Labour Court Rules Protected Strike Status Remains Despite Violence at Shave and Gibson Packaging

The Labour Court has ruled that a protected strike by workers at Shave and Gibson Packaging in 2018 did not lose its protected status despite incidents of violence and intimidation by some strikers. The court held that the employer was not entitled to dismiss all 161 striking workers, finding the dismissals substantively unfair.

In 2018, members of the African Meat Industry and Allied Trade Union went on a protected strike at Shave and Gibson Packaging, demanding wage increases. During the strike, some workers engaged in violent acts and property damage. The employer obtained a legal order prohibiting these actions, but the unlawful activities continued.

Shave and Gibson Packaging subsequently dismissed all the strikers, arguing that the strike had lost its protected status due to the violence. However, the Labour Court disagreed with this assessment. The court ruled that the employer failed to connect the individual strikers to the criminal acts or prove the strikers' knowledge of the perpetrators' identities.

Why this matters: This ruling by the Labour Court affirms the constitutional right to strike, even in the face of incidents of violence and intimidation by some strikers. It sets an important precedent for protecting workers' rights to engage in protected industrial action without fear of blanket dismissals.

In its judgment, the Labour Court emphasized that a protected strike does not automatically lose its status when some strikers resort to violence and intimidation. The court found that Shave and Gibson Packaging was not entitled to rely on the claim that the employment relationship with all strikers had been rendered intolerable due to the actions of a few.

The Labour Court ordered a retrospective reinstatement of the dismissed strikers. "The dismissal was substantively unfair, as the employer failed to connect the individual strikers to the criminal acts or prove their knowledge of the culprits' identities," the court stated in its ruling. This judgment highlights the importance of protecting workers' right to strike, a fundamental constitutional right, even in challenging circumstances.

Key Takeaways

• Labour Court ruled protected strike not lost despite violence by some strikers.
• Employer failed to connect individual strikers to criminal acts or prove their knowledge.
• Dismissal of all 161 strikers found substantively unfair by Labour Court.
• Ruling affirms constitutional right to strike, even with incidents of violence.
• Labour Court ordered retrospective reinstatement of the dismissed strikers.