HR Pulse




Menu Style

Home Termination

Employment Termination

Government blamed as shipping sheds 600 jobs

The government’s much-vaunted plan to grow SA’s shipping industry has hit a major snag, with hundreds of jobs recently being shed instead of created.  


Numsa challenges Eskom SMS dismissals

The National Union of Metalworkers of SA (Numsa) said on Friday that it would challenge power utility Eskom on its decision to fire 1,000 workers at its Medupi construction site by SMS.


Dismissal is unfair if rehabilitation is needed

Disabled or sick employees are protected by law. They cannot be disciplined for their incapacity (sickness or disability) even if this has been brought on by their own actions. For example, an employee who drinks excessively and becomes an alcoholic is legally classified as being ill and is protected by law. Section 6 of the Employment Equity Act (EEA) prohibits unfair discrimination against employees because of disability. This means that an employer may not discriminate against an employee because he is disabled. In fact, the EEA obliges employers to find ways of recruiting and seeking ways to accommodate people with disabilities.


How retirement reforms will encourage retirement savings

National Treasury has introduced a number of policies aimed at encouraging South Africans to increase their retirement savings. In the 2013 budget, former minister of finance – Pravin Gordhan – announced a number of retirement reforms, i.e. taxation of retirement funds, compulsory preservation and on-retirement savings. Particularly significant in these reforms in the question of 'preservation', which was introduced to make sure that a person's assets are retained – in their own name – for their use during retirement. Batseta, leading industry body actively contributing towards the advancement of the retirement fund industry, breaks this concept of 'preservation' down further.


Employers still bungling retrenchments

We've regularly reminded employers of the factors that render dismissals for operational requirements (retrenchments) fair and unfair. Despite this, employers continue to get it wrong and end up paying a very heavy price. To win a retrenchment case at the CCMA or Labour Court, the employer needs to prove the retrenchment was fair in all respects. It's the employer who has the duty to prove there was a valid reason for the retrenchment, among others. Why are employer's failing to follow the correct retrenchment procedure?