This Act regulates the organisational rights of trade unions and promotes and facilitates

collective bargaining at the workplace and at sectoral level. It also deals with strikes
and lockouts, workplace forums and alternative dispute resolution. It also establishes
the CCMA, Labour Court and Labour Appeal Court as superior courts, with exclusive
jurisdiction to decide matters arising from the Act.

LABOUR RELATIONS ACT 66 OF 1995

CHAPTER ONE PURPOSE, APPLICATION AND INTERPRETATION

(ss 1-3)

1.   Purpose of this Act

The purpose of this Act* is to advance economic development, social justice, labour peace and the
democratisation of the work-place by fulfilling the primary objects of this Act, which are-

* An italicised word or phrase indicates that the word or phrase is defined in section 213 of this Act.

a. to give effect to and regulate the fundamental rights conferred by section 23 of the
Constitution*

b. to give effect to obligations incurred by the Republic as a member state of the International
Labour Organisation;

c. to provide a framework within which employees and their trade unions, employers and
employers' organisations can-

i. collectively bargain to determine wages, terms and conditions of employment and other
matters of mutual interest; and

ii. formulate industrial policy; and

d. to promote-

i. orderly collective bargaining;

ii. collective bargaining at sectoral level;

iii. employee participation in decision-making in the work-place; and

iv. the effective resolution of labour disputes.

2.   Exclusion from application of this Act

This Act does not apply to members of -

a. the National Defence Force;

b. the National Intelligence Agency; and

c. the South African Secret Service.

3.   Interpretation of this Act

Any person applying this Act must interpret its provisions-

a. to give effect to its primary objects;

b. in compliance with the Constitution; and

c. in compliance with the public international law obligations of the republic

d. Chart Of Dispute
Resolution Stages And Steps
e. Today, because of the flexibility, adaptability and versatility of ADR, Users of dispute resolution
processes have available to them a wide variety of techniques that can be used to prevent, control and
resolve disputes. New techniques are constantly being developed to deal with the wide variety of
potential disputes that can occur in any kind of relationship, and at any stage in the development or
escalation of a problem or dispute.
f. It has become increasingly common for parties about to enter into a relationship to combine a series of
dispute prevention, control and resolution processes into a ‘system’ or series of ‘steps’ that are
designed to deal with different kinds of problems or disputes that might occur, at successive stages in
the development and escalation of a dispute. These processes can be grouped for convenience into
four broad categories or stages:
g. The Prevention and Cooperation Stage,  where parties can use prevention and cooperation
techniques, tailored to encourage alignment of interests, improve cooperation, prevent or minimise the
adverse impact of problems, and curb adversarial attitudes.
h. The Dispute De-Escalation, Control and ‘Real Time’ Resolution Stage,  where parties can use
techniques that are designed to deal promptly and realistically with problems, differences of opinion
or disagreements at the time they arise, to de-escalate tensions, resolve problems, or achieve instant
resolution of disputes.
i. The Facilitated Resolution Stage, where parties, assisted and guided by mediators and other dispute
resolution professionals, can use any of a a wide variety of techniques, or combinations of
techniques, to achieve a mutually-acceptable resolution of a dispute.
j. The Binding Resolution Stage,  where, after all other efforts at resolution have failed, parties can have
a ‘back stop’ adjudication process in which the dispute will be finally resolved by a neutral third party
— either in a privately-agreed process such as arbitration, or, by default, in a court of law.
k. These stages are graphically illustrated in the attached Chart of Dispute Resolution Stages and Steps,
which lists various techniques in the order in which they would normally be employed in the life of a
 dispute, and demonstrates, in dramatic ‘stair step’ fashion, escalating degrees of hostility, cost, and
time for achieving resolution, from stage to stage, as an unresolved dispute progresses.
l.

Top 3 Major Components of

Industrial Relation
Article shared by :  <="" div="" style="margin: 0px;
padding: 0px; border: 0px; outline: 0px; font-size: 16px; vertical-align: bottom;
background: transparent; max-width: 100%;">

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Some of the major parties to industrial relation are as follows: 1.

Employees 2. Employer 3. Government.
1. Employees:
Among the participants to IR, employees are considered as the most
affected one by the IR system prevalent in an organisation. Employees
with their various characteristics such as their commitment to the
work and the organisation, their educational and social background,
their attitudes towards the management and so on affect and are
affected by the system of IR.

Generally, employees perceive IR as a means to improve their

conditions of employment, voice against any grievances, exchange
views and ideas with management and participate in organisational
decision making processes.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Employees participate in the IR system through their associations, or

say, trade unions. Past evidences indicate that trade unions play a
crucial role in making an IR system as effective or otherwise. Trade
unions with their strong political and emotional overtones are looked
upon as a tool to wrest concessions from employers.

With regard to their role in relation to IR, they work to

achieve the following objectives:
1. To redress the bargaining advantage on one-on-one basis, i.e.,
individual worker vis-a-vis individual employer by way of joint or
collective actions.

2. To secure better terms and conditions of employment for their

members.
ADVERTISEMENTS:

3. To obtain improved status for the worker in his/her work.

4. To increase democratic mode of decision making at various levels

However, various factors such as union membership, its attitude

towards management, inter- union rivalry and the strengths at the
national or local level determine the role of trade unions in influencing
the system of IR in an organisation.

2. Employer:
Employer is the second party to IR. In the corporate organisation,
employer is represented by the management. Hence, management
becomes responsible to various stakeholders in an organisation
including employees.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

According to Cole, management has to see IR in terms of the

following employee-employer relationship:
1. Creating and sustaining employee motivation.

2. Ensuring commitment from employees.

3. Achieving higher levels of efficiency.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

4. Negotiating terms and conditions of employment with the

representatives of employees.
5. Sharing decision making with employees.

Like employees’ associations, employers also form their associations at

the local, industry and national levels. Examples of employers’
associations at all India level are Associated Chambers of Commerce’s
and Industry (ASSOCHAM), Confederation of Indian Industry (CII),
Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry (FICCI),
etc.

The major objectives of the employers’ associations in

relation to IR are to:
ADVERTISEMENTS:

1. Represent employers in collective bargaining at the national or

industry level.

2. Develop machinery for avoiding disputes.

3. Provide feedback on employee relations.

4. Advise member organisations on the issues relating to IR.

3. Government:
The role of government in the matter of industrial relations has been
changing along with changes in industrial environment and
management perspective. For example, till century, the governments
everywhere in the world adopted a policy of laissez faire.

The IR matters were left to be settled by the employees and employers.

But, towards the end of the 19 century, the attitude of the government
in the changed conditions of conflicts between employees and
employers, changed to some kind of intervention in the matter of IR.

In due course of realization, government intervention became a

reality. As of day, government intervention has become widespread in
HR matters. In India, government tries to regulate the relationship of
employees and employers, and also keeps an eye on both groups to
keep each in line. This relationship is enforced and maintained
through labour courts, industrial tribunals, wage boards, investigating
and enquiry committees, etc.