SAMWU and Another v City of Johannesburg and Others (LC) (case not notified JR2228/2013, 2-2-2018) (Whitcher J)  Section 72, settled matters settled by the Minister after consultation with the first party. This includes the establishment of the job evaluation system. There is no need for the minister to reach an agreement on this issue. No collective agreement binds the Minister`s margin of appreciation. There is no evidence that the minister decided to make collective bargaining an issue. The nomenclature in Article 72 does not suit the interpretation relied on by the applicant that job evaluation is a matter of collective bargaining. 1.1. Collective bargaining may be conducted either at national or departmental level, and the appropriate forum shall be defined taking into account the issue that is the subject of collective bargaining. During the investigation, the applicant trade unions argued, on behalf of the workers, that Article 197(5)(b)(ii) stated that the new employer, the City of Casu, was bound by the old collective agreement. Section 197(5)(a) and (b) is worded as follows: 1.3.
To promote the intention to create uniform conditions of service, the following issues are the subject of collective bargaining at the divisional level only on special leave; action compensation; night work allowance; standby abatement; shiftwork allowance; Bonus for long services; emergency work; legal exemption; additional paid sick leave; administrative measures relating to the taking of sick leave; and measures to control the reception and disingestion of sick leave.  The IMATU decision concerned the creation of a right in the form of a priority benefit. The applicant`s case concerns a claim that is the subject of a collective agreement, as the judge rightly said. Given the broad definition of dispute in mutual interest and the fact that the parties have negotiated collective bargaining on this issue in the past, I think this is a competent issue for collective bargaining.  Although the applicant qualified the nature of the dispute as a dispute of mutual interest, he recorded in his analysis that there was no negotiation. The basis for that measure is unclear, since it is apparent from the transfer documents that the applicant`s case concerned a matter of mutual interest. It is common knowledge that the parties have already negotiated this case and have not reached an agreement, hence the applicant`s request. Negotiations on this issue stalled, and in 2013, the City amended employee terms and conditions to comply with the bargaining council`s main agreement.
It was indisputable that certain conditions, as laid down in the old collective agreements, were more favourable than those laid down in the main contract.  The overall objective of the LRA is to encourage employers and unions to settle their affairs as fully as possible through collective agreements. While some of the rights granted by the LRA and BCEA may be abrogated by collective agreements, these powers are limited.7 With respect to whether the parties were bound by the former collective agreements or by the main agreement of the bargaining board, and given the objectives of the LRA, the Tribunal decided that, however, in 2012 the city informed the workers that they were all under the jurisdiction of the South African Local Government Bargaining Council (SALGBC). they were bound by the Council`s main collective agreement, which regulated the working and employment conditions of all workers. .