https://search.dev.ndltd.org/etd/cape-town/oai:open.uct.ac.za:11427/32415
type: CreativeWork
name: Did the Constitutional Court decision in Assign Services (Pty) Limited v National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa and Others(CCT194/17) [2018] ZACC 22 do away with the TES practice in South Africa?
description: This paper is on the impact of the Labour Relations Amendment Act 6 of 2014(LRAA) on the Temporary Employment Services(TES) in South Africa. The TES practice involves a triangular relationship where the TES places workers/employees with a client to provide labour for the benefit of the client. Over the years, there has been an outcry from organised labour for the ban of the TES practice on the basis that it encouraged the exploitation of workers and undermined job security. Other issues associated with the practice were low wages and inferior conditions of service of the placed workers compared to employees employed by the client doing same or similar work. Initially, the TES practice was regulated in a limited way by the Labour Relations Act of 1956 as well as the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA). The LRA initially only regulated the TES practice in so far as it recognised that the TES is the employer of placed workers and it created provisions for joint and several liability for the client and the TES under certain limited circumstances. Despite these attempts to regulate the practice, organised labour felt it was still not good enough as the same problems continued to persist, as a result they continued to challenge the constitutionality of this practice and called for it to be completely banned. In response, the legislature introduced the Labour Relations Amendment Act No 6 of 2014 (LRAA) in an effort to close the loopholes identified. Section 198A(3)(b)(the deeming provision) introduced by the LRAA stipulates that after a period of three months of placement of workers by a TES with a client, the client is deemed the employer of those workers. It is the interpretation of this deeming provision that has sparked a legal debate in South Africa, resulting in two views on how the deeming provision should be interpreted. The first view is the ‘dual employment' interpretation which suggests that after the three months placement has lapsed, both the TES and the cli…
abstract: This paper is on the impact of the Labour Relations Amendment Act 6 of 2014(LRAA) on the Temporary Employment Services(TES) in South Africa. The TES practice involves a triangular relationship where the TES places workers/employees with a client to provide labour for the benefit of the client. Over the years, there has been an outcry from organised labour for the ban of the TES practice on the basis that it encouraged the exploitation of workers and undermined job security. Other issues associated with the practice were low wages and inferior conditions of service of the placed workers compared to employees employed by the client doing same or similar work. Initially, the TES practice was regulated in a limited way by the Labour Relations Act of 1956 as well as the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA). The LRA initially only regulated the TES practice in so far as it recognised that the TES is the employer of placed workers and it created provisions for joint and several liability for the client and the TES under certain limited circumstances. Despite these attempts to regulate the practice, organised labour felt it was still not good enough as the same problems continued to persist, as a result they continued to challenge the constitutionality of this practice and called for it to be completely banned. In response, the legislature introduced the Labour Relations Amendment Act No 6 of 2014 (LRAA) in an effort to close the loopholes identified. Section 198A(3)(b)(the deeming provision) introduced by the LRAA stipulates that after a period of three months of placement of workers by a TES with a client, the client is deemed the employer of those workers. It is the interpretation of this deeming provision that has sparked a legal debate in South Africa, resulting in two views on how the deeming provision should be interpreted. The first view is the ‘dual employment' interpretation which suggests that after the three months placement has lapsed, both the TES and the cli…
author: Mcaciso, Zola
keywords: Labour Law
date published: 2020
date modified: 2026-07-22T22:23:44Z
provider: University of Cape Town
publisher: Networked Digital Library of Theses and Dissertations
type: WebPage
source organization: Department of Commercial Law

PropertyValue
property ID: Handle
value: http://hdl.handle.net/11427/32415