Carmel Rickard reports that in a case certain to intrigue many, the National Union of Metalworkers of SA (Numsa) recently found itself in an unusual role — as an employer in dispute with a union organiser who challenged an alleged unfair labour practice.
Even the Labour Court could not resist pointing out the irony of the union being "taken to task by one of its own employees", with acting judge Sean Snyman calling it a case of the "shoe being on the other foot". The dispute concerned a car-purchase scheme the union offered its employees as a benefit — subject to certain conditions. The conditions included that if a car developed problems and was not used for 30 days, the allowance paid to the employee would lapse. Importantly, every employee who was allocated a vehicle had a duty to report any problems with that car. When local Numsa organiser Mandla Skhosana ignored these conditions, despite receiving reminders, the union suspended access to his vehicle and fuel allowance. Skhosana claimed he had been unfairly treated and took his grievance to the CCMA. When the arbitrator found in Numsa’s favour, Skhosana asked the Labour Court for its view. Judge Snyman found nothing wrong with the arbitrator’s ruling as there was no doubt that Numsa’s decision to suspend the allowance was "objectively justified and relevant". He ruled that the case amounted to a disagreement over how the union applied a benefit policy — something that fell far short of establishing an unfair labour practice.
- Read the full original of the report on this dispute at BusinessLive (paywall access only)
Get other news reports at the SA Labour News home page