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

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 / LL. D.

South Africa has been experiencing a number of violent strikes by trade unions in recent times. The issue is not only to hold unions liable for damage caused during strikes, but also to reduce the number of violent strikes. This study investigates if victims of such violence can hold trade unions liable for the violent acts committed by their members during industrial action. The Labour Relations Act, 66 of 1995 (LRA) makes provision for the dismissal of employees who commit misconduct during an unprotected strike. It also provides the remedy of an interdict and a claim for just and equitable compensation which can be made against the union, during an unprotected strike. It is further possible to hold the union together with its members liable for damages in terms of the Regulation of Gatherings Act, 205 of 1993 (RGA). The study argues that a strike or conduct in furtherance of a strike that becomes violent could lose protection and the trade union should consequently be held liable, in terms of the LRA and/ or the RGA, for damages caused by its members. This study investigates the position in Canada, Botswana and Australia to determine if there could be any other basis upon which to hold trade union liable for the conduct of its members. The study recommends that the common law doctrine of vicarious liability should be developed by the courts to allow trade unions to be held liable for damages caused by members during violent industrial action. Policy considerations and changing economic conditions and the nature of strikes in the Republic favours the expansion of the doctrine of vicarious liability to trade union member relationship. / Mercantile Law / LL. D.