Court sets aside Nedlac decision on Solidarity strike | Fin24
 
Loading...

Court sets aside Nedlac decision on Solidarity strike

Sep 14 2018 13:40
Jeanette Chabalala
Thousands of Trade union Solidarity members take p

Thousands of Trade union Solidarity members take part in a protest at the Sasol plant during a shutdown against a black empowerment scheme at the chemical giant in Secunda, South Africa. (Gianluigi Guergia, AFP)

Related Articles

Commission plans to intervene in Sasol strike - Solidarity

Solidarity to NYSE: Sasol Khanyisa violates Civil Rights Act

Sasol says it's ready for Solidarity’s ‘clever strike’

Solidarity plans for three-week Sasol strike over share scheme

 

The South Gauteng High Court in Johannesburg has ruled against a decision by the National Economic Development and Labour Coucil (Nedlac) to refuse an application by trade union Solidarity for all its 180 000 members to go on strike countrywide in protest against a black economic empowerment share scheme impacting some of its members at Sasol. 

While the ruling means Nedlac will now have to review its decision, it doesn't give Solidarity the all-clear to call its members out on a sympathy strike.  

Solidarity approached the court on an urgent basis for the right of its members to go on strike in solidarity with white Sasol employees who have downed tools against what they claim is racial exclusion in Sasol's Broad-Based Black Economic Empowerment (B-BBEE) share scheme, known as Sasol Khanyisa Phase 2. 

Solidarity CEO Dirk Hermann said in a statement: "The Sasol workers are symbolising something so many Solidarity members are experiencing. We are planning a huge protest action to support Sasol members and to protest racial exclusion. It will be a historical protest expressing a voice not heard before."

Nedlac had initially opposed the urgent application, arguing that it lacks the necessary authority to consider Solidarity's "demands".

However, the high court found that there was "no merit in contention by the first respondent that it does not have the power to entertain the applicant's section 77 (1)(b) application. That decision therefore stands to be reviewed".

The urgent application was granted with costs. 

* Sign up to Fin24's top news in your inbox: SUBSCRIBE TO FIN24 NEWSLETTER

Follow Fin24 on Twitter and Facebook. 24.com encourages commentary submitted via MyNews24. Contributions of 200 words or more will be considered for publication.

solidarity  |  strike  |  industrial action
NEXT ON FIN24X

 
 
 
 

Company Snapshot

Money Clinic

Money Clinic
Do you have a question about your finances? We'll get an expert opinion.
Click here...

Voting Booth

Would you switch to a bank that rewarded you for 'good' financial behaviour?

Previous results · Suggest a vote

Loading...