Key changes to the labour laws in 2015 – part 8: PART-TIME EMPLOYMENT

As this blog series comes to a close, we have yet to consider the recent changes to the law on part-time employment.

Again, the new law applies only to employees who earn below the currently prescribed threshold of R205 433,30 per year. It does not apply to employees who ordinarily work fewer than 24 hours a month for the employer, nor does it apply in the first three months of employment.

Employers with fewer than 10 employees, and those with less than 50 but in the initial two year start-up phase, are exempt.

The part-time employee is entitled to be treated on the whole not less favourably than a comparable full-time employee doing the same or similar work, unless there is a justifiable reason for different treatment. She is further entitled to access to training and skills development which is on the whole not less favourable than the access applicable to a comparable full-time employee. She is entitled to the same access to opportunities to apply for vacancies at the employer.

A justifiable reason may include seniority, experience or length of service; merit; the quality or quantity of work performed; or any other criterion of a similar nature.

A comparable employee is one who is identified as full-time in terms of the employer’s custom and practice, but not an employee on agreed temporary short time. One should compare with a full-time employee with the same type of employment relationship and performing the same or similar work at the same workplace, and only at another workplace of the employer if no such employee exists at the same workplace.

As with the new law governing fixed term contracts, greater equity between those enjoying standard (permanent, full-time) employment and those subject to non-standard (fixed term, part-time) employment is the objective. In the event of an infraction, the aggrieved employee may refer a dispute to the CCMA within six months. If not resolved at conciliation (that is, mediation) then the dispute may be referred for arbitration.

Key changes to the labour laws in 2015 – part 7: FIXING THE FIXED TERM CONTRACT

Many people are employed on fixed term contracts which are renewed time and again with no promise of job security beyond the current term of the contract. After the third or sixth or twelfth renewal, the employer announces that the contract will not be renewed further, and the employee’s attention is drawn to the term of the contract stating that she agrees that she has no expectation of further renewal. After three or six or twelve continuous years of employment, the relationship has been terminated without any fault on the employee’s part, and in the employer’s view no due process is called for.

The LRA has long provided that a failure by an employer to renew a fixed term contract (or an offer to renew but on less favourable terms) is a dismissal IF the employee can establish that she reasonably expected renewal. This has assisted affected employees who have the stomach to contest their dismissal at the CCMA AND who are able to produce the necessary evidence to show that they had an expectation of renewal which was reasonable in the circumstances. Many more have walked away from their employment situations with a sense that injustice has prevailed.

As of 2015, the LRA has been amended to come to the assistance of employees earning less than the currently prescribed threshold of R205 433,30 per year. Higher earners do not benefit from the new law. Exempted from compliance are employers with fewer than 10 employees, as well as employers with fewer than 50 employees who are in the initial start-up phase of two years.

The new law allows fixed term contracts (including renewals) for periods up to three months only. Fixed term contracts (including renewals) may exceed three months in duration only if (1) the work is of limited or definite duration in nature or (2) the employer can show another justifiable reason. The latter might include:

  • replacing an employee temporarily absent from work (such as on maternity leave)
  • a temporary increase in work volume not expected to last beyond one year (such as a one-off large order)
  • the employee is a student or recent graduate being trained or gaining work experience to enter a job or profession (such as a candidate attorney)
  • the employment is for work on a specific project only, of limited duration
  • a non-citizen employee has a work permit for a limited period only
  • the work is seasonal (such as apple picking)
  • the work is part of an official public works scheme or other job creation scheme
  • the position is funded by an external source for a limited period (such as in the NGO sector)
  • the employee is post-retirement age

The Act goes on to state that a justifiable reason includes the application of a system that takes account of seniority or length of service, merit, the quality or quantity of work performed, or other criteria of a similar nature.

Where the fixed term employment exceeds three months and there is no valid justification, the employment is deemed to be indefinite (that is, permanent) employment.

The employer’s offer of fixed term employment must be in writing and must specify a valid reason for the fixed term nature of employment.

