Effective, efficient and expeditious resolution of labour disputes plays a crucial role in terms of the realization of one of the primary objectives of the Labour Relations Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) which is the achievement of labour peace. Although there is no proper definition of a dispute offered by the Act, there are several elements raised by authors within the labour relations and labour law fields which constitute a dispute. Two types of disputes are discussed, namely disputes of right (emanating from entitlement) and disputes of interest (based on demands not provided for, and these are also known as disputes based on matters of mutual interests). Labour relations in South Africa has a history that is tarnished by segregation and dualism, where there was a system of labour relations and labour statutes for all races (except for Africans). The first statute dealing somewhat comprehensive with labour disputes, the Industrial Conciliation Act, did not apply to Africans. This situation (exclusion of Africans) prevailed until the early 1980’s. Therefore, although the apartheid system was legislated in 1948, its segregation practices based on race existed long before 1948 and also extended to the workplaces. The turning point in the labour relations arena in South Africa was the appointment of the Wiehahn Commission. As a result of the recommendations by this Commission, African Workers were for the first time included in labour legislation. So, of great interest is the fact that African Workers attained labour rights before the demise of the apartheid system. The birth of the Act with its dispute resolution fora like the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (hereinafter referred to as “the CCMA”), Bargaining Councils, Labour Court and the Labour Appeal Court, revolutionized dispute resolution in the country. However, there are some challenges that have emerged even within the new system. Prior to 1993, labour relations in the public service, simply just did not exist. This was mainly due to the fact that the public service was excluded from mainstream legal framework governing labour relations. The State was very much in control of what was happening with regards to employment relations in the public service. There were some structures developed for engagement with the State like the Public Service Commission (PSC) which was politicized to push the agenda of apartheid, Public Servants Association (PSA) for White Public Servants, Public Service Union (PSU) for Indian Public Servants and Public Service League for Coloured Public Servants. There was no structure established for African Public Servants though. Nevertheless, these established structures were useless. One of the recommendations of the Wiehahn Commission was the inclusion of public servants within the mainstream labour relations framework and this was never pursued by the then government. It took the wave of strikes in the early 1990’s for the Act to be extended to the public service. Even with the inclusion of public service within the scope of the Act, there are still challenges pertinent to the public service. Central to these challenges is the problem of fragmentation in terms of approach regarding dispute resolution and the fact that there are too many pieces of legislation dealing with dispute resolution. This situation has also resulted in a jurisdictional debacle within the public service. Also, there is a huge challenge in terms of dealing with abscondments / desertion within the public service. In terms of the way forward, there is an initiative to streamline the public service. In this regard, there is a Draft Single Public Service Bill and also the Public Service Amendment Bill.

Thesis (LLM) North-West University, Mafikeng Campus, 2005

The Public Service Commission (PSC) is an independent oversight body established in terms of chapter 10 of the Constitution, 1996. Although, its powers and functions were enacted in the Public Service Commission Act, 1997, this institution has been in existence since the early 1900’s. As an institution which was birthed during an era wrought with injustice, inequality upon a labour law framework which barely existed as the concept is understood today, the PSC played a leading role in the management of the public service. The influence of the Treasury, Governor-General and socio-political forces throughout the 1900’s negatively impacted the manner in which the PSC was effectively able to exercise its’ powers and functions. Subsequent thereto, the rise of staff associations and their concerted effort to be party to matters pertaining to the employment relationship, placed the PSC in a precarious situation which created the perception that the PSC was a “toothless organization”. Although the PSC has since transitioned significantly in that many of the functions it performed are now exercised by the Ministry of Public Service and Administration, today, this perception is still as real as it was in the 1970’s. The primary purpose of this treatise is to provide a historical background to present time, depicting the role undertaken by the PSC and whether the perception of being ineffective in the administration of the public service, remains. The researcher will provide a distinction of the nature of grievances dealt with by the PSC and other alternate dispute resolution bodies, with specific attention being drawn to the methodologies applied in the execution of its mandate relating to labour relations and personnel practices, and the overall bearing it this has on the effective administration of the public service. In the conclusion it is submitted that the powers and functions of the PSC may extend to directions, advice and recommendations (unenforceable), however in comparison to other dispute resolution bodies, these powers and functions are centred around the promotion of constitutionally enshrined values and principles. PSC prides itself in the fruits of its labour as it is able to make a far greater impact by investigating root causes of grievances and redressing systemic issues, emanating from yesteryear to date. It is therefore submitted that as a result of different methodologies applied in comparison to other dispute resolution bodies, the highly administrative processes embarked proves far more thorough and effective and as a result cannot be compared or perceived to be ineffective. Lastly, it is submitted that the co-operative rather than adversarial approach embarked upon by the PSC is befitting for a young democratic country where impact-driven bears far reaching results, extending over the public service administration at large. To this end, the researcher refutes the misconception that the PSC is a toothless, ineffective organization which no longer plays a meaningful role within the Public Service Administration.

