Die regsimplikasies van die grondwetlike reg om te staak vir die lewering van noodsaaklike dienste

Abstract

This dissertation critically considers the application of and necessity for the right to strike, especially regarding employees that are employed in an essential service. The South African position on the issue is examined and compared to the positions of the International Labour Organisation, the United Kingdom and the United States of America. The research in this dissertation shows that South Africa’s current labour legislation (especially regarding essential services) is in theory good, but that it is applied and enforced poorly in the country in spite of the provisions contained in the Labour Relations Act and the Constitution of South Africa. This was evident in the 2007, 2009 and 2010 public workers’ strike in which many essential services employees took part. The countries that are compared to South Africa all have different ways of dealing with strikes and essential services. These countries’ approaches are similar to South Africa’s in some ways, (for instance regarding dispute resolution, conciliation and arbitration) but each contains some differences that could possibly be applicable in South Africa. Through these comparisons it becomes clear that the right to strike is an important international instrument of collective bargaining, but that each country’s essential services (or services that can be classified as essential) are equally important. Every country places at the very least some limitation on essential services employees’ right to strike. In conclusion this dissertation states that the South African labour law is not perfect and can through legal comparison be improved. This improvement, as will be made clear, is of vital importance for the lives, health and personal safety of every individual in the country.