In any proceedings, the employer bears the burden to prove that there was a valid reason for fixed term employment, and that the term was agreed with the employee.

Absent a justifiable reason, fixed term employees performing the same work as permanent employees are entitled to no less favourable treatment. Permanent and fixed term employees are also to be provided with equal opportunity to apply for vacant positions.

Where an employee is employed for a fixed term to work exclusively on a specific project of limited duration, for a period of over twenty-four months, then on termination the employer must pay that employee severance pay equal to one week’s pay per completed year of the contract. This applies prospectively to any work subsequent to the amendment date (1 January 2015) even if the contract was concluded before the amendment. No severance pay is payable, however, if before expiry of the contract the employer offers the employee, or procures for the employee with another employer, employment commencing at expiry on the same or similar terms.

This amendment is one of the most welcome changes to our labour law from an employee perspective, with the scope to prevent a great deal of abuse of the fixed term contract. One waits to see how strictly or generously the CCMA and courts will interpret the requirement that an employer demonstrate a justifiable reason for fixing the term of a contract.

Key changes to the labour laws in 2015 – part 6: BRINGING LABOUR BROKERS IN LINE

Throughout recent deliberations on amendments to the Labour Relations Act, the status of labour brokers, or “temporary employment services (TES)” was a hot button issue. Trade unionists called for their outright banning. At last, however, the law governing their operation was instead tightened up, in the interests of protecting those employed by them. Many of the amendments are aimed at halting abuses whereby employers circumvented  labour laws, sectoral determinations and collective agreements by employing staff via a TES.

Since a prior amendment, the Act has held a TES and its client jointly and severally liable for contraventions of basic conditions and other requirements – even though technically the TES is the employer, and the client is a third party to the employment relationship.

The new amendments go further.

(a) Where the TES and its client are jointly and severally liable for contraventions:

  1. The employee may sue either or both of them;
  2. The Department of Labour can take enforcement action against either or both;
  3. A court order or arbitration award issued against one in favour of the employee or labour inspector, may be enforced against either.

(b) TES employees must be given written employment particulars, compliant with the law on basic conditions of service, when they are employed.

(c) The terms and conditions of employment must comply with the Act and any labour law. In addition, significantly, where a TES employs an employee to do work for a client in whose sector there is a collective agreement or sectoral determination, the TES must comply with those too.

(d) A special level of protection is offered to employees of TES who earn below the threshhold currently set at R205 433, 30 per year. Such an employee remains an employee of the TES only if she works for the client for less than three months, is substituting for an employee of the client who is temporarily absent, or performs work which has been defined as temporary work in a collective agreement, sectoral determination, or notice by the Minister of Labour. Failing falling into those categories, the employee is deemed in law to the employee of the TES’s client. She is entitled to treatment which is not less favourable than that given to an employee of the client performing the same or similar work unless there is a “justifiable reason” for different treatment.

Key changes to the labour laws in 2015 – part 4: ARBITRATIONS IN LIEU OF DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS

The Labour Relations Act has long provided for the possibility of what was called (to the dread of many an employee) a “pre-dismissal hearing”. This had the effect of a CCMA arbitration, but replaced an in-house disciplinary process by the employer. In the latter, an employer would make allegations about an employee’s conduct or capacity which could result in the employee’s dismissal, and hold a hearing and, possibly, an appeal – and perhaps then end up defending the process at the CCMA at an arbitration preceded by a conciliation. In the former, the CCMA would take over the process, enquire into the allegations, and make a decision having the effect of an arbitration award – a greatly streamlined process.

In the past this could only be done by the employer with the consent of the employee.

The new law enables industry- or workplace-wide collective agreements to provide for inquiries by arbitrators (formerly “pre-dismissal arbitrations”), instead of requiring consent by individual employees in each case.

