Thesis (LLM. (Labour Law)) -- University of Limpopo, 2012 / The purpose of the study is to address the effects of employment discrimination in the workplace focussing on designated groups, by comparing South Africa and Canada. Canada is one of the few countries that have addressed the employment barriers of target groups with one encompassing piece of legislation. In this study reference was made at the constitutional provisions towards unfair discrimination, labour law materials, employment and statutory provision so that the future researcher could see where employment discrimination in South African and Canada originate and what is the position. In order to address employment discrimination in the workplace case laws, courts judgments and other jurisprudence were used. The scope focused in this study is broad as a researcher did not look at other forms of employment discrimination. Employment discrimination in South Africa and Canada exists, this implies that the employment discrimination between two countries could be comparable. Policies and practices in order to identify employment barriers facing the disadvantaged groups were discussed. Therefore critical look focused on the employment systems, policies and practices at workplaces and also identify employment barriers facing designated groups in relation to recruitment, job classification, remuneration, employment benefits, conditions of services and promotion. South Africa and Canada emanated from a historical background of inequalities. Such inequalities lead to discrimination. South Africa and Canada’s discrimination affected blacks, Aboriginal people, women and people with disabilities. The grounds of discrimination were discussed in full for both countries.

Thesis (LLM. (Labour Law)) -- University of Limpopo, 2013 / Like other forms of prohibited discriminations, discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation has become an area of concern in the workplace. The law prohibits discrimination in whatever form and declares it unlawful to discriminate people on the basis of sexual orientation. In this work, South African anti- discrimination provisions on the basis of sexual orientation will be emphasized, whereas foreign countries will only be referred to for the sake of comparative analysis. Discrimination of lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and homosexual people (LGBTH) in the workplace is manifested by harassment and constructive dismissal through homophobia. Homophobia is a psychological concept which refers to the hatred of people after declaring their gay, lesbian or homosexual identities. This study reveals homophobic practices towards homosexuals as if they are not beneficiaries of contemporary democratic laws and dividends of democracy enshrined in Chapter 2 of the RSA Constitution of 1996 and Chapter 2 of the Employment Equity Act (EEA) 55 of 1998. To this, the research revealed an interesting corroboration in section 9(4) of the RSA Constitution of 1996, and section 6(1) of the EEA 55 of 1998, which provide that no person may unfairly discriminate another on the grounds of sexual orientation. The study has also revealed that among others, employment rights of people in South Africa and in foreign countries are being violated on the basis of sexual orientation. In most case laws, people who disclosed to their employers, that their gender identities are different to what was expected as straight genders and those who informed their employers about their intentions to undergo sex change surgeries are being hired and fired. The study also proved a point that when it comes to sexual orientation exclusion and discrimination, the same vulnerable groups of gays and lesbians are as well caught up in practices of sodomy and sexual harassments. Therefore, the remedies suggested by this research will also apply to everyone including gays and lesbians. To avoid controversy and issues, statutes and decided court cases have been stated as they are, in chapter 4 of this research, for the sake of comparative analysis in order to unravel the existing state of affairs through approaches from different jurisdictions.

Thesis (LLM. (Labour Law)) -- University of Limpopo, 2012 / Indirect discrimination is a concept which originated from the United States of America. The concept came about after the failure of anti- discrimination legislation to improve the position of Black Americans, particularly in the employment field. The legislature realized that there are structural practices and policies, in the employment field which affect certain racial groups negatively. These practices of discrimination were not clearly defined hence the meaning and interpretation of the concept was left to the administrative body, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) and the courts. The concept was imported into the South African jurisprudence after the inception of the government of National unity in 1994. The new government was committed to bring to an end all forms of discrimination which were in the past practiced against the Black community. Section 9(3) of the Constitution of South Africa Act 1996 (Act 108 of 1996) proscribed direct and indirect discrimination. These sections served as the basis for sections 6(1) of the Employment Equity Act 1998 (Act 55 of 1998) which proscribes “unfair direct and indirect discrimination” in any employment policy or practice. Its scope is wide and allows Plaintiffs to prove their claims in jurisdictions where it could have been very difficult for them to do so. While in the United States, statistical evidence is required to prove indirect discrimination, this is not the case in South Africa as seen in the landmark case of v Leonard Dingler Employee Representative Council v Leonard Dingler (PTY) LTD (1998) 19 ILJ 285 (LC). In this case when the Court gave its decision it simply relied on the facts of the case instead of complicated statistical evidence. Seemingly this will apply only in more obvious cases. In more complicated cases, Plaintiffs will still need to submit statistics to prove their claim.