Authorities can not stroll away from wage deal scot-free, courtroom hears

Though South Africa’s fiscal place has progressively weakened over the previous three years, the federal government can not stroll away from implementing the ultimate yr of a three-year wage deal, authorized counsel for public sector unions argued on Wednesday.

Unions – together with the Public Servants Affiliation (PSA), the SA Democratic Lecturers’ Union, the Nationwide Skilled Lecturers’ Organisation of SA, the Well being and Different Companies Personnel Commerce Union of SA, and the Nationwide Training, Well being and Allied Staff’ Union (Nehawu) – approached the Labour Attraction Court docket to compel the federal government to stay to its finish of the 2018 wage agreements.

Moneyweb InsiderINSIDERGOLD

Subscribe for full entry to all our share and unit belief information instruments, our award-winning articles, and help high quality journalism within the course of.

Learn: Unions reject government’s request to postpone wage bill court battle

Regardless of this being the ultimate yr of the three-year deal, the federal government unilaterally determined to announce a freeze on public sector wage will increase earlier this yr in step with its bid to avoid wasting R160 billion over the subsequent three years.

Settlement ‘unenforceable’

Advocate Jeremy Gauntlett , showing on behalf of Finance Minister Tito Mboweni, argued that the wage settlement is invalid and unenforceable on condition that the general public funds have vastly modified for the reason that settlement was signed, due partially to the Covid-19 pandemic.

The R37.eight billion required to finance the wage will increase, Mboweni says in courtroom papers, comes at a time when the “remainder of the nation’s workforce (together with higher-echelon public servants, Cupboard and Parliament) have accepted wage cuts or freezes as a consequence of the financial local weather and Covid-19 disaster”.

Gauntlett informed judges Dennis Davis, Phillip Coppin and Violet Phatshoane that Nationwide Treasury’s palms are “empty” and that implementing clause three.three of the wage settlement, which particulars percentages of wage will increase from 2018, takes 60% of the nation’s income and allocates it to simply 2% of the inhabitants.

Nevertheless, Advocate William Mokhare who appeared on behalf of Nehawu mentioned that as lately as April, the federal government had indicated dedication to unions that it will adjust to the wage settlement, regardless of the federal government experiencing “difficulties” with the implementation. Moreover, Mokhare mentioned the choice to signal the 2018 settlement with unions was accepted by the cupboard so it ought to be enforced.


“Courts ought to encourage the state to respect its obligations … the second the federal government is allowed to go scot-free on an settlement that it signed willingly … [it would allow] some other company that has been implicated by Covid-19 to stroll away,” Mokhare mentioned.

Mokhare argued that a greater choice than a dismissal of the wage settlement can be for the federal government to be assisted to find an answer that will allow it to adjust to its obligations regardless of the ailing public purse.

Choose Davis identified that the nation’s funds had deteriorated for the reason that settlement was signed and that ought to it’s enforced, authorities’s funds might must be reprioritised from vital programmes to finance the agreements.

‘Equitable treatment’

In response, Advocate Ngwako Maenetje who appeared on behalf of three unions, mentioned within the face of the impossibility of the enforcement of the settlement the federal government can not stroll away. Moderately the settlement stays legitimate and the events are eligible to a “simply and equitable” treatment.

Advocate Chris Orr, representing the PSA, cited Treasury’s personal findings that the settlement may be enforced however would require that no less than 5% of the general public service be retrenched.

Whereas this suggestion could not discover favour amongst public servants, Orr argued that the federal government’s assertion that it will be inconceivable for it to implement the wage deal (given the strained funds) falls away.

Judgment has been reserved.