In addition, under the new law this process may be triggered by either the employee or the employer, when an employee complains that the holding of a hearing into her conduct or incapacity contravenes the Protected Disclosures Act. That Act aims to protect whistleblowers in the workplace. This new provision is directed at maximising fairness, while minimising the protracted litigation arising in disputes under the Protected Disclosures Act.

High earners to lose legal protections?

Another major change to our employment law is on the way via a new section 188B to be added to the Labour Relations Act.

At present, all employees have recourse to the CCMA (or a bargaining council or private arbitration) and the Labour Court if they are dismissed and feel that the reason behind it or the procedure followed was not fair.

New section 188B will effectively strip employees earning above a certain amount – still to be determined by the Minister of Labour – of the right to challenge the fairness of their dismissals in the vast majority of cases. Provided the employer gives the employee three months’ written notice of his or her dismissal (or longer if required by their employment contract) or pays out the equivalent salary instead of notice, and the dismissal is not for an automatically unfair reason, the dismissal will be regarded by the law as fair (regardless of what the actual circumstances might be).

A dismissal is automatically unfair if it is motivated by reasons such as:

  • Retaliation for exercising a legal right from the LRA, including participation in a lawful strike, or for whistle-blowing;
  • Arbitrary grounds such as the employee’s race, gender, religion, age, ethnicity, sexual orientation or identity, pregnancy and so on;

unless it can be justified due to an essential requirement of the employee’s job or a normal or agreed retirement age.

Once the amendment has been signed into law, the exclusion will apply to all new employment contracts entered into (where the earnings exceed the threshold). Two years later it will also apply to all pre-existing employment contracts.

Employees who lose their rights of recourse due to this amendment will still have the option of enforcing any contractual obligations of the employer through the civil courts. They will have to show that the employer has acted unlawfully with reference to their agreement, rather than unfairly. Affected employees will be well-advised to participate actively in the negotiation and drafting of their employment contracts, in order to retain their rights to the greatest extent possible.

It remains to be seen where the threshold will be set. Until there is clarity in this regard, it is a matter of grave concern that many employees may be stripped of protections which they have come to regard as their basic right. When setting the threshold, the Minister will be required to consult NEDLAC and to consider the extent to which those employees “by reason of their earnings level, level of skill or position” have the bargaining power to ensure that their contracts of employment protect them adequately against unfair dismissal.

Fixed term employment contracts – new law!

The Labour Relations Act will soon be amended to change the law on fixed term employment (meaning for example employment “for one month”, “until X returns from maternity leave”, or “until we complete project Y”).

 1. The amended Act will impose new requirements when an employer employs a person on a fixed term contract, and will restrict their right to do so for
 longer than six months in total.
2. An employer must make an offer of fixed term work in writing, and must state in writing the reason for the offer being for a fixed term only.
3. Fixed term employment may only exceed six months in total if the work itself is of a limited or definite duration, or if the employer can show any other good reason (the amended Act gives a number of examples which will be accepted as good reasons). Failing this, the employment will be deemed to be indefinite, regardless of what the contract might say, and the employer will have to retain the employee in employment or follow fair procedures to dismiss the employee for a fair reason.
4. Where fixed term employment beyond a total of 24 months is justified (instead of indefinite employment), the employee will be entitled to severance pay from the employer, similar to a retrenched employee, when the work comes to an end – unless the employer offers the employee another job, or secures one for him or her.5. The amended provisions will not apply where the employee’s annual salary is over R172 000,00, or where the employer is a small one with fewer than 10 employees, or where the employer is a new, sole business of less than two years’ standing with fewer than 50 employees. (The last provision is intended to prevent employers from circumventing the law by artificially slicing up businesses or reintroducing old businesses in new forms.)

The new provisions will hopefully put an end to abusive practices whereby employers have denied staff job security for no good reason, and avoided meeting their legal obligations to dismiss employees fairly. The legislature has sought to strike a balance, however, by allowing short-term flexibility and by making exceptions for small and new businesses and high-earning employees.

This is not the only major development on the cards in employment law – more updates still to come with deal with other changes in the pipeline affecting both employees and employers.