published_or_final_version / Public Administration / Master / Master of Social Sciences

The thesis examines the effectiveness of the Kenyan labour dispute resolution system by undertaking a comparative analysis of South African and international labour standards. A comparative approach is adopted, which relies on primary and secondary sources of data, thereby undertaking an in-depth content analysis. The study provides a comprehensive discussion of the current legislative provisions and alternative dispute resolution (ADR) framework as recognised in both countries' national labour legislation as well as in a number of international labour standards instruments. In particular, the study illuminates and discusses the bottlenecks in the current Kenyan system and argues that it does not adequately respond to the needs of parties in terms of the international labour conventions. The study argues further that labour disputes should be resolved as quickly and informally as possible and at the lowest level possible. Similarly, disputes should ideally be resolved with little or no procedural technicalities, and without allowing them to drag on indefinitely. However, this study observes that there have been notable concerns in the current dual system of labour dispute resolution in Kenya. The problems include protracted referral timeframe for dismissal disputes, non-regulation of maximum timeframe for the agreed extension after 30 days conciliation period has lapsed, the absence of a statutory timeframe for appointing a conciliator/commissioner and arbitration process under both the Labour Relations Act, 2007 and the Employment Act, 2007. The study argues for Kenya to incorporate provisions in its labour laws of a proactive and expeditious dispute resolution thereby helping to resolve labour disputes in the most effective and efficient manner without necessarily having to resort to the courts. Likewise, the responsibility of resolving statutory labour disputes in Kenya is still heavily under the control of the government of Kenya through the Ministry of Labour. There is still no independent statutory dispute resolution institution (Conciliation, Mediation Commission) as envisaged by the Labour Relations Act, 2007. As a result, the Kenyan dispute resolution system has been criticised for lack of impartiality leading to the increases in strikes and lockouts. Similarly, it has made the attainment of effective and efficient labour dispute resolution difficult. In view of that, a comparative approach with South Africa is adopted with a view to informing Kenya how the establishment of independent institutions similar to the Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration, Bargaining Councils and specialised labour courts can lead to effective dispute resolution in Kenya. Given above, the study provides a wide range of remedial intervention intended to address the gaps and flaws highlighted in the study. Systematically, the study provides important suggestions and possible solutions for a better institutional framework and processes to address them. However, the study acknowledges that making effective and efficient labour dispute resolution a reality calls for renewed commitment from government and social partners and investment in appropriate human and financial resources. This requires a strong political will as well as concerted efforts from all role players in the labour relations community in the two respective countries.

History and Background: The history of statutory labour dispute resolution of South Africa dates back to 1909, when the Transvaal Disputes Prevention Act of 1909 was promulgated which applied only to the Transvaal. The Industrial Conciliation Act of 1924 established industrial councils and ad hoc conciliation boards and excluded black workers from the statutory definition of employee and this resulted in a dual industrial relations system that existed up to 1979. The history of statutory labour dispute resolution of Swaziland dates back to 1980 when the first Industrial Relations Act of 1980 was promulgated which established the first Industrial Court. Research Findings: The dispute resolution systems of South Africa and Swaziland contain both similarities and differences. Lessons for Swaziland include combining general and specific dispute resolution procedures, providing the right of a referring party to apply for condonation for late referral of a dispute, using conciliation-arbitration, making arbitration proceedings public hearings, influence of parties on the appointment of arbitrators, court adjudication, pre-dismissal arbitration, court adjudication by judges only, establishment of a constitutional court, full protection of protected strikes/ lockouts from interdicts, legalization of sympathy strikes, and removal of strikes/ lockout ballot. Lessons for South Africa include plural representation of parties at conciliation and arbitration, re-direction of some disputes by the Labour Court to the Commission for arbitration, reporting of labour disputes direct to the Head of State for determination.

published_or_final_version / Business Administration / Master / Master of Business Administration

published_or_final_version / Business Administration / Master / Master of Business Administration

LL.M. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

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.

No abstract available. / Thesis (LL.M.)-University of Natal, Durban,1985.

