Numsa to ask Constitutional Court to reinstate 733 Aveng steel workers

04 March 2020 - 17:56 By Nonkululeko Njilo
subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now
The apex court will consider Numsa's call for Aveng Trident Steel to reinstate dismissed workers.
The apex court will consider Numsa's call for Aveng Trident Steel to reinstate dismissed workers.
Image: NICOLENE OLCKERS/GALLO IMAGES

The National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (Numsa) is set to approach the Constitutional Court on Friday to challenge what it deems to be the unfair dismissal of 733 workers by Aveng Trident Steel.   

The move follows a four-year court battle after workers were allegedly forced in 2015 to accept changes to the terms and conditions of their employment.

“The company issued a section 189 notice informing our members of its plans to restructure and retrench,” said Jacob Xilongo, Numsa’s Ekurhuleni regional secretary.

“In the letter they said that if workers refused, then their contracts would be terminated.

“Our members refused to accept the new terms and conditions, and were subsequently dismissed. This is in violation of the Labour Relations Act ... which provides that workers cannot be dismissed for refusing a change in their terms and conditions.” 

Xilongo said Numsa took the matter to the labour court, where the dismissals were upheld. They subsequently appealed to the labour appeals court (LAC), but lost the bid too.  

He said during the court proceedings they had argued that “dismissal is automatically unfair if the reason is a refusal by employees to accept a demand in respect of any matter of mutual interest between them and their employer,” according to section 187(1)(c) of the act.

However, the employer argued that they were dismissed because of a change in operational requirements — not because of a change in their terms and conditions.

“The employer claimed that the letter which was issued to our members was not a demand but rather a proposal based on operational requirements,” said Xilongo.

He said Numsa wants the Constitutional Court to find that the LAC’s interpretation of the act was incorrect — and that it erred when it found that Aveng’s letter did not constitute a demand and that individual applicants must not be reinstated.

Xilongo said the decision to approach the top court was also to get clarity and protect workers from exploitation.  

“The legal implications of this case are very serious. If Aveng succeeds at the Constitutional Court, it means employers can circumvent the section 189 consultation process by simply tabling demands to employees about changes to their terms and conditions. If they refuse, then they will be dismissed.

“It is therefore important that the court clarifies this issue in order to protect workers from being exploited by the bosses.”


subscribe Just R20 for the first month. Support independent journalism by subscribing to our digital news package.
Subscribe now