Thesis (MBA)--Stellenbosch University, 2006. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: In many countries in the world today, Labour Courts have developed as an integral part of the law system arising from the need to afford labour disputes specialised adjudication, independent from the ordinary civil courts. This study presents a comparison of the German Labour Court System and the British Employment Tribunal System, representing the Continental Law System and the Common Law System respectively. In comparing the German Labour Courts and the British Employment Tribunals, the study highlights the special qualities of labour law and why labour disputes are treated differently from other legal disputes. It demonstrates that both systems have attempted to achieve the handling of labour disputes in different ways and proceedings. Similarly, the study reveals that both systems have their pros, cons and limitations and that no system can guarantee an optimal way to achieve a "better" justice. Nonetheless, the study attempts to show that each system can learn from the other's strengths and weaknesses by being open and reasonable to criticism. Another important objective of this study is to determine whether Labour Courts and Employment Tribunals should be maintained as a separate part of the law system or whether to merge them into the ordinary civil courts as some critics feel that such courts and tribunals create added expenses to governments. Furthermore, the study explores other dispute resolution mechanisms that if encouraged, provide additional benefit to labour issues in teoday's complex business environment. As a whole, the study proves that the German Labour Courts and British Employment Tribunals are a quicker, cheaper and better way of achieving justice, preferable to the civil litigation system. It is therefore concluded that such courts and tribunals should be maintained because of their significant successes so far. Furthermore, it is suggested that labour dispute resolution can be further developed through the increased use of mechanisms such as conciliation, negotiation and mediation in the management of organizations today. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: In baie lande van die wereld vandag, het gespesialiseerde arbeids tribunale ontwikkel as 'n integrale deel van die regsisteem as gevolg van die behoefte om arbeidsdispute te onderwerp aan gespesialiseerde beregting, onafhanklik van gewone siviele howe. Hierdie studie behels 'n vergelyking van die Duitse Arbiedshofsisteem en die Britse "Employment Tribunal" sisteem, wat die kontinentale regsisteem en 'n gemeenregtelike regsisteem respektiewelik verteenwoordig. Deur die Duitse Arbeidshowe en die Britse "Employment Tribunals" te vergelyk, beklemtoon hierdie studie die spesiale eienskappe van arbeidsreg en waarom arbeidsdispute anders as andere regsdispute hanteer word. Dit demonstreer dat beide sisteme probeer het om die hantering van arbeidsdispute op verskillende maniere en deur middel van verskillende prosesse te bereik. Terselfdertyd, wys die studie dat beide sisteme hulle voordele, nadele en tekortkomings het, en dat nie een sisteem 'n optimale manier het om "beter" geregtigheid tussen werkgewer en werknemer te laat geskied nie. Nietemin, probeer die studie wys dat elke sisteem kan leer van die ander se sterktepunte en tekortkominge. 'n Verdere belangrike doel van hierdie studie is om te bepaal of die Duitse Arbeidshowe en Britse "Employment Tribunals" as aparte deel van die regsisteem behoort te voortbestaan, of hulle saamgesmelt moet word met die gewone siviele howe, want sekere kritici voel dat sulke howe en tribunale addisionele koste vir owerhede meebring. Verder ondersoek die studie ander dispuutoplossings meganismes, wat, indien dit bevorder sou word, dalk addisionele voordele in vandag se komplekse besigheidsomgewing kan meebring. In geheel toon hierdie studie dat die Duitse Arbeidshowe en Britse "Employment Tribunals" 'n vinniger, goedkoper en beter manier bied om geregtigheid te bereik en verkies word bo die siviele litigasie sisteem. Die gevolgtrekking is dat sulke howe en tribunale behou moet word as gevolg van hulle sukses tot dusver. Verder word dit voorgestel dat arbeidsgeskilbeslegting verder ontwikkel kan word deur groter gebruik te maak van meganismes soos konsiliase, onderhandeling en mediasie in organisasies.

M.Comm. / With the adoption of the 1995 Labour Relations Act (LRA) and the creation of the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), expectations ran high that the era of workplace conflict that had characterised previous labour dispensation would come to an end. The reality, however, is that parties have abdicated their responsibility in dispute-resolution, and have transferred this responsibility to the CCMA and Bargaining Councils. The purpose of this study was to gain insight into the perceptions of users of the current model with regard to its effectiveness, flaws and challenges. Based on the data received, this study presents a case for a new approach to discouraging disputes from being taken beyond the level of the workplace. The following research questions were formulated: Given the prevailing lack of ownership by parties over dispute-resolution and the resultant rise in case load and costs, what alternative strategies could be adopted? With the introduction of such new strategies, what dispute resolution model would be appropriate to enable the parties to focus on the core issues and also reduce costs? These questions are based on the set of main problems and sub-problems. The main problems are the low dispute-resolution/settlement rate (the conciliation stage being a mere formality), even when arbitration takes place; and the lack of ownership for dispute prevention by line managers and organised labour. In collecting data I followed the triangulation approach which combined both qualitative and quantitative research. During the qualitative stage, I collected data by using unstructured interviews and audio-recording the interviews with the Secretary of the PHSDSBC. I used quantitative methods to distribute participants’ agenda points and to record the numbers returned. The same method was used to analyse the patterns and themes emerging from data collected. Forty-nine negotiators, shop stewards, human resource managers across the nine provinces, and staff in the office of the Secretary of the PHSDSBC, were selected. Because participants in the study were distributed over a wide area, my level of physical contact with them was restricted to the normal business schedules of the Bargaining Council, during teambuilding exercises, and during Employer Caucus meetings. As a participant in these meetings, I was able to adopt an auto-ethnographic stance. I analysed the data, using graphical depictions, and categorised it into thoughts and later into themes. The findings indicate that the current dispute-resolution system model, being reactive in its application, is time-consuming for the both employee and the employer.