M.Phil. / The Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 introduced new structures for resolution of labour disputes. The Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) was established as an independent body to resolve labour disputes. The CCMA also took over the functions of the old Industrial Court. The Act also replaced the old Industrial councils with bargaining councils. The function of the bargaining councils is to play a parallel role to the CCMA in dispute resolution within their scope of jurisdiction. The purpose of the legislature in establishing the bargaining councils was to alleviate part of the burden of the CCMA in resolving of labour disputes. The Act envisaged that the CCMA would resolve disputes speedily and inexpensively. If bargaining councils fail in their task of resolving disputes, these disputes are referred back to the CCMA adding to its caseload. The study seeks to establish the effectiveness of bargaining councils in handling dispute resolution function and whether they assist the CCMA in alleviating part of its burden. There are 43 bargaining councils that are accredited by the CCMA to conciliate and arbitrate disputes. Some bargaining councils are accredited to do both conciliations and arbitrations but are failing to perform both tasks. Some bargaining councils are closing down. Other registered bargaining councils do not apply for accreditation. Disputes that are not handled by these councils are referred to the CCMA. The CCMA caseload is escalating every year since inception in 1996. In view of these circumstances the study seeks to understand from bargaining councils and from both the unions and employers organizations that are party to the bargaining council agreements, whether there are any problems that hinder the effectiveness of bargaining councils in dispute resolution in the private sector. It has been concluded in the study that there are a number of problems that can cause bargaining councils not to exercise dispute resolution function effectively. It has been established that only few bargaining councils receive a high number of disputes referred. Bargaining councils are quicker in handling disputes than the CCMA, however, most bargaining councils receive a small number of disputes. Bargaining councils also complain about insufficient funds in handling dispute resolution function. They complain that the subsidy they receive from the CCMA is not enough for this function. Small bargaining councils are the most suffering because of low numbers of referrals. It has also been established that bargaining councils pay their panelists very high rates. The non-accredited bargaining councils are rejected when applying for accreditation because of not meeting the required criteria. Employers are negative about belonging to bargaining councils because they feel it is costly. Some employers who belong to bargaining councils are also reluctant to contribute to established council's fund.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:netd.ac.za/oai:union.ndltd.org:uj/uj:9142 |
| Date | 14 August 2012 |
| Source Sets | South African National ETD Portal |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Thesis |
Page generated in 0.0096 seconds