Fundamental to any contract of employment is the obligation that rests on an employee not to be absent from work without justification. Under the common law, if an employee did that, the employer would be entitled to dismiss him or her on notice. The International Labour Organization Convention (ILO) 158 of 1982 provides that the employer must have a reason for a dismissal and sets out broad categories or reasons for dismissals . Section 23 of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996(Act 108 of 1998) provides that “Everyone has the right to fair labour practices”. Section 33 of the Constitution provides that “Everyone has the right to administrative action that is lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. The Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA) is designed to give effect to just administrative action. Section 1 and 3 of the Labour Relations Act,1995(Act 66 of 1995)(LRA) require compliance with Article 7 and 8 of the ILO Convention 158 of 1982, when the employment of a worker has been terminated by his or her employer. The LRA protects employees against unfair dismissal. In the Department of Education, Section 14(1)(a) of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 provides for the discharge of an educator in the event that he or she absents himself or herself from work for a period exceeding 14 consecutive days without the permission of the employer. A similar provision, Section 17(5)(a)(i) of the Public Service Act, 1994 provides for the discharge of an officer other than an educator who absents himself or herself from his or her official duties without the permission of the Head of Department for a period exceeding one calendar month. Section 14(2) of the Employment of Educators Act, 1998 and 17(5)(b) of the Public Service Act,1994 afford an employee who has been deemed discharged to show good cause why he or she should be reinstated. Against this background, the critical legal question is the constitutionality of the deeming provisions. The study will examine the validity of these provisions in relation to the ILO Conventions, Constitution, LRA and PAJA.

South Africa has over the years and particularly since the enactment of our new Constitution, attracted an increasing number of foreigners. One of the main problems associated with the large number of illegal immigrants in this country is that they are placing strain on South Africa‟s already scare resources such as housing and healthcare. A further problem is that these illegal immigrants are competing with South Africans for jobs which are already scarce, and thus aggravating the unemployment situation. Nevertheless, these illegal immigrants are being employed and by virtue of their circumstances are easily exploited and often the victims of cheap labour, corruption, eviction and assault. Given that these workers are illegal immigrants not in possession of the required work permits, their employment is prohibited by the Immigration Act 13 of 2002. They are thus illegal workers. Another category of illegal workers are those, predominantly women, who are employed in an industry which offers easy income with no contractual obligations – the prostitution industry. Despite the prohibition of prostitution by the Sexual Offences Act 23 of 1957, the prostitution industry throughout South Africa continues to exist. These workers are also particularly vulnerable and easily exploited and abused by their employers. Illegal immigrants and sex workers in South Africa have until recently been denied access to the protection of our labour legislation, by virtue of the illegality of their employment contracts. However two recent controversial decisions, that of the Labour Court in the Discovery Health case, and that of the Labour Appeal Court in the Kylie case, have changed this position.

