The Future of Collective Bargaining between Labour and the Employer after the Case of Public Servants Association v Minister of Public Service [2021] 3 BLLR 255 (LAC)

This case note seeks to determine the future of collective bargaining after the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) judgment in Public Servants Association v Minister of Public Service [2021] 3 BLLR 255 (LAC). In arriving at a conclusion, context is provided. As part of the context it is shown that the right to engage in collective bargaining is not synonymous with the legal right to collective bargaining. This is based on the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, case law and international law. Despite this, it is demonstrated that it can be argued that collective bargaining can be accepted as a recognised practice (a right) when one uses the test of what is a custom. It is further revealed that the main parties in public sector collective bargaining are the Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council (PSCBC), the Department of Public Service and Administration, and trade unions. The last two ordinarily have competing interests and the PSCBC is the platform where they resolve their differences and enter into collective agreements. In 2018 a three-year wage agreement was reached for public servants, which the employer failed to implement in its last year. This led to the PSCBC intervening in the matter, but before it could reach fruition the matter was scheduled to be heard by the court. The last leg of the agreement was declared to be invalid and unenforceable on the basis that it was unaffordable and did not comply with the legal prescripts. This led to a period of uncertainty (2022-2023). This period saw government employees receiving 0% salary increases, failed wage negotiations, the unilateral imposition of a wage increase by the employer, a disruptive strike, and shorter wage agreements to address the shortcoming identified by the LAC in PSA v DPSA. The context provided yields the answer (the conclusion) that there is still room for collective bargaining, but that it will be filled with turbulence.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad
Published
2024-08-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.17159/1727-3781/2024/v27i0a15350
Citations
1
Primary Topic
Legal Issues in South Africa
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
4.07
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

The Future of Collective Bargaining between Labour and the Employer after the Case of Public Servants Association v Minister of Public Service [2021] 3 BLLR 255 (LAC)

Matthews Eddie Nkuna-Mavutane, Clarence Itumeleng Tshoose, Vukile Ezrom Sibiya, Reuben Letseku et al.
1 citations
Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese Regsblad
Legal Issues in South Africa
4.07
article

The Future of Collective Bargaining between Labour and the Employer after the Case of Public Servants Association v Minister of Public Service [2021] 3 BLLR 255 (LAC)

Matthews Eddie Nkuna-Mavutane, Clarence Itumeleng Tshoose, Vukile Ezrom Sibiya, Reuben Letseku, Brigitte Barends
article en
1 citations

Abstract

This case note seeks to determine the future of collective bargaining after the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) judgment in Public Servants Association v Minister of Public Service [2021] 3 BLLR 255 (LAC). In arriving at a conclusion, context is provided. As part of the context it is shown that the right to engage in collective bargaining is not synonymous with the legal right to collective bargaining. This is based on the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, case law and international law. Despite this, it is demonstrated that it can be argued that collective bargaining can be accepted as a recognised practice (a right) when one uses the test of what is a custom. It is further revealed that the main parties in public sector collective bargaining are the Public Service Coordinating Bargaining Council (PSCBC), the Department of Public Service and Administration, and trade unions. The last two ordinarily have competing interests and the PSCBC is the platform where they resolve their differences and enter into collective agreements. In 2018 a three-year wage agreement was reached for public servants, which the employer failed to implement in its last year. This led to the PSCBC intervening in the matter, but before it could reach fruition the matter was scheduled to be heard by the court. The last leg of the agreement was declared to be invalid and unenforceable on the basis that it was unaffordable and did not comply with the legal prescripts. This led to a period of uncertainty (2022-2023). This period saw government employees receiving 0% salary increases, failed wage negotiations, the unilateral imposition of a wage increase by the employer, a disruptive strike, and shorter wage agreements to address the shortcoming identified by the LAC in PSA v DPSA. The context provided yields the answer (the conclusion) that there is still room for collective bargaining, but that it will be filled with turbulence.

Potchefstroom Electronic Law Journal/Potchefstroomse Elektroniese RegsbladVol. 27
Stellenbosch University (ZA), University of Limpopo (ZA)
Decent work and economic growth
Openalex Percentile: Top 9%
Legal Issues in South Africa
4.07
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.