Labour Court ruling sparks controversy over wage increases for Tshwane municipal workers
South African Municipal Workers Union members who previously embarked on march to demand that the City of Tshwane honour the historical wage agreement, which includes wage increases of 3,5% and 5,4% from 2021 and 2023, respectively.
Image: Oupa Mokoena/ Independent Media
Municipal workers' labour unions have expressed disappointment over a May 9 Labour Court ruling that exempted the City of Tshwane from implementing a 5,4% wage increase for the 2023/2024 financial year.
The court also ruled that the City's exemption application regarding the 3,5% wage increase for the 2021/2022 financial year should be reconsidered by a different exemption panellist, to be appointed by the South African Local Government Bargaining Council (SALGBC).
The City approached the court two years ago after its application for exemption from a wage agreement with the unions was rejected by the bargaining council.
The City argued in one of its applications that implementing the wage agreement, without an exemption, would require it to spend R489 million on increases, violating the Municipal Finance Management Act.
Reacting to the ruling, the South African Municipal Workers' Union (Samwu), General Secretary, Dumisane Magagula, said: 'This judgment represents a deeply troubling intervention by the courts in the collective bargaining process, with far-reaching consequences for workers' rights.'
The union claims the ruling is not a neutral legal decision, but rather a judicial endorsement of austerity, contributing to a concerning trend of courts interfering with collective bargaining, undermining worker protections, and weakening unions' ability to represent members effectively.
Samwu also said the Labour Court's decision to override SALGBC's authority is 'a direct attack on the autonomy of collective bargaining".
"By substituting the SALGBC's 2023 ruling with its own determination, the court has overstepped its role, improperly venturing into the evaluation of complex financial evidence and affordability criteria, a terrain rightfully reserved for bargaining councils with their specific expertise in labour relations within the sector,' the union said.
On the other hand, the Independent Municipal and Allied Trade Union (Imatu), said it is preparing an action plan, which includes consulting with its legal team to explore all available options such as potential appeals.
'While the outcome is certainly not what we anticipated, our resolve remains firm. We are currently analysing the full implications of the judgment to determine the most strategic course of action to protect our members' rights and interests,' the union said.
The union further said the ruling directly impacts workers' livelihoods, citing that the cost of living increases in 2021 and 2023 already put significant financial strain on Tshwane's municipal workers.
Imatu is demanding transparency and accountability, arguing that the City cannot claim financial stability to the public while citing financial distress to justify not paying its workforce.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Next
Stay
Close ✕
'In April 2025, during her State of the Capital Address, Tshwane Executive Mayor Dr. Nasiphi Moya announced that the City's cash reserves are projected to reach R2,86 billion in the 2025/26 financial year. This projection was presented as a significant milestone towards financial stability,' the union said.
Tshwane's Samwu regional secretary, Donald Monakhisi, recently said with the City's reported R2,86 billion in cash reserves, there is no justification for delaying the implementation of outstanding salary increases.
Former Mayor Cilliers Brink, under whose administration the City applied for the exemption from the wage increase, said the council's decision was difficult but necessary for the city's financial rescue mission, which is ongoing, and to improve service delivery and value for residents.
Grandi Theunissen, a Freedom Front Plus councillor, said: 'The ruling affirms the Freedom Front Plus's responsible and principled actions in the previous administration. The party also defended the case to the end along with some of its coalition partners.'
