Labour law, the queen bee syndrome and workplace bullying: A contribution to the shattering of at least one glass ceiling for female employees

by | Oct 6, 2019 | ILJ, ILJ V37 I2

Labour law, the queen bee syndrome and workplace bullying: A contribution to the shattering of at least one glass ceiling for female employees

Authors Denine Smit

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: B IUR (Free State), LLB (Free State), Diploma in Labour Law (cum laude), LLM (cum laude) (Free State), LLD (Free State)
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 2, 2016, p. 779 – 803

Abstract

Along with the rise of women in the workplace has come the rise of the workplace ‘queen bee’ — a female in a senior or authoritative position in a predominantly male workplace who would do everything in her power to keep other females from advancing through the ranks. This article argues that in order to ensure that females in the workplace enjoy the same rights as their male colleagues, it is imperative for all stakeholders to see the queen bee syndrome for what it is — yet another form of workplace bullying. Treating it as such could help shatter at least one of the glass ceilings currently restricting women’s advancement at work. Through a comparison with the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, amongst others, the legal position on this matter in South Africa is assessed. It is concluded that even though there are various potential legal avenues in South Africa through which to address the queen bee syndrome as a form of bullying, there is no single deadly accurate one. For this reason, until government and stakeholders finally develop new, purpose-made legislation or a code to deal with the matter, soft-law approaches may deliver potential solutions. These include the drafting of internal zero-tolerance workplace policies, underpinned by awareness campaigns, employee education and training in problem recognition, coaching and mediation tools, as well as specially created hotlines to report queen bee behaviour.

Minority trade unions and the amendments to the LRA: Reflections on thresholds, democracy and ILO conventions

by | Oct 6, 2019 | ILJ, ILJ V37 I2

Minority trade unions and the amendments to the LRA: Reflections on thresholds, democracy and ILO conventions

Authors Paul Benjamin

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Temogo Geoffrey Esitang, Stefan van Eck
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 2, 2016, p. 763 – 778

Abstract

A dominant feature of the LRA collective bargaining framework is that it strongly favours majority trade unions. The proverbial ‘big kids on the block’ can prevent newcomer trade unions from getting a ‘foot in the door’. Section 18 of the LRA permits employers and majority trade unions to conclude collective agreements establishing a threshold of representativeness required in respect of organisational rights. The Labour Relations Amendment Act of 2014 seeks to ameliorate the negative effect of s 18 agreements in two key respects. In the first instance, a trade union may apply for organisational rights despite the existence of a s 18 agreement. Secondly, a trade union not representing a majority of workers at a workplace may apply for all of the organisational rights as long as there is no other trade union at the workplace which holds majority status. This article questions whether, after the amendments, the South African framework of labour democracy: is aligned to the democratic model envisaged by the Constitution; complies with the fundamental labour rights contained in the Constitution; and adheres to ILO conventions. The contribution finds the amendments wanting in so far as they do not do enough to establish the type of multiparty democracy which the Constitution envisages. Furthermore, the limitations which the LRA places on minority trade unions are disproportional in as far as they limit the constitutional and ILO norms pertaining to the freedom of association and the right to organise.

Case Note: Derivative misconduct and an employee’s duty of good faith: Western Platinum Refinery Ltd v Hlebela & others (2015) 36 ILJ 2280 (LAC)

by | Oct 6, 2019 | ILJ, ILJ V37 I1

Case Note: Derivative misconduct and an employee’s duty of good faith: Western Platinum Refinery Ltd v Hlebela & others (2015) 36 ILJ 2280 (LAC)

Authors Kershwyn Bassuday

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer, Commercial Law Department, University of Cape Town
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 4, 2016, p. 86 – 91

Abstract

None

Case Note: Insufficient service notice for conciliation before litigation: An analysis of National Union of Metalworkers of SA v Intervalve (Pty) Ltd & others (2015) 36 ILJ 363 (CC)

by | Oct 6, 2019 | ILJ, ILJ V37 I1

Case Note: Insufficient service notice for conciliation before litigation: An analysis of National Union of Metalworkers of SA v Intervalve (Pty) Ltd & others (2015) 36 ILJ 363 (CC)

Authors Simphiwe Phungula

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer, School of Law, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 4, 2016, p. 75 – 86

Abstract

None

Case Note: Who needs to notify the employer of impending strike action? A discussion of SA Transport & Allied Workers Union & others v Moloto & another 2012 (6) SA 249 (CC); (2012) 33 ILJ 2549 (CC)

by | Oct 6, 2019 | ILJ, ILJ V37 I1

Case Note: Who needs to notify the employer of impending strike action? A discussion of SA Transport & Allied Workers Union & others v Moloto & another 2012 (6) SA 249 (CC); (2012) 33 ILJ 2549 (CC)

Authors Brenda Grant, Simphiwe Phungula, Nicola Whitear-Nel

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Research Fellow, University of KwaZulu-Natal; Lecturer, University of KwaZulu-Natal; Senior Lecturer, University of KwaZulu-Natal
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 4, 2016, p. 62 – 74

Abstract

None

Should s 197 of the LRA be amended to automatically protect employees when labour intensive services are outsourced or when a new service provider is appointed?

by | Oct 6, 2019 | ILJ, ILJ V37 I1

Should s 197 of the LRA be amended to automatically protect employees when labour intensive services are outsourced or when a new service provider is appointed?

Authors Ian Davis

ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: None
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 37 Issue 4, 2016, p. 45 – 61

Abstract

It is common practice for private or public employers to enter into arrangements with service providers in terms of which the employer outsources, to the service provider, certain labour intensive services, such as catering, cleaning, gardening or security. These services may previously have been performed by employees of the outsourcing organisation, or they may have been contracted out to another service provider and the outsourcing organisation is now seeking to change providers or to bring the services back in-house. Although the intention of s 197 of the LRA is to provide protection to employees when a business is transferred as a going concern, the extent to which the definitional elements of s 197 apply when labour intensive services are outsourced, particularly for a second time, or are insourced, is uncertain. Accordingly, labour intensive service workers may be exposed to uncertainty and potential abuse. This article proposes, in light of developments in the UK, including the provisions in the Transfer of Undertakings (Protection of Employment Regulations) of 2006, amending s 197 to apply automatically in circumstances in which labour intensive services are outsourced.