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Associate Professor, Department of Public Law, University of Johannesburg; Associate Professor, Department of Private Law, University of Johannesburg
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 3, 2022, p. 1473 – 1498

Abstract

Despite constitutional and legislative protections against unfair pregnancy and marital discrimination, it is argued that in practice these grounds have not yet developed into fully-fledged grounds of discrimination. Rather, they are often determined with reference to factors such as sex and gender. This phenomenon continues to perpetuate sex and gender stereotypes. With recourse to comparative examples, the article critically considers the legal mechanisms that South Africa has implemented to address these forms of discrimination. It is argued that aspects of the legal provisions enacted to prohibit the above forms of discrimination have the consequence of maintaining sex and gender stereotypes, fostering discrimination against (mainly) women in the workplace, men at home, and homosexual and transgender people’s parenting ambitions. The article makes several recommendations for law reform that move beyond a legislative framework centred around sex and gender in order to protect such persons from discrimination based on pregnancy and marital status. It argues that pregnant women should be granted more freedom to plan and structure their maternity leave and that they should be able to transfer a portion of their maternity leave to their partners. Parental, adoption and surrogacy leave should be extended, and pregnancy and marital status discrimination protection should be extended to men, homosexual partners and transgender persons. Legal fragmentation and the exclusion of informal and atypical workers from current protection should also be addressed.

The Seychelles Employment Tribunal and its Application and Interpretation of the Grievance Procedure Provisions under the Employment Act:

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I3

The Seychelles Employment Tribunal and its Application and Interpretation of the Grievance Procedure Provisions under the Employment Act

Author Jamil Ddamulira Mujuzi

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Professor, Faculty of Law, University of the Western Cape
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 3, 2022, p. 1499 – 1521

Abstract

In 2008 the Seychelles Employment Act of 1995 was amended by the Employment (Amendment) Act (2008), inter alia, to establish the Employment Tribunal. Between 3 December 2008 and 1 December 2021, the tribunal received 2,478 civil cases and 172 criminal cases. The author examined 648 files for the years from 2012-2021 to assess how the tribunal has applied or interpreted the Employment Act to deal with grievances between workers and employers and focuses primarily on dismissal and disciplinary issues short of dismissal. The article highlights certain shortcomings in the procedures and practice of the tribunal, and suggests amendments for their resolution. Inter alia, it argues that where one of the parties fails to appear before a competent officer for mediation, the officer should not issue a certificate to the effect that mediation was unsuccessful. Furthermore, the tribunal’s approach of treating criminal matters as civil ones could be encouraging some employers to terminate contracts of employment unjustifiably; and, in addition, the tribunal should be clear on who has the burden to prove termination of employment in cases where the termination is contentious. Since many respondents refuse or fail to appear before a competent officer for mediation and there is case law from the Supreme Court suggesting that mediation is not mandatory, the Act may have to be amended to make mediation mandatory before a complaint is taken to the tribunal.

Note: A Much Needed Re-affirmation of a Settled Principle of Law

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I3

Note: A Much Needed Re-affirmation of a Settled Principle of Law

Author Fanelesibonge Mabaso

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: LLB (University of KwaZulu-Natal), LLM (University of KwaZulu-Natal), PhD Candidate (University of KwaZulu-Natal)
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 3, 2022, p. 1522 – 1530

Abstract

This case note concerns the Constitutional Court’s reaffirmation of the principles relating to cost orders in labour law. The matter relates to a costs order that had been awarded by the Labour Court without it furnishing reasons for imposing such order. The Constitutional Court confirmed that the principle that costs orders should not follow the winner was rooted in the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 and the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996. The note argues that the apex court could have gone a step further in emphasising how issues relating to poor workers, such as those of race and class, should be taken into account in the awarding of such orders.

Protecting Platform Workers: Options and Challenges

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I2

Protecting Platform Workers: Options and Challenges

Authors Darcy du Toit & Kelle Howson

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Centre for Transformative Regulation of Work, University of the Western Cape, Bellville, South Africa; Oxford Internet Institute, University of Oxford, United Kingdom
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 2, 2022, p. 711 – 725

Abstract

The use of digital platforms as a means of organising work and creating new work opportunities (‘platform work’) is on the increase in developing as well as developed countries. The article starts from three widely-accepted premises: (1) platform work typically falls beyond the scope of labour law because labour rights are generally limited to ‘employees’ whereas platforms typically classify their workers as ‘independent contractors’; (2) in terms of international law, platforms workers enjoy the same basic rights as all other workers; and (3) national legal regulation needs to be adapted in order to ensure protection of platform workers’ rights. In this context the article examines the obstacles to regulatory change and considers the use of rating systems as a means of exerting reputational pressure on platforms to acknowledge workers’ rights and implement fair working practices, using the Fairwork project and its interventions across four continents as an exemplar. It then turns to the need for legalregulation of platform work as a means of bringing about fair working practices where voluntary compliance fails. In particular, it considers broader definitions of ‘worker’ to identify all those deserving of legal protection in addition to ‘employees’, as well as the forms in which labour rights can meaningfully be extended to workers operating outside an employer’s workplace and managed via digital applications.

