Ngcukaitobi argued that the employer can not resolve exactly who to retrench till it’s recognized how the corporate will probably be restructured and saved via a enterprise rescue plan.
“Conceivably, workers might be retrenched, solely to seek out that the enterprise rescue plan, in closing kind, required them to be retained and that one other distinct group of workers be retrenched,” he mentioned.
Hlubi-Majola mentioned although the enchantment was heard after the BRPs lastly revealed a plan, “it was necessary for us to defend the choice of the labour court docket, as a result of it had far-reaching implications for staff and the case is necessary for setting down clear pointers for BRPs as an entire.
“There are numerous corporations which have filed for enterprise rescue in South Africa, citing the Covid-19 pandemic as the explanation. This judgment successfully signifies that BRPs might not be utilized by employers to prune the enterprise by reducing jobs, and the basic challenges threatening the corporate’s survival should be addressed within the enterprise rescue plan,” she mentioned.
She mentioned Dongwana and Matuson have already gone towards the legislation in lots of respects, by failing to develop a enterprise rescue plan throughout the stipulated interval, whereas charging exorbitant charges — about R36m in complete — at nice value to the taxpayer.
“They’ve additionally taken quite a few dodgy choices, which have completed extra hurt than good and worsened the scenario at SAA.
“A transparent instance of this was the reckless choice to chop routes, and their refusal to cancel the leases on the planes after the routes had been cancelled. SAA has now incurred a further invoice of R30bn for planes which had been parked and never getting used.”