INDUSTRY NEWS
Extension of a Bargaining Council Agreement
is a key ingredient in ensuring labour market peace and stability
A
lot has recently been written about the extension of collective agreements and particularly those covering terms and condition of employment in the metals industry.
Labour law is derived from our Constitution, which is dedicated to the achievement of social justice. Fundamental to this, as Marikana reminded us, is the reduction of inequality.
A starting point in responding to these criticisms is to acknowledge that the extension of a bargaining council’s collective agreement is not unconstitutional. This view was upheld by Judge John Murphy on behalf of a full bench of the North Gauteng (Pretoria) High Court in the 2016 Free Market Foundation (FMF) v Minister of Labour & Others Judgment.
Collective bargaining is a cornerstone of the system and the reduction of disproportionate income differentials is one of its purposes. Add to this the right to strike, which is constitutionally entrenched for the very purpose of allowing workers to exercise economic pressure – in other words, forcing employers to pay higher wages than they would otherwise have done – and it becomes less obvious why collective bargaining aimed at achieving the same outcomes should be regarded as being reprehensible.
The argument that collective agreements adversely affect non-party employers by requiring them to pay higher wages than they would otherwise have done may well be correct, but the question is whether our critics can take the same narrow view.
10
SEIFSA NEWS
|
The point here is that section 32 of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) expressly empowers – indeed, requires – bargaining councils and the Minister of
NOVEMBER / DECEMBER 2021
