Employment contract signing job deal Recruitment concept

The Importance of Clear Employment and Commercial Contracts: Lessons from Recent Legal Cases

by with No Comment Vannie Pillay

Why Clear Contracts Matter

In the business world, having clear agreements with your employees (and business partners) is essential. These written contracts are like maps that guide everyone through potential conflicts or misunderstandings. Recent legal cases show just how crucial they are. In this article, we focus on agreements between employers and employees.

Legal Basics: Understanding Section 29

In South Africa, there’s a rule (Section 29 of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act) that says employers need to give employees written job details. This isn’t just paperwork—it’s about making sure everyone knows where they stand. And it’s especially important when there’s a disagreement.

Navigating Contractual Disputes: The Case of Three Executives

In a recent case involving Passenger Rail Agency of South Africa and Others v Martha Ngoye and Others (handed down on 26 March 2004), three executives faced dismissal when their employer claimed their contracts had expired. However, two of these executives disputed this, pointing to their written contracts which stated they held permanent positions. Unsurprisingly, these executives emerged victorious, their claims supported by the explicit terms of their contracts.

The Significance of Contractual Details

The significance of these contracts went beyond job titles; they contained provisions stating that changes couldn’t be made without being reduced to writing. This safeguarded against arbitrary modifications and ensured stability in employment terms.

Unravelling Company Policies: Understanding Contractual Confusion

The situation highlighted a curious discrepancy: while the employer asserted that all executives were on 5-year fixed-term contracts, the contracts of the disputed executives indicated permanent employment. It’s plausible that a policy shift within the company led to confusion regarding contractual terms. This scenario underscores the intricate interplay between company policies and legal obligations in the realm of labour law. While company policies may outline general practices, they must align with legal requirements to ensure compliance and protect the rights of employees. In cases where policies deviate from legal mandates, as seen here, confusion and disputes may arise, emphasising the importance of clarity and coherence between internal policies and statutory regulations.

Examining Tenure: A Case of Implicit Contractual Rights

As for the third executive, despite receiving a promotion, no new contract was signed. While it’s unclear whether their initial contract specified permanent or fixed-term employment, the court noted their lengthy tenure of 12 years, suggesting a stable, long-term arrangement.

Legal Implications: Upholding Employment Rights

Ultimately, the court ruled in favour of the executives, deeming their terminations unlawful. This outcome underscores the importance of documenting any changes to employment terms. By ensuring that modifications are formally recorded, businesses can avoid legal disputes and maintain transparent, fair employment practices.

How to Protect Your Business: Our Approach at Ignite Hub

At Ignite SME Hub, we help small and medium-sized businesses draft contracts that cover all the bases. Whether it’s setting the job duration or dealing with changes down the road, we’ve got you covered. Because when you have clear contracts, you’re not just protecting yourself—you’re building trust with your team.

In Summary: Why it Pays to Get it Right

So, what’s the bottom line? Written contracts aren’t just about following the law—they’re about keeping your business on solid ground. By making sure everyone knows what’s expected from the start, you’re not just avoiding headaches later on. You’re showing your employees that you value fairness and honesty in the workplace. And that’s a win-win for everyone.

Judge's hammer and helmet Law and Justice about labor law concept Construction law.

Unravelling the Power Play: Can a Chairperson’s Disciplinary Sanction be Challenged?

by with No Comment Vannie Pillay

In the intricate realm of labour law, the imposition of disciplinary sanctions can often lead to contentious debates between employers and employees. But what happens when the decision of a Chairperson in a disciplinary hearing doesn’t align with the employer’s expectations? Can the imposed sanction be challenged?

Navigating the Terrain of Disciplinary Action

Employee dismissal typically stems from three main grounds: retrenchment, incapacity, or misconduct. It’s this latter category that often sparks the need for a disciplinary hearing, where an employee’s conduct is scrutinized and adjudicated upon.

During such hearings, the Chairperson assumes a pivotal role, charged with the responsibility of ensuring a fair and impartial process. Despite being appointed by the employer, the Chairperson is expected to exercise independence in determining guilt and appropriate sanctions.

Navigating Conflicting Perspectives: The Chairperson vs. Employer Conundrum

However, what ensues when the Chairperson’s decision deviates from the employer’s stance? Picture a scenario where an employer deems misconduct deserving of dismissal, yet the Chairperson advocates for a milder penalty, such as a final written warning.

This discrepancy can be a source of frustration for employers, who may feel their authority challenged. Yet, relief lies in the fact that employers possess the prerogative to override the Chairperson’s decision and substitute the sanction, albeit after affording the employee a fair opportunity to present their case.

The Legal Landscape: Assessing Fairness

The crux of the matter lies in the fairness of such actions. While employers may reserve the right to substitute sanctions in their disciplinary codes, arbitrators and courts will scrutinise these decisions to ensure procedural fairness.

Empowering Employers with Insight

Should the employee challenge the dismissal, the starting point is whether the disciplinary code allows the employer to override the decision of a chairperson. For this reason, employers would be well advised to reserve the right to substitute decisions of a Chairperson in their disciplinary codes, where such exist. An employer could also specify in the letter appointing a Chairperson that their mandate is to recommend a sanction, as opposed to making a final decision.

At Ignite SME Hub, we understand the complexities of these situations. Our expertise enables us to guide employers through the intricate process of challenging Chairpersons’ decisions, evaluating the fairness of such actions, and exploring alternative avenues available to employers.

In Conclusion: Empowering Employers with Insight

In the realm of labour law, the power dynamics between employers, employees, and disciplinary authorities can be complex and nuanced. By understanding the intricacies of challenging Chairpersons’ decisions and ensuring procedural fairness, employers can navigate these challenges with confidence and clarity.

At Ignite SME Hub, powered by Oaktree People Solutions, we’re committed to empowering small and medium sized business owners with the knowledge and expertise needed to navigate the complexities of employment law. Reach out to us today to learn more about how we can support your organisation’s HR and legal needs.