You are currently viewing our desktop site, do you want to download our app instead?
Moneyweb Android App Moneyweb iOS App Moneyweb Mobile Web App

NEW SENS search and JSE share prices

More about the app

SAA: Numsa and Sacca backpay application dismissed

Labour court says the matter should be heard by a high court.
Judge notes that employees remain in a position to enforce their claims to the full amount of arrear salaries owed to them, subject to provisions in the Companies Act. Image: Waldo Swiegers, Bloomberg

The urgent application brought by the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (Numsa) and the South African Cabin Crew Association (Sacca) to have the South African Airways (SAA) settlement agreement declared unlawful or unfair has been dismissed by the Labour Court.

Judge André van Niekerk’s decision has dealt a blow to Numsa and Sacca’s bid to compel the SAA business rescue practitioners and the Department of Public Enterprises (DPE) to pay their members a lump sum comprising an agreed-to 5.9% increase backdated to April 2020, as well as an equivalent pro-rata contribution towards a 13th cheque.

This is the settlement offer that four other unions at the airline accepted, but which Numsa and Sacca declined in December.

They argued in court in January that their members are entitled to the same payments made to members of the other four unions – but that their members should not be forced to waive their rights in terms of the balance of salaries owed.

The airline – which has been under business rescue since December 2019, and has been granted a R10.5 billion government bailout, R1.3 billion of which it received in late January – claims that it cannot afford to pay its workers the full amounts it owes them.

Read:

The unions have declined to comment, saying they are still studying the judgment.

Back to the drawing board

In the judgment handed down on Monday, Van Niekerk noted that: “SAA does not dispute that those employees who have not accepted the settlement offer (and in particular the members of the applicant unions) remain entitled to claim their outstanding remuneration in full, and that their right to do so has not been prejudiced or otherwise affected by the settlement agreement.”

However, he said the unions’ application does not fall within the Labour Court’s jurisdiction and that the application should rather be heard at the High Court.

“The claim relates both to the conduct of the business rescue practitioners … and the conduct of SAA as the employer,” according to the judgment.

“In the former case, this court has no jurisdiction to consider the lawfulness of the actions of the business rescue practitioners, only because they have not taken these actions as an employer.”

According to Van Niekerk, the unions failed to substantiate their claims that SAA as an employer acted unlawfully or unfairly when it did not pay their members the settlement offer paid to members of other unions.

Discrimination not evident, says judge

Considering that SAA is under business rescue and that the settlement offer to pay three months salaries as part of a compromise was extended to all employees, Van Niekerk said he fails to understand how it could be said that there is any discrimination against those employees who refused to compromise their claims.

“They [employees] remain in a position to enforce their claims in due course to the full amount of arrear salaries owed to them subject, of course, to the provisions of Chapter 6 of the Companies Act,” reads the ruling.

“There is nothing improper or unlawful about any agreement to compromise a claim for remuneration.”

The court further ordered Numsa and Sacca to pay the legal costs of Public Enterprises Minister Pravin Gordhan, who had applied to be an intervening party in the matter – with the judge describing the union’s opposition to Gordhan’s application as “misguided” and “bordering on the frivolous”.

Gordhan ought to have been cited as one of the respondents in the first place, said Van Niekerk.

“I fail to understand why the taxpayer should ultimately be saddled with the costs of the application to intervene,” he says.

Read:
Please consider contributing as little as R20 in appreciation of our quality independent financial journalism.

AUTHOR PROFILE

COMMENTS   9

Sort by:
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Top voted

You must be signed in to comment.

SIGN IN SIGN UP

So the union rejected the settlement in December and are now demanding this same settlement.
Now they discovered that they can also loose by their ridiculous demands.
Now go and explain this to your members, I suspect them to be quit upset.

It is encouraging to see that someone is prepared to stand up to the unions at last. Let’s hope the Lily-livered government takes some courage from the example.

Gotta love the way Unions and Wukkers “DEMAND” everything these days .
As my Boss once told me when I had the Audacity to question the level of my salary increase : “Mr XX you do realise you are a free Agent”.

Put more simply “if you dont like it you are free to seek a better deal”! ”
The Unions need the same treatment —but told less politely .

The entitlement and victim mentality shines through this article.Will not read this journalist again.

After reading your comment, I re-read the article carefully. It seems a meticulous and well-written news piece, quoting the judgment at length without expressing any opinion on it.

I can’t help but have a huge smile on my face while reading this. Numsa and Sacca wanted the equivalent of having their cake and eating it to, hopefully their members will now realise that their unions are cause of them missing out on the settlement.

Too long have unions held the economy ransom, part of the structural reforms our economy need is the easing of labour laws and the reigning in of the unions.

What’s more, they have the damnable cheek to expect the free market tax payers to clean up after their communist mess!

Just deserts for supporting a communist ideology and regime that has indeed been the misguided cause for your selfish political and gimme club “damands” and the subsequent demise of your “employment”

Don’t like it?….its a free world….go and find another job with an organisation that has a modicum of management skills and not run by marxist fools!!!

I hope CWU with regards to SABC learns a thing or two. The SABC blackout also is so hilarious to picture because SA people do have options.

End of comments.

LATEST CURRENCIES  

USD / ZAR
GBP / ZAR
EUR / ZAR
BTC / USD

Podcasts

INSIDER SUBSCRIPTIONS APP VIDEOS RADIO / LISTEN LIVE SHOP OFFERS WEBINARS NEWSLETTERS TRENDING PORTFOLIO TOOL CPD HUB

Follow us:

Search Articles:
Click a Company: