Publications
Partners
Durban - Labour Minister Mildred Oliphant will not challenge the KwaZulu-Natal High Court ruling which stopped her from extending a bargaining council agreement to textile manufacturers and employees not represented by the council.
Oliphant had accepted the judgment of the court issued on Wednesday March 13, and had enjoined the department of labour to abide by it, her spokesperson Musa Zondi said in a statement issued on Friday.
He said that while the agreement had been set aside by the court, a later clothing sector bargaining council agreement, which was extended by the minister in September to members who were not part of the council, was still in force.
"This agreement has not been set aside. It would in any event constitute an unfair labour practice if any employer were to unilaterally change an employee's conditions of employment," he said.
This later agreement remained in force until August 2015.
A group of five Taiwanese-owned factories and the United Clothing and Textile Association had asked the Pietermaritzburg High Court to set aside the minimum wages set by the bargaining council.
Judge Piet Koen ruled that factories which were not members of the council could hold separate talks about pay levels with their workers. He found that less than half of employees in the clothing industry were represented on the National Bargaining Council.
Zondi said: "The judgments stem from a misalignment between two sections of the Labour Relations Act which is being corrected through the amendments to the Labour Relations Act."
He said that certificates of representivity issued in terms of section 49 of the act would not be used when considering extensions of collective agreements.
Oliphant and the labour department still supported a collective bargaining system and they intended opposing a court application brought by the Free Market Foundation, challenging the constitutionality of the extension of collective agreements.
SA Clothing and Textile Workers' Union general secretary Andre Kriel said on Thursday the judgment did not mean the bargaining council could not force compliance to companies which were not part of the council.
He said it was also not true that the minister of labour would no longer be able to extend a bargaining council agreement to non-parties.
Oliphant had accepted the judgment of the court issued on Wednesday March 13, and had enjoined the department of labour to abide by it, her spokesperson Musa Zondi said in a statement issued on Friday.
He said that while the agreement had been set aside by the court, a later clothing sector bargaining council agreement, which was extended by the minister in September to members who were not part of the council, was still in force.
"This agreement has not been set aside. It would in any event constitute an unfair labour practice if any employer were to unilaterally change an employee's conditions of employment," he said.
This later agreement remained in force until August 2015.
A group of five Taiwanese-owned factories and the United Clothing and Textile Association had asked the Pietermaritzburg High Court to set aside the minimum wages set by the bargaining council.
Judge Piet Koen ruled that factories which were not members of the council could hold separate talks about pay levels with their workers. He found that less than half of employees in the clothing industry were represented on the National Bargaining Council.
Zondi said: "The judgments stem from a misalignment between two sections of the Labour Relations Act which is being corrected through the amendments to the Labour Relations Act."
He said that certificates of representivity issued in terms of section 49 of the act would not be used when considering extensions of collective agreements.
Oliphant and the labour department still supported a collective bargaining system and they intended opposing a court application brought by the Free Market Foundation, challenging the constitutionality of the extension of collective agreements.
SA Clothing and Textile Workers' Union general secretary Andre Kriel said on Thursday the judgment did not mean the bargaining council could not force compliance to companies which were not part of the council.
He said it was also not true that the minister of labour would no longer be able to extend a bargaining council agreement to non-parties.
