SECTION 77 NOTICES

Section 77 of the Labour Relations Act allows registered trade unions or federations of trade unions to undertake protest action to promote or defend the socio-economic interests of workers.

Before embarking on protest action, the Act requires the trade union concerned to serve notice on Nedlac stating the reasons for the protest action and the intended nature of the protest action. The Nedlac parties then meet with the trade union and other interested parties to consider the issues raised. Should the issues remain unresolved after thorough consideration, workers are entitled to participate in protected protest action.

Since the promulgation of the Labour Relations Act, Nedlac has been served with 33 notices of protest action. Six of these notices were served in the period 1 April 1999 to 31 March 2000. Unlike the preceding year, in which 5 notices were incorrectly served on Nedlac there were no incorrect notices in the year under review. This indicates an increasing understanding of this aspect of the legislation.

Nedlac considered the following notices during the year under review:

The National Education, Health and Allied Workers Union tabled a notice in protest against large-scale retrenchments and a lack of transformation in the tertiary education sector (March 1999). Nedlac convened a range of meetings, including an Education Summit, in an attempt to bring the parties to agreement, but by November 1999 the parties did still not agree on a way forward. No protest action was, however undertaken.

Fedusa tabled a notice in protest against the restructuring of Spoornet. The pro-active intervention of the Minister of Public Enterprises resulted in agreement that Fedusa's concerns would be addressed through existing processes. No protest action was taken.

In August 1999 Sactwu tabled a S77 notice in protest against continuing job losses in the clothing, textile and footwear sectors. During the Nedlac process the parties reached agreement on a range of issues. However, Sactwu and the DTI were unable to reach agreement on:

• The freezing the tariff phase-down scheduled for 1 September 1999
• The retention of the existing footwear quota
• The extent to which labour had been adequately consulted in the adjustment of quotas for Zimbabwe.

Following the reaching of deadlock. Sactwu tabled a S77(d) notice and embarked on protest action.

The National Union of Mineworkers tabled a S77 notice in protest against the gold industry's failure to re-employ workers who had been retrenched during the previous drop in the gold price. Nedlac referred the issue to the Gold Crisis Committee (GCC) for resolution. The GCC was unable to reach consensus, but no protest action was undertaken.

The proposed restructuring of Johannesburg was strongly contested by trade unions organising members in the city. In February 2000 Fedusa, in conjunction with Imatu (Independent Municipal and Allied Trade Unions) and the South African Municipal Workers Union (SAMWU), tabled a notice of protest action. In response, the Greater Johannesburg Metropolitan Council made an application to the Labour Court to contest the validity of the notice. The unions subsequently withdrew their notice and no further notice was received by Nedlac.

In July 1999, Cosatu tabled a notice in protest against ongoing job losses in the South African economy. Several meetings were convened to discuss the issues raised in the Cosatu notice. Agreement was reached on three issues, but on four issues, Cosatu felt that not sufficient progress had been achieved. Accordingly, on 21 February 2000 Cosatu tabled its intention to undertake protest action. Protest action was subsequently held in various provincial centres, and a national day of protest action was held.