rapula.moatshe@inl.co.za
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
IOL News
5 hours ago
- IOL News
Financial distress: Couple accuses Absa of reckless lending after accepting R3. 2 million second home loan
A Gauteng couple took action against Absa bank after alleging reckless lending practices that have led them into a spiralling debt of over R5.1 million. Image: Oupa Mokoena / Independent Newspapers A Gauteng couple took action against Absa bank after alleging reckless lending practices that have led them into a spiralling debt of over R5.1 million. Christian Daniel De Klerk and his partner, long-standing customers of the bank, claim that their financial wellness was compromised when they accepted a second home loan from Absa without being given a suitable affordability assessment. Initially, the De Klerks secured a R1.9 million home loan from Absa in 2011 and, for nearly a decade, they successfully met their repayment obligations. However, following the collapse of the husband's legal practice in March 2020 due to the pandemic, the couple were granted a temporary three-month payment holiday. Ironically, during the same month, they said Absa approached them with an offer for a second loan, amounting to R3.2 million. Despite their precarious situation, the couple accepted the offer. Meanwhile, the husband remained unemployed until June 2024 and the couple faced mounting debt because of missed repayments from 2022. They maintained that their current income was inadequate to service both the new instalments and the arrears. Nevertheless, they submitted that they could meet the loan obligations under terms similar to those agreed upon in March 2020. In seeking respite, the couple brought their case before the National Consumer Tribunal (NCT), voicing their primary grievance against Absa's alleged failure to conduct a proper affordability assessment before approving the second loan. They argued that Absa did not request essential financial documentation such as proof of income, detailed expense records, or even a credit history report—critical assessments that would typically inform responsible lending practices. The couple contended that granting them a loan while the husband was unemployed amounted to reckless lending. In addition, the couple alleged that Absa also failed to provide clear information regarding the loan's terms, conditions, interest rates, and penalties for missed repayments, all of which they argue have contributed to their current financial hardship. As a result of these alleged contraventions, the couple said that they are suffering severe financial hardship, face the risk of foreclosure, and are enduring significant emotional distress, which has adversely affected their quality of life. In the answering affidavit, Absa argued the couple's application was time-barred as more than three years have elapsed since the alleged cause of action arose. Moreover, the bank submitted that the North Gauteng High Court in Pretoria enforced the loan agreement in September 2024 and ordered the couple to pay over R5.1 million including interests and declared the couples' property executable. The bank added that the couple's case was frivolous, vexatious, and constitutes an abuse of the Tribunal's process. In their reply, the couple disputed the assertion that the matter was time-barred. They argue that the cause of action only arose in 2022 when they began defaulting on their home loan repayments. On this basis, they contend that the three-year period should be calculated from 2022, not from 2020 when the second home loan was granted. They also disputed the contention that the high court judgment precludes them from pursuing the complaint before the tribunal. They argue that the issue of reckless lending, which forms the crux of their complaint before the tribunal, and it was not adjudicated by the high court. Looking at matter, the tribunal said by law, the limitation period must be calculated from 2020 March when the alleged reckless credit was extended. Having filed their application for leave to refer in February 2025—almost five years post the alleged reckless lending—the tribunal indicated that they would be barred from considering the complaint, potentially closing the door on their search for justice. As a result, the application was dismissed. [email protected] IOL News Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.
Daily Maverick
18 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Weaponising the Public Finance Management Act: A new legal trend threatening public sector discipline
A concerning trend is emerging in public sector employment. Employees facing disciplinary action are increasingly wielding the Public Finance Management Act 1 of 1999 (PFMA) not as the accountability tool it was designed to be, but as a shield against workplace consequences. This strategic pivot transforms financial governance legislation into an employment litigation weapon with potentially far-reaching implications for public administration. The PFMA was enacted in 1999 with the primary purpose of establishing a robust framework for financial governance in South Africa's public sector. At its core, the act aims to secure transparency, accountability, and sound management of revenue, expenditure, assets and liabilities across national and provincial government institutions. Among its core objectives, it provides mechanisms to prevent irregular, unauthorised, as well as fruitless and wasteful expenditure, thereby safeguarding public resources against misuse. The recent Labour Court case of Vico