O Poder Judiciário exerceu uma grande influência na formação do Estado brasileiro, o que ressaltou o papel da classe jurídica dentro da sociedade. Como juristas, os magistrados tiveram uma grande influência na elaboração da estrutura e organização estatal o que lhes renderam um enorme prestígio e poder dentro do meio social. Esta característica associada à luta pela independência e profissionalização da categoria gerou um distanciamento dos juízes com os cidadãos, sendo que a formação da magistratura baseada no método cartesiano de fazer ciência, que não acompanhou as transformações sociais trazidas pela modernidade, aprofundou ainda mais este afastamento, gerando uma insatisfação com a atuação do Poder Judiciário, inclusive no ramo trabalhista. O aumento da conflituosidade provocado pelas modificações implantadas no mundo moderno exige respostas rápidas e efetivas do Poder Judiciário, como pacificador social. Neste panorama, os meios de solução de conflitos devem ser privilegiados, que além de desafogarem a máquina judiciária, resolvem a contenda no seio social. A conciliação vem sendo estimulada como melhor e mais rápida solução para as ações judiciais, portanto precisa ser aprimorada. A humanização da atuação jurisdicional se apresenta como alternativa para aproximar o Poder Judiciário do cidadão e auxiliar na missão de pacificação dos conflitos, pois promete o aperfeiçoamento da pessoa para melhor conviver em sociedade, em um momento em que o isolamento e as contradições parecem atingir o homem moderno. O presente trabalho objetivou identificar o sentido da relação estabelecida em audiência entre o magistrado e as partes, através de uma pesquisa fenomenológica existencial, utilizando como instrumento metodológico, a versão de sentido, para a coleta de dados. Os resultados e discussão demonstram que das falas dos magistrados e dos jurisdicionados emergiram eixos de significados que revelam o sentimento de cada pesquisado, inclusive com tematizações específicas dos Juízes; eixos que se comunicavam nas vivências dos reclamantes e dos reclamados e outros que são peculiares a cada parte em específico. Analisando estas unidades de significações se podem traçar conexões com a revisão da literatura que evidenciaram a necessidade de aperfeiçoar a atividade jurisdicional e promoveram uma reflexão sobre as posturas adotadas na atuação do Poder Judiciário Trabalhista da Paraíba. Conclui-se com a sugestão de uma nova perspectiva para humanizar a tentativa conciliatória, adotando os fundamentos da Abordagem Centrada na Pessoa para qualificar este ato jurisdicional e implantar dentro da Justiça do Trabalho uma conciliação humanista / The Judiciary has exercised a great influence on the formation of the Brazilian state, which emphasized the role of the judicial profession in society. As jurists, the judges had a great influence in developing the structure and the state organization that earned them enormous prestige and power within the social environment. This feature associated with the struggle for independence and professionalism of the category generated a distance of judges with the public, and training for the judges based on the Cartesian method of doing science, which not accompanied the social changes brought by modernity, has enlarged this distance, generating a dissatisfaction with the performance of the Judiciary, including the labor sector. The increased conflictuality that caused by the changes implemented in the modern world requires rapid and effective responses of the judiciary, social as peacemaker. In this scenario, the means of conflict resolution should be privileged, that beyond the Judiciary of relief, resolve the dispute within society. Reconciliation has been promoted as the best and quickest solution to the lawsuits, so they need to be improved. Humanizing is an alternative approach to the judiciary of the citizen and helping in the mission of pacifying the conflict, for it promises the improvement of the person to cope better in society, in a time when the isolation and the contradictions seem to reach the modern man. This study aimed to identify the direction of the relationship between the judge and the parties, through an existential phenomenological research, using as a methodological tool, the version of meaning, to collect data. Results and discussion show that the speech of judges and parties of the axes of meanings emerged that reveal the feelings of each search, including specific thematizations Judges; axes that are communicated in the experiences of the parties and others axes which are peculiar to each part in particular. Analyzing these units of meaning they can trace connections to the literature review, highlighting the need to improve the judicial activity and promote a reflection on the postures adopted in the Judiciary of the Paraiba. This Search concluded by suggesting a new perspective to humanize the conciliatory attempt, taking the fundamentals of the Person Centered Approach to qualify and deploy the conciliation within the Judiciary proposing the conciliation a humanist

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.