The rule of law, fairness and labour law

The rule of law, fairness and labour law

Authors Johan Froneman

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Justice of the Constitutional Court
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 36 Issue 2, 2015, p. 823 – 836

Abstract

The manner in which courts have dealt with fairness in labour law is not the only obstacle to achieving the goals of the rule of law. This article presents a different perspective on what the rule of law means under the Constitution, particularly in relation to the aims of transformation. An examination of the formal and substantive conceptions of the rule of law, as well as the concepts of economic efficiency and privilege, shows that historically privileged white people must confront the reality of their past privilege and historically disadvantaged black people must acknowledge the responsibility placed on them by the Constitution. Also, it is not impossible to balance a proper understanding of the substantive demands of the rule of law with a realistic and pragmatic understanding of economic efficiency. It concludes that in the workplace we are not yet squarely confronting the hard questions that the demands of constitutional transformation ask of us. Employers and workers need to understand and trust each other’s perspective in order for there to be lasting labour stability and peace. If labour lawyers work towards this, we may be able to establish a reasonable degree of fairness and stability in our labour relations.

Case Note: Protecting the unwed woman against automatically unfair dismissals for reasons relating to pregnancy: A discussion of Memela & another v Ekhamanzi Springs (Pty) Ltd (2012) 33 ILJ 2911 (LC)

Case Note: Protecting the unwed woman against automatically unfair dismissals for reasons relating to pregnancy: A discussion of Memela & another v Ekhamanzi Springs (Pty) Ltd (2012) 33 ILJ 2911 (LC)

Authors Nicola Whitear-Nel, Brenda Grant, Asheelia Behari

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Senior lecturer, University of KwaZulu-Natal; Professor, Grant research fellow, University of KwaZulu-Natal; PhD candidate, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 36 Issue 1, 2015, p. 106 – 118

Abstract

None

Case Note: Between a rock and a hard place – Concor Projects (Pty) Ltd t/a Concor Opencast Mining v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration & others

Case Note: Between a rock and a hard place – Concor Projects (Pty) Ltd t/a Concor Opencast Mining v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation & Arbitration & others

Authors Neil Coetzer

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Senior Associate, Cowan-Harper Attorneys
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 36 Issue 1, 2015, p. 94 – 106

Abstract

None

Case Note: Wrongful suspension as a ground for delictual damages – Weitz v Goodyear SA (Pty) Ltd & others (2014) 35 ILJ 441 (ECP)

Case Note: Wrongful suspension as a ground for delictual damages – Weitz v Goodyear SA (Pty) Ltd & others (2014) 35 ILJ 441 (ECP)

Authors Andre Mukheibir, Thanduxolo Qotoyi

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Associate Professor in Law, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University; Lecturer in Law, Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 36 Issue 1, 2015, p. 70 – 79

Abstract

None

Towards unity – reconciling fairness and rationality in affirmative action disputes

Towards unity – reconciling fairness and rationality in affirmative action disputes

Authors Emma Fergus

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer, Commercial Law Department, Institute of Development and Labour Law, University of Cape Town
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 36 Issue 1, 2015, p. 40 – 69

Abstract

This article considers the standard applicable in assessing employers’ affirmative action (AA) measures in unfair discrimination disputes. It necessarily begins with an overview of the Constitutional Court’s decision in SA Police Service v Solidarity obo Barnard handed down in September 2014. As the judges did not agree on the appropriate standard of scrutiny for AA, however, that standard remains uncertain. Recent amendments to the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998 will likely compound this uncertainty. In an attempt at clarifying the position, this article considers Barnard with reference to both the constitutional provisions governing restitutive measures and those provided for in the EEA. From these, an argument is made that — provided it is suitably applied — the test set out by the Constitutional Court in Minister of Finance & another v Van Heerden for assessing restitutive measures in general is well suited to the employment context. Should that test be applied to workplace AA going forward, it will ensure compliance with both relevant constitutional and statutory provisions and international law.