ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Advocate and Editor of the ILJ
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 38 Issue 2, 2017, p. 793 – 806
None
ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Attorney
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 38 Issue 2, 2017, p. 784 – 792
None
ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Professor and Research Fellow, University of KwaZulu Natal; Senior Lecturer, University of KwaZulu Natal; Attorney
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 38 Issue 2, 2017, p. 769 – 784
None
ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Faculty of law, K. U. Leuven
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 38 Issue 2, 2017, p. 740 – 768
None
ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Admitted Attorney of the Gauteng North High Court; Lecturer in Mercantile Law, University of Pretoria
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 38 Issue 1, 2017, p. 63 – 79
A review application in terms of s 145 of the Labour Relations Act is valuable in remedying a defective arbitration award granted in favour of an employee but has proven to be somewhat challenging. Undue delays, generally by employers, in finalising the prosecution of these applications, have been identified as a particular concern and as a result amendments to s 145 reviews were introduced. They provide particularly for the furnishing of security in order to stay the enforcement of an arbitration award. Although the aim is to eradicate the abuse of the proceedings by employer-applicants, who instituted such applications simply to frustrate the enforcement of arbitration awards, the practical application and enforcement thereof seem to be prejudicial to both parties involved rather than address the concerns which initially gave rise to the amendments. A reading of the amended sections and related jurisprudence point to the challenging nature of s 145 reviews and the fact that our courts are grappling with how best to deal with this issue. The failure adequately to address the problem may result in the amendments becoming a hindrance to effective dispute resolution.
ISSN: 2413-9874
Affiliations: Lecturer, Midlands State University, Gweru, Zimbabwe; Lecturer, Midlands State University, Gweru, Zimbabwe
Source: Industrial Law Journal, Volume 38 Issue 1, 2017, p. 43 – 62
The adoption of the 2013 Constitution of Zimbabwe provides an interesting opportunity to explore the potent symbolism and practical significance of constitutional labour rights that, until now, have been conspicuously absent in the Declaration of Rights. The fact that the labour rights framework is a closely contested space characterised by conflicts and tensions suggests that the constitutional entrenchment of labour rights in the 2013 Constitution can only be welcome. There is therefore a strong basis for the contention that the adjudication of labour disputes on the basis of indirect constitutional interpretation and the application of traditional civil and political rights such as freedom of assembly should be abandoned as they have proven unhelpful in the development of labour law jurisprudence in Zimbabwe. This article argues that constitutional entrenchment of labour rights elevates such rights to human rights, and further provides a sound foundation for their broader enjoyment and protection. Accordingly, judicial interpretation of constitutional labour rights, it is proposed, should ensure progressive development of the jurisprudence around these rights, and move away from the previous pedantic approaches to interpretation. The clarion call is that only through such progressive interpretation can the various tensions, conflicts and disputes that necessarily characterise the labour rights system be resolved in the broader interests of society.