MRL3702 Semester 02 Assignment 02 Unique number: 686978
Due date: 30 June 2021 Student number: 55612792 Ashleigh Hala
Question 1
The discussion below will investigate the position of law regarding Porschee and
Roy, two employees from a milk producing farm, who refuse to work overtime and
have, as a result, been threatened with dismissal by their employer. The discussion
will refer to the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 and the Labour
Relations Act 66 of 1995, regarding the regulations of working time and will provide
reasons as to whether Porschee and Roy’s argument could stand in court, as well as
whether their employer, Dikgomo Dairy (Pty) Ltd, could lawfully dismiss them if they
refuse to work overtime.
Section 10 of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 (BCEA) provides
for overtime worked by employees, which is defined as time worked over and above
ordinary hours of work. According to section 10 of BCEA, employees can only be
required to work overtime when there is an agreement in place between employees
and the employer, where the employees cannot work more than ten hours of
overtime a week.1 This means that overtime is voluntary, and employees have the
right to refuse.
As this is the case, employers should have overtime agreements in place or provide
a clause in the employment contract that states that the employee needs to work
overtime when required to do so and will be in breach of contract if they refuse to do
so with disciplinary action to be taken against them. Employees should also be
warned about possible disciplinary actions that can be taken against them when an
overtime agreement is in place, and they refuse to abide by this.
Section 188(1)(a)(ii) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA) deals with certain
circumstances whereby an employer’s operational requirements can constitute a fair
reason for dismissal. An operational requirement allows for the needs of the
employer to justify a fair dismissal. As the common law duties of employees are not
clearly defined and contracts of employment tend to be drawn up in a similar way,
the employer has a contractual right to change the way in which work is performed,
such as changing duties and hours of work.2 An employer is still able to terminate
employment by giving notice of termination of employment and offering to re-employ
1
Garbers, C., 2019, 103.
2
Garbers, C., 2019, 275.
Due date: 30 June 2021 Student number: 55612792 Ashleigh Hala
Question 1
The discussion below will investigate the position of law regarding Porschee and
Roy, two employees from a milk producing farm, who refuse to work overtime and
have, as a result, been threatened with dismissal by their employer. The discussion
will refer to the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 and the Labour
Relations Act 66 of 1995, regarding the regulations of working time and will provide
reasons as to whether Porschee and Roy’s argument could stand in court, as well as
whether their employer, Dikgomo Dairy (Pty) Ltd, could lawfully dismiss them if they
refuse to work overtime.
Section 10 of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 (BCEA) provides
for overtime worked by employees, which is defined as time worked over and above
ordinary hours of work. According to section 10 of BCEA, employees can only be
required to work overtime when there is an agreement in place between employees
and the employer, where the employees cannot work more than ten hours of
overtime a week.1 This means that overtime is voluntary, and employees have the
right to refuse.
As this is the case, employers should have overtime agreements in place or provide
a clause in the employment contract that states that the employee needs to work
overtime when required to do so and will be in breach of contract if they refuse to do
so with disciplinary action to be taken against them. Employees should also be
warned about possible disciplinary actions that can be taken against them when an
overtime agreement is in place, and they refuse to abide by this.
Section 188(1)(a)(ii) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA) deals with certain
circumstances whereby an employer’s operational requirements can constitute a fair
reason for dismissal. An operational requirement allows for the needs of the
employer to justify a fair dismissal. As the common law duties of employees are not
clearly defined and contracts of employment tend to be drawn up in a similar way,
the employer has a contractual right to change the way in which work is performed,
such as changing duties and hours of work.2 An employer is still able to terminate
employment by giving notice of termination of employment and offering to re-employ
1
Garbers, C., 2019, 103.
2
Garbers, C., 2019, 275.
