Abstract:
The Minister of Labour may extend collective agreements concluded in bargaining councils to non-parties to the agreements in terms of section 32 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. The extension of these agreements has long been a cumbersome debate in law and practice. While some argue in favour thereof there are many that argue against it. Non-parties can apply for exemption from these collective agreements, and this is seen as a due remedy, however, the process of applying for exemption can be wrought with inefficiencies. Therefore, the question must be asked whether the employer as a non-party to an extended agreement, has any remedy to its disposal. Section 206 of the Labour Relations Act deals with the effect that a defect or irregularity in a bargaining council can have on the validity of the collective agreement concluded by said council. If the collective agreement is extended to non-parties, and there is a material defect with regard to the collective agreement, this section can provide a due remedy for the non-party, if interpreted and applied correctly. Seen as a clarification for the correct interpretation of section 206 has only recently been addressed in a judgment by Judge Van Niekerk, this article focuses on this interpretation and aims to make certain recommendations with regard to the interpretation of section 206.