v The Department of Forestry, Fisheries and Environment offers a compelling illustration of this new phenomenon. Thembalethu Vico, a director within the department who faced dismissal following disciplinary proceedings related to the removal of confiscated abalone valued at approximately R7.5-million, sought to challenge his dismissal through an unusual legal avenue: by attacking the procedural aspects of his disciplinary hearing through the lens of the PFMA. At the heart of Vico's application was an attempt to secure declaratory relief related to what he characterised as incomplete disciplinary proceedings. His arguments centred on several PFMA-related assertions: that the employer had 'unjustly and unfairly terminated' the briefing contract of the disciplinary hearing chairperson; that this termination caused 'unreasonable delay' in his disciplinary hearing; that respondents 'contravened the applicant's right to fair labour practice'; and rather notably, that expenditure on recusal applications against the chairperson constituted 'fruitless and wasteful expenditure' under the PFMA. The Labour Court's response was unequivocal. In his judgment, Judge Robert Lagrange not only dismissed the application, but characterised it as 'vexatious in nature', ordering the applicant to pay the respondents' costs. 'An attempt to circumvent the proper forums for labour disputes' The court found that Vico was 'no stranger to legal principles and reasoning' and determined that his PFMA-based arguments represented an attempt to circumvent the proper forums for labour disputes — namely the General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council where he had already lodged an unfair dismissal claim. This case highlights a broader issue deserving closer scrutiny: the strategic repurposing of financial management legislation to serve employment law objectives. The PFMA, enacted in 1999, was designed to promote transparent and effective management of government finances — not as a mechanism for employees to challenge disciplinary outcomes. Yet increasingly, we witness creative legal arguments that stretch the PFMA beyond its intended boundaries. Several notable examples demonstrate this concerning pattern in other contextual scenarios: Unsuccessful tender bidders increasingly invoke the PFMA not to address genuine financial irregularities, but to contest legitimate procurement decisions they simply disagree with. By alleging technical PFMA violations, these bidders attempt to overturn procurement outcomes through financial management legislation rather than following appropriate procurement appeal processes. Some employees facing disciplinary action for performance or conduct issues have strategically repositioned themselves as 'whistleblowers' under section 51 of the PFMA. By claiming they were disciplined for reporting financial misconduct, rather than for their own workplace infractions, they attempt to transform standard employment disputes into protected disclosure matters. Some senior employees facing poor performance reviews have contested their evaluations by claiming they were instructed to take actions that would violate the PFMA. This transforms performance management into a complex legal dispute about financial legislation interpretation. Public entities facing pressure to implement organisational changes have cited PFMA compliance concerns as reasons to delay implementation, effectively using financial legislation as a strategic tool to resist operational reforms. Perhaps most troublingly, the PFMA has become weaponised in political contexts, with allegations of technical PFMA violations used to undermine political opponents in positions of financial accountability, regardless of whether actual financial mismanagement occurred. In the misconduct context, the implications of this trend are significant. Public sector managers face the daunting prospect of defending not only the substantive merits of disciplinary decisions, but also navigating complex arguments about whether their internal processes satisfy the technical requirements of financial legislation. This creates a chilling effect on departmental decision-making, potentially undermining efforts to address misconduct effectively. More worryingly, this legal strategy diverts valuable court resources. Judge Lagrange noted that the application was largely an attempt to revisit a matter that had already been decided, writing that 'it beggars belief that the applicant could have seriously believed that he could simply avoid the unequivocal effect of the judgment by approaching this court under the guise of an application for declaratory relief'. When courts must attend to such applications, genuine cases requiring judicial attention face delays. The Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment's approach in the Vico case provides a template for addressing such claims. Rather than becoming entangled in debates about the PFMA's application to employment matters, they successfully redirected the court's attention to the jurisdictional question: Whether the Labour Court was the appropriate forum for what was essentially an attempt to relitigate disciplinary proceedings through a different legal framework. Distinct forums and remedies PFMA matters and employment disputes are meant to follow different procedural paths, with distinct forums and remedies designed to preserve the integrity of both systems. When properly invoked, PFMA concerns should follow established channels that begin with internal departmental controls, escalate to Treasury