DURBAN - THE Labour Appeals Court this week ruled in favour of a New Germany-based plastic resin and synthetic fibre manufacturing company for suspending workers for carrying weapons during a strike.
Although the carrying of sticks and other weapons has always been the norm in South Africa during strikes and protests, including labour protests, community protests and also during celebration marches to commemorate significant events, the court ruled that the carrying of weapons in the workplace was unacceptable and workers should have been aware of this.
The National Union of Metal Workers of SA (Numsa) was, however, not satisfied with the court ruling, saying it would appeal against it at the Constitutional Court.
Numsa general secretary Irvin Jim told the Daily News on Tuesday that the ruling was an indication that workers were still treated like incomplete human beings.
He described the carrying of weapons as a tradition, a culture for black people and not an expression of violence.
“We are taking it to the Constitutional Court. The truth is workers have never been treated like real human beings. This shows that the workplace has not transformed. This is a demonstration that we have not moved an inch from in democratising the workplace. When somebody is carrying a stick, sjambok or a knobkierie, it does not mean that they are going to use it,” said Jim.
He said it would be different if the workers actually used the weapons, but that, for now, they would discourage workers from carrying weapons during protests until the final outcome on this matter.
The Labour Appeals Court ruled that the company had done nothing wrong by dismissing Numsa members employed by Paipac who participated in the protected strike during which they carried weapons such as sticks, sjamboks, and golf clubs.
The workers were charged for “brandishing and wielding weapons during a strike”. The dismissed employees were found guilty at their individual disciplinary hearings, and dismissal was recommended.
Paipac subsequently dismissed all of them on March 21.
The employees referred an unfair dismissal dispute to the Metal and Engineering Industry Bargaining Council for arbitration, where their dismissals were found to be unfair. Paipac applied to the Labour Court to review the arbitration award, but the Labour Court upheld it. Paipac then appealed to the Labour Appeals Court.
The primary issue before the court was to determine whether the dismissed employees were aware of the rule barring them from carrying weapons during a strike.
According to the employer, rules were placed on the official notice board where employees obtained various work-related information.
The court found that the dismissed employees were fully aware of their obligation to read the notices and other communications posted on the board. Accordingly, the court found that the employees were aware, or could reasonably have been expected to be aware, of the picketing policy.
While this judgment turned on the question of employees being aware of workplace rules, the court stated that any reasonable employee would in any event know that having dangerous weapons at work was not acceptable.
SA Democratic Teachers Union provincial secretary Nomarashiya Caluza said teachers protesting with weapons was not allowed as the carrying of weapons was prohibited in schools.
Democratic Nurses of SA provincial secretary Mandla Shabangu said the ruling undermined the integrity of workers and sought to instil fear in the workers to prevent them from exercising their right to demonstrate.
“Carrying a weapon in a protest does not mean that it will be used against anyone,” said Shabangu.
Daily News