Essential Services Committee designates certain port services as essential services

While employees are entitled to postponements in a disciplinary hearing if they demonstrate good cause, there is a limit to how long an employee-driven delay can be justified. A recent decision of the Labour Court has raised the question of whether an employer may implement suspension without pay in the face of dilatory tactics occasioned by the employee.

On 30 August 2024, the Magistrates’ Court handed down judgment in Raborife Kedibone Pauline v Moeketsi MC and Another (Case No.: LP/TBZ/RC/21/2024). The judgment concerned an exception raised by the South African Democratic Teachers’ Union (SADTU), the second defendant in the matter, relating to whether a trade union can be held vicariously liable for the actions of a shop steward.

On 8 October 2024, the Labour Court handed down judgment in ArcelorMittal South Africa Ltd v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa. The applicant, ArcelorMittal, sought to review and set aside an essential services designation that its blast furnaces and coke batteries do not constitute an essential service. The issue concerned the meaning of the phrase “the whole or any part of the population” as it is stated in the definition of Essential Service in the LRA.