This paper is divided into two distinct sections. The first being an analysis of the legal protection of temporary employees as things currently stand. It deals with the various labour laws that currently regulate temporary employment as well as the temporary employment contract and the common-law. The second section summarises and analyses the provisions of the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill as they apply to fixed-term employees. Temporary employees are protected by the general protection extended to all employees in terms of section 23(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, guaranteeing all employees the “right to fair labour practice”. The Labour Relations Act has as one of its main objectives to give effect to and regulate the fundamental rights contained in the Constitution. Thus the Labour Relations Act must not only give effect to constitutional rights but it must also ensure that it in no way unreasonably or unjustly denies or limits constitutional rights. Temporary employees have a number of labour laws protecting their interests. Where the provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, a Bargaining Council Agreement or a Sectoral Determination do not apply the employee will rely on the terms of the fixed-term employment contract and thereafter the common law for protection. The only protection offered to temporary employees contained in the Labour Relations Act is in section 186(1)(b), where a dismissal is defined to include the non-renewal of temporary contracts of employment where there is a reasonable expectation of renewal on the same or similar terms. This provision has proved to be highly controversial in that it does not expressly cater for temporary employees who harbour reasonable expectations of indefinite employment. An analysis is made of the most important cases relating to section 186(1)(b). The second section unpacks and critically analyses the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill which have been long in the offing and when they are finally enacted, will bring with them sweeping changes for atypical employment . The amendments will drastically change the way employers make use of fixed-term employees as well as the way in which Temporary Employment Services may conduct business if they are in fact able to keep working at all. There is very little literature of substance written about the Labour Relations Amendment Bill as it applies to atypical employment. The fact that the proposed amendments have changed so many times over such a long period of time might have deterred many writers from investing time and effort in attempts to analyse and summarise the amendments. Articles posted on the internet are in the main short and have very little content. No books were found with any discussion that pertains to the amendments. The amendments divide employees involved in atypical employment into two different categories. These categories consist of employees earning above the threshold in terms of section 6(3) of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act and those earning below this threshold. All fixed-term employees may rely on the provisions of section 186 of the Labour Relations Act. Employees earning below the threshold are considered to be the most vulnerable and have been afforded additional protections in terms of sections 198(A), (B) and (C). Issues surrounding Temporary Employment Services and fixed-term employees have been very divisive and have been the topics of heated debate at all levels of Industrial Relations for a long time. Discussions regarding the use of the services of Temporary Employment Services can be highly emotive, with Temporary Employment Services being accused of committing wideThis paper is divided into two distinct sections. The first being an analysis of the legal protection of temporary employees as things currently stand. It deals with the various labour laws that currently regulate temporary employment as well as the temporary employment contract and the common-law. The second section summarises and analyses the provisions of the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill as they apply to fixed-term employees. Temporary employees are protected by the general protection extended to all employees in terms of section 23(1) of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, 1996, guaranteeing all employees the “right to fair labour practice”. The Labour Relations Act has as one of its main objectives to give effect to and regulate the fundamental rights contained in the Constitution. Thus the Labour Relations Act must not only give effect to constitutional rights but it must also ensure that it in no way unreasonably or unjustly denies or limits constitutional rights. Temporary employees have a number of labour laws protecting their interests. Where the provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act, a Bargaining Council Agreement or a Sectoral Determination do not apply the employee will rely on the terms of the fixed-term employment contract and thereafter the common law for protection. The only protection offered to temporary employees contained in the Labour Relations Act is in section 186(1)(b), where a dismissal is defined to include the non-renewal of temporary contracts of employment where there is a reasonable expectation of renewal on the same or similar terms. This provision has proved to be highly controversial in that it does not expressly cater for temporary employees who harbour reasonable expectations of indefinite employment. An analysis is made of the most important cases relating to section 186(1)(b). The second section unpacks and critically analyses the Labour Relations Amendment Bill and the Basic Conditions of Employment Bill which have been long in the offing and when they are finally enacted, will bring with them sweeping changes for atypical employment . The amendments will drastically change the way employers make use of fixed-term employees as well as the way in which Temporary Employment Services may conduct business if they are in fact able to keep working at all. There is very little literature of substance written about the Labour Relations Amendment Bill as it applies to atypical employment. The fact that the proposed amendments have changed so many times over such a long period of time might have deterred many writers from investing time and effort in attempts to analyse and summarise the amendments. Articles posted on the internet are in the main short and have very little content. No books were found with any discussion that pertains to the amendments. The amendments divide employees involved in atypical employment into two different categories. These categories consist of employees earning above the threshold in terms of section 6(3) of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act and those earning below this threshold. All fixed-term employees may rely on the provisions of section 186 of the Labour Relations Act. Employees earning below the threshold are considered to be the most vulnerable and have been afforded additional protections in terms of sections 198(A), (B) and (C).

The purpose of this treatise was to determine the distinction between the contract of service (employment) and the contract of work (independent contractor). A comprehensive literary survey was undertaken so as to establish if such a distinction does indeed exist. A logical point of departure was to study the contract of service and determine how the employment relationship is established by it. It is also necessary to establish under what circumstances a contract may be terminated and what the rights and obligations of the parties to the contract were. The contract between the parties will determine remedies to the breach of contract or applicability of labour legislation. It is also necessary to establish the definition of an employee under various statutes so as to understand what remedies exist should rights be infringed upon. Statutes considered include the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa, Labour Relations Act, Basic Conditions of Employment Act, Employment Equity Act, Unemployment Insurance Act, Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act, Skills Development Act and the Income Tax Act. The effect of insolvency of the employer on the employee is also discussed. Outsourcing has played a major role in the emergence of the independent contractor. This phenomenon is considered from the point of the employer in terms of the reasons for choosing the option of outsourcing and the associated risks. The employee perspective is also dealt with in terms of why an employee would change his/her employment status. The various tests historically applied to determine the status of a worker is also discussed. These include the control, organisation, dominant impression and economic tests. Currently the dominant impression test is the one that is being applied to determine the employment relationship. Extensive reference was made to case law. United States of America cases are referred to with specific reference to the 20 Factor Test applied by the Internal Revenue Service. South African case law is dealt wit in terms of enforcement of Bargaining Council agreements, commission-earning persons, payment for services rendered, the intention of the parties and the identity of the true employer. The emergence of the dependent contractor is also addressed. This form of worker normally falls outside of the protection of labour legislation and social security. Amendments have been proposed to various statutes to remedy the situation in South Africa. A final aspect that is dealt with is that of vicarious liability. The applicability of this aspect lies in the liability of the employer for damages inflicted by the employee.

