CWAO IN THE NEWS

The SWF has been trying for the past 26 months to register as the trade union that it is. The Registrar of Labour Relations flatly refused to process the registration. The SWF went to the Labour Court which ruled in July 2023 that the Registrar of Labour Relations must register the SWF as a union immediately. The Registrar has continued to refuse to do this. Instead, he is bringing an appeal tomorrow, even though in August 2023, his application for leave to appeal was rejected by the Labour Court (he then had to petition the Labour Appeal Court directly for leave to appeal).

The Department of Employment and Labour (DEL) appears intent on using the public purse (money paid in taxes by the working class) to hire expensive lawyers to take this case all the way to the Constitutional Court. Clearly, the DEL only wants to protect politically connected people who own labour broking companies and the unscrupulous employers who hire workers as "casuals" through labour brokers. These workers are often paid rates often below the minimum wage, and sometimes only get one day a week of work. They are among the layer of workers most in need of a trade union, but the country's trade unions have largely refused to organise them because they don't earn stable wages and are not able to pay high union membership fees.

It is only the SWF that has organised these workers but many employers have been refusing to negotiate with the SWF because it is not a registered trade union - and this is because the DEL is spending public money on trying to delay the SWF's registration.

Workers have the Constitutional right to join a union of their choice. For this reason, the DEL is never going to win a legal victory in this matter, especially not in the Constitutional Court. In the Labour Court, the DEL lost with costs - more wasted public money.

The DEL's argument that the SWF is not a real union because it is worker-controlled has already been rejected by the Labour Court on several comprehensive grounds. A reminder of the key points in Labour Court judge Andre van Niekerk's ruling one year ago:

* The Registrar of Labour Relations was wrong to assert that section 95 of the LRA is so restrictive that it limits workers to joining only unions of a certain type (those unions that do not elect rotating steering committees but only elect a tiny group of leaders who remain in leadership positions for three years). Judge van Niekerk pointed out that the courts have already ruled that the rights of workers to freely associate "must be interpreted generously".

* The Registrar had insisted that SWF’s constitution does not comply with s95 of the LRA, because it does not establish the office of a Secretary. The Court held that this was incorrect: SWF’s constitution does indeed establish the office of a Secretary. Insofar as the Registrar contended that a Secretary must be a permanent General Secretary who manages the union’s administration (instead of a rotating role, elected at each Meeting), the Court held that the SWF constitution provided for the Standing Committee to administer the union, subject to the overall direction and control of Meetings. SWF “is entitled to make that choice”.

* The Registrar had complained that the LRA treats unions equally and does not make provision for ‘traditional’ or ‘new’ forms. The Court agreed that all unions are treated equally, but this does not mean that the Registrar is entitled to refuse to register a union that has chosen to adopt organisational structures which do not replicate those of the unions which are currently registered.

* The Registrar claimed that the Court had measured the union’s freedom of association rights against the SA Constitution instead of the LRA, but the Court held that here again he was wrong: Section 8 of the LRA gives full expression to the constitutional rights to freedom of association.

Background to the case:

In June 2022, the Registrar rejected the SWF's application to register as a union for reasons that have no validity in law, except his own insistence that it did not look like a traditional trade union.

The SWF challenged this in the Labour Court and won the case in June 2023, with judge van Niekerk ruling that the Registrar must register SWF within 14 days. The Registrar then brought a fruitless and wasteful application for leave to appeal this ruling, which he again lost in August 2023. He then petitioned the LAC directly and it is this case that will be heard tomorrow.

The SWF has consciously resolved not to have positions such as general secretary, president, and deputy president with a lot of power concentrated in a small group. Instead, it has a Standing Committee which takes minutes of all meetings, keeps an attendance register, and controls the collection and spending of membership fees.

Each meeting elects a different chairperson and a secretary, at least one of whom must be a woman. This ensures that everyone gets a chance to develop skills in meeting procedures. It also prevents domination by any particular workplace or grouping, and minimises the likelihood of corruption.

/ends For comment, please call:
SWF - Irene Sibanyoni (Standing Committee member) on 083 953 0955
CWAO – Sydney Moshoaliba (Education officer) on 078 562 1942 and 072 5093587

Category: PRESS RELEASE | NEWS