PAPER V PRACTICE – EXAMINING THE SCOPE AND LIMIT OF SECTION 206 OF THE LABOUR RELATIONS ACT IN PROVIDING A REMEDY FOR A NON-PARTY TO AN EXTENDED COLLECTIVE AGREEMENT
Keywords:collective agreements, non-parties, exemption, due remedy, bargaining council, material defect
The Minister of Labour may extend collective agreements concluded in bargaining councils to non-parties to the agreements in terms of section 32 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. The extension of these agreements has long been a cumbersome debate in law and practice. While some argue in favour thereof there are many that argue against it. Non-parties can apply for exemption from these
collective agreements, and this is seen as a due remedy, however, the process of applying for exemption can be wrought with inefficiencies. Therefore, the question must be asked whether the employer as a non-party to an extended agreement, has
any remedy to its disposal. Section 206 of the Labour Relations Act deals with the effect that a defect or irregularity in a bargaining council can have on the validity of the collective agreement concluded by said council. If the collective agreement is extended to non-parties, and there is a material defect with regard to the collective agreement, this section can provide a due remedy for the non-party, if interpreted and applied correctly. Seen as a clarification for the correct interpretation of section 206 has only recently been addressed in a judgment by Judge Van Niekerk, this article focuses on this interpretation and aims to make certain recommendations with regard to the interpretation of section 206.
How to Cite
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.