LL.M. (Labour Law) / Commentators have warned that when men are given absolute control over their fellow men, there is the danger that what appeared pragmatically desirable may become morally intolerable. The current usage of polygraph testing by employers undoubtedly confirms this. In what follows, it will be argued that there is a serious shortcoming in South African law in that there is no legislative framework that governs and regulates the use of polygraph testing in the workplace. It is fairly likely that many South African employers will at some time be faced with dishonesty or criminal activities, such as fraud or theft, without accurately being able to identify where, how, and by whom such dishonesty was committed. If dishonesty and criminal activities are not properly managed, there may be adverse ramifications. As a result, many employers have opted to insert a clause in the employment offer and employment contract that relates to security obligations on the part of the employees or prospective employees. The clause would normally read as follows: “The company may request that you subject yourself to a polygraph test before commencement of employment or if an incident has occurred or and random testing during your period of employment with the Company. The employee hereby declares that he is aware of the company polygraph policy and accepts that this policy as a term and condition of his employment. The employee undertakes to comply with the said policy in all respects and acknowledges that he is bound thereby”. Magna Alloys & Research v Ellis introduced a significant change to the Courts’ approach to restraint of trade agreements by declining to follow earlier decisions based on an English precedent that an agreement in restraint of trade is prima facie invalid and unenforceable. The implication of this decision is that a right to choose a trade, occupation, or profession freely may

The thesis analyses the concept ‘fairness’ in consumer contracts regulated by the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, mainly from the perspective of a freedom and fairness orientation. It discusses the evolution of ‘fairness’ as background to a more detailed discussion of the classification of fairness into substantive and procedural fairness. The thesis examines dimensions of fairness, factors which play a role in the determination of fairness, and fairness- oriented approaches in an attempt to formulate a framework for fairness in consumer contracts. The main aspects that should be taken into account to justify a finding of fairness, or to determine whether a contract is fair, are identified. This analysis addresses, too, the extent to which the fairness provisions of the Consumer Protection Act are appropriate (with reference to the law of South Africa, Europe, and England). / Mercantile Law / LL.D.

The thesis analyses the concept ‘fairness’ in consumer contracts regulated by the Consumer Protection Act 68 of 2008, mainly from the perspective of a freedom and fairness orientation. It discusses the evolution of ‘fairness’ as background to a more detailed discussion of the classification of fairness into substantive and procedural fairness. The thesis examines dimensions of fairness, factors which play a role in the determination of fairness, and fairness- oriented approaches in an attempt to formulate a framework for fairness in consumer contracts. The main aspects that should be taken into account to justify a finding of fairness, or to determine whether a contract is fair, are identified. This analysis addresses, too, the extent to which the fairness provisions of the Consumer Protection Act are appropriate (with reference to the law of South Africa, Europe, and England). / Mercantile Law / LL.D.

Thesis (LLM)--University of Stellenbosch, 2001. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Section 197 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 ensures the transfer of a contract of employment from an old employer to a new employer on the transfer of a business as a gomg concern. Although section 197 is mostly based on European and British statutes and regulations, one should not rely on foreign provisions when interpreting section 197 without careful consideration. It is only when we understand the inherent limitations of applying these provisions, that they can be of any help to formulate definitions for the terms "transfer", "business" and "going concern". The two most important effects that section 197 has, is that it ensures the transfer of the contract of employment and that it protects the terms and conditions of employment when such a transfer takes place. Unfortunately, this section does not regulate dismissal on the transfer of a business. Section 197 also does not deal satisfactorily with the transfer of contracts of employment on the transfer of an insolvent business. As a result of the above-mentioned and other shortcomings of the current section 197, it was decided to amend the Act. The Labour Relations Amendment Bill 2000 relies heavily on precedents from foreign law, but unfortunately it does not adequately address all the current problems. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Artikel 197 van die Wet op Arbeidsverhoudinge 66 van 1995 verseker die oordrag van 'n dienskontrak van 'n ou werkgewer na 'n nuwe werkgewer by die oordrag van 'n besigheid as 'n lopende onderneming. Alhoewel artikel 197 gebaseer is op Europese en Britse wetgewing en regulasies, moet die leser versigtig wees om sulke bepalings sonder skroom aan te wend by die interpretrasie van artikel 197. Wanneer ons die inherente beperkings daarvan begryp, mag die bepalings van hulp wees om definisies te vorm van die begrippe "oordrag", "besigheid" en "lopende onderneming". Artikel 197 het hoofsaaklik twee uitwerkings: dit fasiliteer die oordrag van die dienskontrak en verseker dat die terme en voorwaardes van indiensneming onveranderd bly. Die artikel reguleer nie ontslag by die oordrag van 'n besigheid nie. Artikel 197 reguleer ook nie genoegsaam die oordrag van dienskontrakte waar 'n insolvente besigheid oorgedra word nie. As gevolg van bogenoemde en ander tekortkominge is besluit om die Wet te wysig. Die Wysigingswetsontwerp op Arbeidverhoudinge 2000 steun op buitelandse presedente, maar spreek ongelukkig ook nie al die huidige probleme suksesvol aan nie.

