Meibc Main Agreement Extension

Johannesburg, 4 September 2018 – Parties to the Metals and Engineering Industries Bargaining Council (MEIBC) today voted overwhelmingly in favour of renewing the three-year agreement in the metallurgical and mechanical sector in 2017. Many of you will have seen SEIFSA (below) send propaganda about accepting its agreement with the unions. It is regrettable (although not surprising) that SEIFSA is once again extremely liberal with the truth in this circular. In sections 31 and 32 of the LRA, the agreement must be adopted as an agreement of a negotiating council for an agreement to be renewed. At the Manco on 1 September 2020, SEIFSA and the trade unions proposed that their agreement be formally adopted by the MEIBC. That is not what happened. Indeed, the President of the MEIBC did not even allow the matter to be put to a vote, because the negotiations that preceded the signing of his agreement were not in accordance with the Meibc constitution. If you look very closely, you will see that the letter never says that the agreement was accepted as a Council agreement (as I explained, an application to renew the LRA). It indicates that the parties (i.e.

SEIFSA and the unions) have agreed. Of course, they have it — that is their consent! It was „accepted“ when they agreed! The reason they sent this circular is to give the impression that their agreement has been adopted by the Council (which it does not have) and that it can be extended – something that SAEFA and other employers` organisations will not allow. The dispute settlement agreement followed the administrative cost contract described above. However, in July 2017, NEASA became a party to a new dispute settlement agreement to allow members access to the MEIBC Dispute Resolution Centre. The new agreement required NEASA members to pay an increase in the dispute settlement tax. The extension of the old 2011 Administrative Costs Agreement replaced this new dispute settlement agreement and effectively reduced the dispute settlement tax to the 2011 rate. Chief Operating Officer Lucio Trentini of the Steel and Engineering Industries Federation of Southern Africa (SEIFSA) said the employers` parties who supported the extension of the 2017-2020 agreement accounted for 65% of the employees of companies registered with MEIBC, with FSA members alone representing 58% of these employees. He referred to the finding made by Justice John Murphy, who, on behalf of a bank full of the North Gauteng (Pretoria) High Court, had decided in the Free Market Foundation (FMF) 2016 against Minister of Labour and Others Judgment that the extension of the collective agreement was legal, provided that one or more registered unions, whose members form the majority of the union members on the bargaining board, , were legal. , and one or more registered employer organizations whose members employ the majority of workers employed by members of employers` organizations who are members of the bargaining council vote in favour of the extension.

The last „new“ administrative cost agreement, extended to non-parties, expired in 2015 and all attempts were either set aside or blocked. As a result of recent amendments to the Labour Relations Act, which specifically served to limit NEASA`s ability to prevent the renewal of funding agreements, the Minister of Employment and Labour revived an old 2011 agreement and extended it to non-parties from 28 October 2019 for a period of 12 months. Therefore, according to our previous notification, members are again required to deduct and pay administrative taxes and litigation charges at 2011 rates.