Facilitating Decent Work: The Case of Domestic Workers in Nigeria

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I2

Facilitating Decent Work: The Case of Domestic Workers in Nigeria

Author Abigail Osiki

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer, Department of Mercantile and Labour Law, University of the Western Cape; PhD (University of the Western Cape)
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 2, 2022, p. 726 – 750

Abstract

A decade after the first international standard regulating domestic work was introduced decent work remains a challenge for domestic workers in Nigeria. Within the framework of ILO’s Convention on Domestic Workers 189 of 2011, this article explores the extent to which domestic workers in Nigeria benefit from legal protection. The article argues that although parts of Nigerian labour law are relevant to domestic workers, there is need for the development of regulation which gives full effect to the provisions of the convention. The country’s de facto exclusion of domestic workers from the national minimum wage and social protection laws as well as regulatory gaps in dealing with safety in the workplace remains problematic for domestic workers. Against this background, this article suggests the development of a regulatory model which would facilitate the achievement of decent work Nigerian domestic workers.

Unfair Discrimination on the Ground of Family Responsibility

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I2

Unfair Discrimination on the Ground of Family Responsibility

Author Wilhelmina Germishuys-Burchell

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Senior Lecturer, University of South Africa; BCOM LLB (UP), LLM (UNISA)
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 2, 2022, p. 751 – 778

Abstract

At a time when dual-earner households are the norm, South African workplaces continue to be structured around the idea of family as the nuclear family and the gendered and obsolete assumption that workers come without family responsibilities. Despite the clear duty that labour legislation, including recent amendments, places on employers to accommodate employees’ efforts to balance work with family responsibilities, the failure to do so remains a prevalent form of unfair discrimination in South African workplaces today. The potential of family responsibility as a discriminatory ground remains largely unutilised. The article seeks to investigate what seems to be a reluctance by employees to interrogate family-hostile working conditions. It also considers issues relating to family responsibility discrimination and its intersection with other discriminatory grounds. In addition, the article also briefly considers international and foreign comparative developments that may provide some valuable insights into potential issues associated with family responsibility jurisprudence of relevance for South Africa.

Case Note: The Hybrid Contract of Employment: A Tale of (Mostly) Unreported Judgments

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I2

Case Note: The Hybrid Contract of Employment: A Tale of (Mostly) Unreported Judgments

Author Rochelle le Roux

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Professor, Department of Commercial Law, University of Cape Town
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 2, 2022, p. 779 – 786

Abstract

In Buthelezi v Municipal Demarcation Board the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) held that it is per se substantively unfair to retrench an employee who is employed on a truly fixed-term contract. This note seeks to establish whether the same applies in the case of the termination of a hybrid contract of employment (ie a fixed-term contract of employment that provides for termination on notice during the term of the contract).

Some Issues in Relation to the Incidence of Common Law Fiduciary Accountability in Relationships of Employment

by | May 25, 2023 | ILJ, ILJ V43 I1

Some Issues in Relation to the Incidence of Common Law Fiduciary Accountability in Relationships of Employment

Author Kathy Idensohn

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Department of Commercial Law, Faculty of Law, University of Cape Town
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 43 Issue 1, 2022, p. 1 – 16

Abstract

This article considers three inter-connected issues relating to the incidence of common law fiduciary duties in relationships of employment: (1) whether employment generally ought to be recognised as a class of ‘fiduciary relationship’; (2) whether all employees owe fiduciary duties to their employers; and (3) the basis on and circumstances in which employees are bound by such duties. It argues that there is little purpose in approaching the analysis of the existence of fiduciary accountability in employment on a generalised class basis; that such accountability is in all cases fact-based and dependent upon the circumstances of the case; that employment is not an inherently fiduciary relationship; that not all employees owe fiduciary duties to their employers; and that they are only bound by such duties where there is justified reliance on the part of the employer on the undivided loyalty of that employee. It then considers some of the factors emphasised by the courts as relevant for the purposes of determining whether fiduciary duties attach to an employee.