In July, COSATU (with FEDUSA and NACTU) submitted a section 77 application to NEDLAC about transport related issues during COVID-19, most notably, the decision to permit the full loading of taxis despite advice in favour of social distancing.
After NEDLAC could not facilitate the resolution of the issues [we refrain at this point from making any sarcastic comments on the possibilities of resolving these issues], the federations gave notice under section 77(1)(d) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) of their intention to embark on a 'socio-economic strike'. SAFTU has also joined.
We do not intend to bore you with things you 'need to know' about tomorrow's 'national protest'.
We would rather use this time to share things that are painfully obvious, following a range of false claims made by employers to workers who intend to join the protest.
Only members of 'recognised' trade unions may participate in the protest.
Section 77(1) of the LRA literally opens with these words: 'Every employee who is not engaged in an essential service or a maintenance service has the right to take part in protest action...'
Also, why would participation in a national protest be more limited than participation in an ordinary workplace strike under section 64 of the LRA?
For example, if NUMSA calls a strike at a workplace, AMCU members may participate in that strike with full protections from dismissal or any other retaliation from employers.
Again, section 64 literally opens with these words 'Every employee has the right to strike...'
A certificate has been issued to protest about taxi-loading, so workers will be dismissed for protesting about anything else.
Without getting into trite points on freedom of expression, the LRA is clear: Section 77 attaches only these conditions to workers' participation in a protest action.
NEDLAC had a chance to resolve the complaint first.
A registered trade union called the protest action.
That trade union has complied with all of the notice requirements when calling the action.
The Labour Court has not interdicted the action.
There is no condition that workers limit their protests to issues listed in the section 77 notice.
Notice to embark on a secondary strike has not been provided.
A section 77 protest action is based on the idea that all workers should be able to engage in protests beyond the shop floor on the basis that workers will often share common interests regardless of which company they work for.
An ordinary strike is called by workers at a company in respect of issues that are of interest only to a company and the workers who serve it.
In other words, a section 77 protest action is not the same thing as a strike, and so the notion of a secondary strike simply does not apply.
In closing, we would like to thank the companies and consultants who made this post possible.
Comments