The lock-out is accepted as a necessary element of collective bargaining. The law relating to lock-out is considered as a legitimate instrument of industrial action. There are a number of procedural requirements for a legal lock-out. The dispute should be referred to a bargaining council (or where there is no bargaining council with jurisdiction, to a statutory council) or, failing which, the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration. If the bargaining/statutory council or the commission fails to resolve the dispute, it is no longer required that a ballet should be brought out in favour of the contemplated lock-out before the lock-out could be legal: all that is required is that the period of notice of the intended lock-out is given. The lock-out may either be protected or unprotected. It is protected if it is not prohibited absolutely and the various procedural requirements have been complied with. The protected lock-out is immuned from civil liability. On the other hand a lockout will be unprotected if it does not comply with sections 64 and 65 of the Labour Relations Act, 1995. In the circumstances the Labour Court has exclusive jurisdiction to grant an interdict or order to restrain any person from participating in unprotected industrial action and to order the payment of just and equitable compensation for any loss attributable to the lock-out. Lock-outs are prohibited in specific instances and allowed with some qualifications in others. For example, employers engaged in the provision of essential or maintenance services are prohibited from locking their employees out in order compel them to comply with their demand. Such essential services are Parliamentary services, the South African Police Service and a service the interruption of which endangers the life, personal safety or health of the whole. A distinction is also drawn between offensive and defensive lock-outs. Defensive lock-outs involve the closure of an employer’s premises or the shutting down of its operations during industrial action initiated by workers. The offensive lock-outs, also known as “pre-emptive lock-outs”, amount to an employer initiated form of industrial iv action where the premises are locked and workers are excluded and prevented from working. The law relating to lock-out in South Africa is clearly put in its proper perspective by the interim Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 200 of 1993, final Constitution of the Republic of South Africa 108 of 1996, Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 and in Ex Parte Chairperson of the Constitutional Assembly: In re Certification of the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa.1 However the situation is unsatisfactory to employers. The interim Constitution guaranteed the “right to strike” and “recourse to the lock-out”. Under the final Constitution lock-outs enjoy no direct protection. The Constitutional Court’s certification judgement rejects the view that it is necessary in order to maintain equality to entrench the right to lock-out once the right to strike has been included. The Constitutional Court concluded that the right to strike and the right to lock-out are not always and necessarily equivalent. However the purpose of the lock-out is to settle collective dispute of the ways permitted by the Labour Relations Act, 1995. The purpose is not to terminate the relationship between the employer and the employee. The employer may not, for example, dismiss employees finally at the end of an unsuccessful lock-out in order to avoid the consequences of impending strike action by the employees.

The development of private divorce mediation appears to offer a friendly and informal alternative to the "hostile" adversarial divorce. A close analysis of its claims, however, shows them to be largely unproven. Urgent attention should therefore be given to the philosophical base of the movement. There is also a need for empirical research and for standardised training. Further unanswered questions relate to the part to be played by different professions, and to professional ethics. It is submitted that the appointment of Family Advocates is a step in the right direction but that the establishment of a full Family Court will best protect children's interests.

The dynamic social and economic conditions in Namibia warranted a periodic review of labour legislation. Given these needs, uhe then Ministry of Labour, undertook a project in 1998, to assess the effectiveness of the first post kndependence Labour Act, 1992 (Act No 6 of 1992) a trirartite task force was established which recommended the amendment of the 1992 Act. This led to the enactment of the Labour Act, 2004 which introduced a new system of dispute prevention and resolution. However, the 2004 Act could not be put into effect in its entirety, because of its technical flaws and the fact that the Namibian Employers Federation (NEF) took issue with some of the provisions of the Act, such as leave provisions. In 2005, the Ministry of Labour and Social Welfare with its social partners undertook a complete technical review of the entire 2004 Act. As a result, In 2007, the new Labour Bill 2007 was tabled in Parliament, which eventually adopted it as the Labour Act, 2007 (Act No 11 of 2007) which became operational on the 1st November 2008. The new Labour Act, 2007 (Act No 11 of 2007) brings in sweeping changes to the familiar terrain of labour law and industrial relations practice in Namibia. The new Act, has done aware with the District Labour Court system, in its place comes the Labour Commissioner. The rudimentary dispute- settlement mechanisms of the old (first ) Labour Act, 1992 ( Act No 6 of 1992) have made way for the more sophisticated, yet speedier and more economical system of alternative dispute resolution through arbitration and conciliation by the Labour Commissioner. The Labour Act, 2007, requires parties to the labour dispute to seek conciliation before either taking industrial action or seeking adjudicative solutions to the dispute. Not only does the Labour Act, establish or makes provision for the appointment of the Labour Commissioner to provide for dispute resolution, it also permits parties to establish their own process for dispute resolution through a private arbitration route. Faced with this daunting array of untested rules and institutions, I have approached the writing of this work with some trepidation. My aim is to provide a thoroughgoing commentary on the provisions relating to dispute resolution. In the absence of much authoritative interpretation, I had to rely heavily on past practices and foreign South African precedents to identify the construction that judges and arbitrators are likely to arrive at. The present treatise provides a, comprehensive and integrated commentary for all involvement in the resolution of labour disputes in Namibia; it further provides rules and procedures which govern statutory disputes resolution through the Labour Commissioner. I sincerely hope that this paper, will prove useful to all those involved in labour law and industrial relations practice, as well as to teachers and students of this subject.

