Elmo wrote: "Protected And Unprotected Strikes. There is a broad distinction between strikes that comply with section 64 of the LRA and those that do not. ... An unprotected strike constitutes a breach of contract for which the employees may be dismissed, interdicted or sued for compensation by the employer."
The question I have is whether this a protected or unprotected strike?Employees should have referred this matter either to the CCMA or relevant bargaining council for resolution prior to embarking on a strike if not the second part of the definition[unprotected strike] should kick in immediately.
Elmo it is one thing having said laws, however the enforceability of said laws is the issue. This is the crisis in the country at the moment. Apply the law and dismiss the lot of the strikers embarking on such unprotected strike and one opens themselves up a can of worms.
Although I am a firm believer in the fact that if the legislature deemed it necessary to draft and enact such legislation then why is it not enforced? However practically, it is difficult to produce, train and earn the trust of a few hundred if not thousand grooms overnight.
Its a catch 22 that in South Africa, the mentality is rather to down tools, textbooks and the like and thus hold whatever association and/or institution to ransom as the current era deem themselves irreplaceable. The blue print has been set nationally that one may continue to strike (with little to no consequences) until said demands are obtained.
The industry itself in my opinion is not solely to blame, it is the blue print that government for years has set. The possibly violent few may end up being dismissed for their roles in the unprotected strikes, however the vast majority will keep their jobs on improved terms which in the end is merely the same as applying a plaster to a gun shot wound, content for now until things boil over again. Thus we have the same issues for years as a clear line in the sand is not drawn. Things will continue until said line is drawn and until an industry or government for that matter decides to set an example.
My point therefore being is that it is adorable having the best constitution and some decent legislation for a democracy as young as ours however applying such is where the authorities are quite content on applying that self same plaster uniformly and thus encountering the self same issues time and time again.
My thoughts, albeit somewhat bias, but the naive few that think they are stupid for striking are missing the bigger picture, time and time again the authorities give in and whats going to change? Nothing. Until things like bargaining councils are used, people have respect for the law and the relevant channels that concerns ought to be raised we will continue to have these issues. This however is a two-way street, I am of the opinion that people resort to downing tools as well as textbooks and the likes because often these concerns, although raised through the correct channels more often then not fall on deaf ears.
In order for the law to take its course the middle to upper channel ought to wake up and be proactive otherwise I am afraid that there will not be a long term amicable future for racing as well as industry as a whole because like i said, the blue print has long been set.
Topic Author