Thesis (LLM)--University of Stellenbosch, 2001. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: Section 197 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 ensures the transfer of a contract of employment from an old employer to a new employer on the transfer of a business as a gomg concern. Although section 197 is mostly based on European and British statutes and regulations, one should not rely on foreign provisions when interpreting section 197 without careful consideration. It is only when we understand the inherent limitations of applying these provisions, that they can be of any help to formulate definitions for the terms "transfer", "business" and "going concern". The two most important effects that section 197 has, is that it ensures the transfer of the contract of employment and that it protects the terms and conditions of employment when such a transfer takes place. Unfortunately, this section does not regulate dismissal on the transfer of a business. Section 197 also does not deal satisfactorily with the transfer of contracts of employment on the transfer of an insolvent business. As a result of the above-mentioned and other shortcomings of the current section 197, it was decided to amend the Act. The Labour Relations Amendment Bill 2000 relies heavily on precedents from foreign law, but unfortunately it does not adequately address all the current problems. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Artikel 197 van die Wet op Arbeidsverhoudinge 66 van 1995 verseker die oordrag van 'n dienskontrak van 'n ou werkgewer na 'n nuwe werkgewer by die oordrag van 'n besigheid as 'n lopende onderneming. Alhoewel artikel 197 gebaseer is op Europese en Britse wetgewing en regulasies, moet die leser versigtig wees om sulke bepalings sonder skroom aan te wend by die interpretrasie van artikel 197. Wanneer ons die inherente beperkings daarvan begryp, mag die bepalings van hulp wees om definisies te vorm van die begrippe "oordrag", "besigheid" en "lopende onderneming". Artikel 197 het hoofsaaklik twee uitwerkings: dit fasiliteer die oordrag van die dienskontrak en verseker dat die terme en voorwaardes van indiensneming onveranderd bly. Die artikel reguleer nie ontslag by die oordrag van 'n besigheid nie. Artikel 197 reguleer ook nie genoegsaam die oordrag van dienskontrakte waar 'n insolvente besigheid oorgedra word nie. As gevolg van bogenoemde en ander tekortkominge is besluit om die Wet te wysig. Die Wysigingswetsontwerp op Arbeidverhoudinge 2000 steun op buitelandse presedente, maar spreek ongelukkig ook nie al die huidige probleme suksesvol aan nie.

The current South African legislative framework does not properly address the unequal bargaining position between employers and fixed term employees. Ineffective regulation of fixed term employment in South Africa has had the effect of excluding certain groups of fixed term employees from claiming the remedies provided in terms of the Labour Relations Act and other labour legislation. Furthermore, where remedies are applicable to them they are often ineffectual. Interpretational variation evident from case law pertaining to the enforcement of the rights of fixed term employees, indicate clear lacunae in the unfair dismissal protection afforded to these vulnerable employees. This is mainly a consequence of uncertainties related to the interpretation of the legislative provisions. The infusion of the values entrenched in the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa and the development of the common law to reflect these values might augment the scope and availability of rights enjoyed by fixed term employees. But, changing socio-economic and political circumstances necessitates review and amendment of the legislation applicable to fixed term employees to meet the country’s constitutional and international obligations. Proposed amendments to the Labour Relations Act have been tabled. These amendments may be capable of addressing some of the current problems. However, they may also lead to other undesirable consequences. An investigation into problems related to the application of similar provisions as those proposed by the Labour Relations Amendment Bill in other jurisdictions crystallises some possible causes for concern. Some of the proposed changes could create new vulnerabilities, or renew old ones. / Private Law / LLD