Facts of the case are that the Appellants joined the employ of Addis Neon and Teunion Signs in 1966. These companies were subsequently bought by the now Respondent Claude Neon. Upon the purchase Appellant and his colleague were among the employees who were engaged by Claude Neon and made to sign new contracts with Respondent. When they eventually reached retirement age they sought to have Claude pay them retirement benefits for the period they used to be in the employ of Addis and Teunion.
Respondent spurned that request arguing that such claims had to be met by to the company... More
This is an appeal against the determination of the respondent’s Disciplinary Authority, which found the appellant guilty of misconduct and dismissed him from employment. More
This is an application for condonation for late noting of an appeal against the decision of the DA who ruled that there was nothing for him to determine if regard is had to the fact that the employer had paid the employee all that was due to him and that the Unionist had collected such dues for onward transmission to the applicant More
The facts in this appeal are common cause. Respondents are employed by the appellant in various capacities. The dispute between the parties arises from the provisions of transport allowances for the respondents. More
This appeal raises one issue, whether an application for exemption made in terms of Statutory Instrument 102 of 2014, The Collective Bargaining Agreement: Welfare and Educational Institutions, suspends the obligation to pay the promulgated salaries and benefits
The background to this case is not in dispute. Statutory Instrument 57 of 2013 Collective Bargaining Agreement: Welfare and Educational Institutions was promulgated gazetting the applicable minimum wages for the period 1 May to 31 August 2009. The appellant had not effected any increments for respondents together with the other employees. It was not in dispute that the employees were entitled to backpays... More
