Home Tags Labour Appeal Court (LAC)
Tag: Labour Appeal Court (LAC)
In Legal Aid SA v Jansen (LAC), the employer appealed against the Labour Court’s decision whereby it held that the dismissal of the employee was automatically unfair in terms of section 187(1)(f) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) and that he had been unfairly discriminated against in terms of section 6 of the Employment Equity Act, on the basis of him suffering from depression.
A common occurrence in the employment relationship is for an employee to resign in the face of disciplinary action by an employer, and South African courts have previously accepted that as long as an employee resigns with immediate effect, the employer has no power to compel the former employer to go through any disciplinary process.
An employer cannot unilaterally change an employee’s retirement age. Should the employer do so and terminate the employee’s employment, the dismissal may constitute an automatically unfair dismissal and amount to unfair discrimination.
An employer may dismiss an employee if he or she has lodged a grievance against another employee which is false. Dismissing an employee for doing so does not amount to an automatically unfair dismissal because the lodging of a grievance is not the same as exercising a right conferred by law.
The Constitutional Court delivered judgement in the case of Association of Mine Workers and Construction Union and Others v Royal Bafokeng Platinum Mine Limited and Others. In this matter, the constitutionality of Section 189(1) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) was debated.
It is trite law that certain prescribed periods of notice become applicable upon termination of any employment relationship between an employer and an employee. These periods are governed by statute and the individual employment contract. However, notwithstanding this, there is uncertainty in our labour law about the position where an employee resigns with immediate effect in the face of a pending disciplinary enquiry.
Employees engaged in strike action who carry dangerous weapons during a strike run the risk of dismissal. The act of carrying weapons exposes others to the risk of injury and also serves to threaten and intimidate others. This kind of conduct is not protected by the right to strike.
South African industrial action has become synonymous with violent, unlawful conduct, as was discussed in the recent case of Association of Mineworkers & Construction Union & Others v KPMM Road & Earthworks (JA 147/2017)  ZALAC 28 (31 October 2018).
The issue arose as to whether the dismissal of an employee who refused to work contractually agreed upon days due to the tenets of her religious convictions was automatically unfair?
Do employees automatically transfer from an old service provider to a new service provider when the client replaces the one with the other? The Labour Appeal Court (LAC) recently engaged low gear to provide proper traction on the automatic transfer of employees.