Full Text Available
Note: Clicking the button above will open the full text document at the original institutional repository in a new window.
In 2007 a military trade union approached the Constitutional Court for an order compelling the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) to bargain with it over conditions of service. 1 Surely the first step to a coup d'etat is a military organised to pursue interests other than those of the stat...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Other Authors: | |
| Format: | Thesis |
| Language: | English English |
| Published: |
Department of Public Law
2026
|
| Subjects: | |
| Tags: |
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | In 2007 a military trade union approached the Constitutional Court for an order compelling the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) to bargain with it over conditions of service. 1 Surely the first step to a coup d'etat is a military organised to pursue interests other than those of the state which it serves? However this case was a sequel to the 1999 decision of the Constitutional Court which struck down the prohibition on members of the SANDF forming and joining trade unions. 2 It paved the way for the development of a parallel system of labour relations in the military.3 This includes the establishment of a Military Bargaining Council at which registered military trade unions may bargain with the SANDF as employer.4 It is clear that an effective system of voice regulation is necessary in the modem military. The manner in which the Constitutional Court has facilitated the development of this system is however problematic. The two decisions raise questions about constitutional adjudication and the limits of labour law. |
|---|