This research study aims to investigate the South African Land Reform process from a conflict resolution perspective. According to Burton’s basic human needs theory deep-rooted social conflict will occur wherever social institutions neglect universal basic human needs. Excess to land and land tenure are considered basic human needs because they provide landowners with food, shelter and security. In absence of an extensive welfare state, land ownership fulfils the role of a social safety network, particularly in African countries. Consequently, an equal distribution of land is needed in order to enable the majority of South Africans to fulfil their basic human needs. The instrument chosen for correcting the inequalities in land distribution are the three components of the South African land reform programme namely tenure reform, restitution and redistribution. The South African Land Reform Programme was largely influenced by the World Bank’s ‘Willing-Seller Willing- Buyer’ or ‘Negotiated Land Reform Approach’. Nevertheless, the South African model differs from the original concept by the World Bank in some aspects. The outcome of the Land Reform Process is analysed and evaluated by the on-going evaluation approach. All sources used in this research are open to the public and published either on official websites or in hard cover version in reports and articles. The results of this investigation indicate that the target of redistributing 30% of white-owned agricultural land by the year 2014 is not going to be accomplished. Nevertheless, the settlement of claims can be considered a success story although most of the claims were settled by means of cash compensation instead of actual land transfer. Furthermore, a change in the land acquisition policy from a demand-led approach based on the negotiated land reform principle towards a more static, state-led, top-down approach has been identified as well as shortcomings in the post-settlement support of new landowners. To put it briefly, the land reform process in toto is about to fail and a chance of reducing the enormous conflict potential given away. Furthermore, the conflict potential will increase due to the failures in providing the poor and rural masses with access to land.

Discipline is crucial in the provision of quality public service work. This is because most citizens are serviced through the public service work. Adhering to rules and orders, exercise of self control and the ability to put needs of others over one’s own needs are fundamental aspects of discipline. Every workplace has its own pieces of legislation that are used as a guide on expected conduct as well as a tool to deal with failure to adhere to the outlined pieces of legislation governing the conduct in the workplace. There are institutions in place that deal with the crafting of the pieces of legislation which clearly outline the manner in which both the employer and employee should conduct themselves as well as rights of both parties as they interact in the employment relationship. The existing pieces of legislation as well as their implementation and relevance in this era needs to be closely scrutinised and critique with proposals within the prescripts of legislation is necessary as some pieces of legislation seem to be conclusive, thereby undermining procedures followed when dealing with cases of misconduct. In any disciplinary process, the sanction should be in line with the process as it has unfolded and not be influenced by how a piece of legislation is crafted. The Public Service Act, Employment of Educators’ Act and the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 are key statutes in dealing with discipline in public education. Sanctions for misconduct are dependent on the gravity of the misconduct. In order to discipline educators, sections 17 and 18 of the Employment of Educators Act are used as guides on processes and procedures to be followed.

Retrenchment, as a form of dismissal, is regulated by section 189 and 189A of the Labour Relations Act 1995. In order for a retrenchment to be fair, it must comply with both the substantive and procedural requirements stipulated in the Act. After an employee has proved the dismissal, the onus rests on the employer to comply with these two requirements by providing proof thereof. One of the most important procedural requirements that must be complied with by the employer is that the employer cannot merely make a decision to retrench. This decision may only be made once the employer, when contemplating a retrenchment, followed the lengthy consultation process as required in section 189. Recent amendments to section 189 introduced a distinction between a small and big employer and further between a large-scale and small-scale dismissal. If the employee is of the opinion that the employer did not comply with either the procedural or substantive requirements or both, he/she may refer such a dispute for conciliation and thereafter for arbitration or adjudication, according to a dispute resolution process contained in the Act, during which process certain remedies are available to the dismissed employee. The Labour Relations Act 1995 also introduced important amendments which have the effect that employees are allowed to, in certain circumstances, to strike over collective retrenchment disputes.

South African labour laws have undergone tremendous amendments before and after independence. This paper focuses on the development after independence, therefore section 34 of the Constitution of 1996, provisions of the Labour Relations Act of 1995 and other laws which deal with labour matters and regulate the labour relations and disputes in the country will be considered. The labour laws in South Africa provide inter alia for the dispute resolution mechanisms, the manner on which disputes should be handled by different organs which are empowered to do so. My focus will be to see how alternative disputes resolution processes of conciliation and arbitration in the Eastern Cape Province aim to transform the South African and global labour market by promoting an integrated simple, quick but efficient and inexpensive dispute settlement services in order to reduce the back log of cases, maintain labour peace, promote democracy at workplace with the view of advancing economic and social justice.