oversight, proceed through audit mechanisms via the Auditor-General's examination, involve executive accountability and operate through specific financial misconduct procedures established in the PFMA — all pathways that exist distinctly from labour dispute mechanisms. Notably absent from the PFMA is any provision making the Labour Court a forum for adjudicating PFMA violations, which is why the Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment correctly focused on the jurisdictional question, highlighting that the applicant was attempting to bypass proper forums for both employment disputes (the General Public Service Sectoral Bargaining Council) and financial governance concerns (internal controls, Treasury oversight and potentially criminal proceedings). As this trend continues to evolve, public sector employers would be wise to develop proactive strategies. This includes ensuring that disciplinary procedures are documented with meticulous attention to detail, that financial decisions related to such proceedings are properly authorised, and that legal teams are prepared to address PFMA-based arguments directly. The PFMA represents a crucial pillar of democratic governance and institutional transformation. The act has become instrumental in the country's ongoing struggle against corruption and State Capture — challenges that have threatened South Africa's democratic foundations and economic stability. However, the judiciary's response in the Vico case sends a clear message: the PFMA cannot be weaponised to circumvent established labour relations processes. This judgment establishes an important precedent that may discourage frivolous applications of this nature. Ultimately, public administration requires both financial accountability and efficient personnel management. When these systems are placed in artificial opposition through creative litigation strategies, neither objective is well served. The Labour Court's firm stance in the Vico case represents a welcome correction — one that reinforces the proper boundaries between financial governance and employment law in South Africa's public sector. DM
IOL News
20 hours ago
- IOL News
Witness in Zandile Gumede trial prefers waste pile over irregular expenditure
Former mayor of eThekwini, Zandile Gumede, with her supporters outside the Durban High Court. Image: Nomonde Zondi In the R320 million Durban Solid Waste (DSW) tender fraud case involving former eThekwini municipality mayor Zandile Gumede, a State witness has told the Durban High Court that she would prefer not to have a pile of rubbish picked up than to deal with irregular expenses for not following due process. The witness, who cannot be named as per court order, is currently being cross-examined by advocate Jimmy Howse SC, who is counsel for Sandile Ngcobo, a fifth accused who was a deputy head of supply chain management (SCM) in eThekwini. Gumede, Ngcobo, and 20 others are facing numerous charges, including money laundering, racketeering, fraud, corruption, and contravention of the Municipal Finance Management Act and the Municipal Systems Act relating to the tender. The witness told the court that waste collection is not an emergency, but a critical service. The court has heard that the Durban Solid Waste Unit had sought authority in December 2017 to get experienced service providers to collect waste from January 2018. This is because the contract of service providers was going to expire on December 31, 2017. In November 2017, the unit advertised a tender for waste collection, but they claimed that they received a lot of submissions and needed extra time to go through all of the proposals.. The witness during this time worked at the tenders and contracts unit. Part of her job included issuing letters of award to those who had won tenders. She said that after the Bid Adjudication Committee (BAC) gave the DSW the go-ahead to get service providers and approved the quotations, that decision needed to be reviewed by the Executive Acquisitions Committee (EAC), which was established by former city manager Sipho Nzuza to advice him. The BAC-approved quotations are subject to compliance checks, and then letters of appointment will be issued to the service providers. Howse asked her if it made sense that the EAC had to consider this on January 29, 2018, when the service providers should start collecting waste on January 1, 2018. The witness said that had she been instructed to do otherwise, she would have. "I was following due processes," she said. Howse asked her if she had approached any of her supervisors to tell them that there were not going to be waste management services in January, considering the email that was sent by a DSW contract administrator stating that this was an emergency. She said no and added that this was not the only contract she was dealing with. Additionally, Howse asked her if the SCM policy had any distinction between critical and emergency. She said it was her view that this was not an emergency and she continued to refer to SCM policies. She said the DSW Unit had a sole mandate to ensure contracts for waste management and illegal dumping. 'Failure to have those contracts does not result in an emergency. That is a failure to properly plan. In my view, Mr Howse, this was not an emergency,' she said. On December 28, 2018, the witness said Ngcobo had asked her to prepare the letters of award for the contractors, who were going to collect waste in January 2018. Howse said this was after his client received a call from the city manager enquiring about the letters of award.
