Managing Shop Stewards can be tricky!

Details

Category: News Articles

BY Ivan Israelstam, Chief Executive of Labour Law Management Consulting. He may be contacted on (011) 888-7944 or 0828522973 or via e-mail address: ivan@labourlawadvice.co.za. Website address: www.labourlawadvice.co.za.

Trade unionism can mean problems for any employer.

Due to their uncertainty as to the rights of unions many employers unnecessarily give to unions rights that they are not legally required to give them. Just as often employers lose out because they fail to accord to unions rights that have been conferred by law.

The Labour Relations Act (LRA) gives employees the right, under certain circumstances, to elect union representatives (shop stewards) who will have the rights to:

• Assist employees in disciplinary and grievance hearings.

• Report any of the employer’s contraventions of the law to the appropriate authorities.

• Take reasonable time off with pay during working hours in order to perform these duties.

Many managers see shop stewards as invaders trying to ruin or take control of the business. Such managers then plot to get even with or get rid of the shop stewards. Such an approach is clearly counter productive because it is very likely to cause industrial action.

Instead management needs to:

• Be given a full understanding of what the shop stewards’ rights are and are not.

• Learn to keep their tempers and act rationally in the face of pressure.

• Know when and how to take legitimate action against shop stewards who exceed their powers.

• Be empowered to keep control of the workforce regardless of the presence of shop stewards.

Read more ...

Transformation and the new way of Work

Details

Category: News Articles

Paving the road to reward - 21^st Century style

While the South African corporate sector is facing incredible challenges that include low economic growth, stagnant consumer demand, transformation issues aroundpay inequality and the fair distribution of wealth, there are also rich opportunities presenting themselves. Transformation in terms of wealth redistribution in the corporate sector is a goal shared by both government and greater society and a process that can result in highly rewarding prospects for business itself and all stakeholders if approached in the correct manner.

21^st Century – a remuneration and reward and organisation development consultancy – is a good example of just how successful a well implemented transformation plan can be. In 2015, the company entered into a Broad-Based Share Ownership Transaction and an Employee Share Ownership Programme. The result was a newly-named, black-owned entity that incorporated the introduction of a B-BBEE trust for the 21^st Century staff.

Over the last few years, the company has seen:

• their employee engagement index rise to one of the highest in South Africa
• their employees having taken ownership resulting in ‘jobs’ now being perceived as  careers
• a culture of high performance and ownership
• an employee retention rate at almost 100%
• staff having done away with silo mentality between departments and service lines
• expansion of services to include 12 new lines
• a sales force inspiring a new sales process of holistic service with cross selling as a way of life
• themselves becoming the preferred supplier in the public sector with a dominant market share in this area
• their clients recognising the staff development and ownership culture resulting in the delivery of more effective solutions in the market

So how does a company successfully transform?

Read more ...

Faulty Charge Formulation Can Be Fatal

Details

Category: News Articles

Employers do have the right to dismiss poor performers. However, this can only be acceptable if the employer can prove factually that it has, prior to the dismissal, complied with all the substantive and procedural requirements of the law. That is, the onus at the CCMA falls entirely on the employer to bring solid proof:

•  that it followed the procedural guidelines quoted above; and also
•  that, regardless of the procedure followed, the dismissal decision itself was appropriate under the circumstances.

In the case of Nationwide Airlines (Pty) Ltd vs Mudau & others (2003, 3 BLLR 279) the employer contended that the employee had not been entitled to representation at his hearing because he was in a senior position. Despite this the Court held that the dismissal was unfair.

Another employer came off second best at CCMA merely because the charges put to the employee were badly formulated. In Fourie vs Capitec Bank (2005, 3 BALR 314) the CCMA found that it was unfair for the employer to have charged the employee with poor performance as well as for failing to obey the employer’s instruction as these two charges were laid for one and the same incident. It appears that the employee, as a result of failing to follow the employer’s instruction, did not perform the work properly. The CCMA also found that the employer had unfairly taken into account a previous final warning for poor performance. This CCMA finding most surprising as well as frightening because:

Read more ...