A BROAD CHURCH RESPONSE TO THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO THE LABOUR RELATIONS ACT AND THE BASIC CONDITIONS OF EMPLOYMENT ACT

To the Minister of Labour, the Honourable Membathisi Mdladlana

As representatives of a range of Christian churches, we appreciate this opportunity to meet with you and to raise a few of our concerns about the proposed changes to labour relations legislation.

We see a number of the amendments proposed--substantive, procedural and technical--as positive. Given our high and escalating unemployment, we welcome the plan to make retrenchments a negotiable issue. We also applaud the revision of the definition of "employee", which will afford greater protection to workers currently unprotected by labour legislation because they are considered independent contractors.

At the same time, we have reservations about a number of other amendments. Through our various structures, we have already expressed our objections in submissions to the Department of Labour. However, we are so deeply concerned about two specific matters--Sunday work and the variation of core rights--that we have been moved to seek a personal meeting with you.

Sunday work and weekly rest periods

Sunday has become a traditional day of rest. Although originally established in accordance with Christian belief, it has long since begun to serve a more universal role. As a common rest day, it is one of the few times that families can be together. Sunday is a time for recreation and renewal, as well as a day for community, social and other engagements.

The proposed amendments to the Basic Conditions of Employment Act would rapidly erode this precious family time. They would repeal the requirement that workers' weekly rest period fall on Sunday unless otherwise agreed. They would end the premium pay requirements for Sunday work that discourage many employers from operating on Sunday.

We appreciate the factors that motivated these proposals. In certain sectors--such as health care, shipping and the hospitality industry--the need for continuous operations necessitates lower barriers to Sunday employment. However, the demands of these specific industries should not serve as a justifications for the abandonment of disincentives to Sunday work in all sectors.

To do so would have disastrous consequences. Once one enterprise in a particular industry realises a competitive advantage by operating on Sunday, other similar businesses will quickly decide to do the same. Before long Sunday will become just a normal working day. Working parents will find it increasingly difficult to spend time with their spouses and children without work and school schedules intervening. In households where both parents are working, the problem could be even greater.

We are gravely concerned about the impact this would have on family life and on society as a whole. We believe that there are enormous social benefits from having a common day of rest. It need not fall on Sunday, but it would be unrealistic to attempt to establish an alternative rest day. Certainly, once we lose Sunday as a common rest day, it will be virtually impossible to revive the practice.

We therefore call upon government to maintain the current provisions relating to Sunday work and to limit exemptions to those sectors and businesses with a clear need to operate on Sunday.

Core Rights

The Basic Conditions of Employment Act identifies a set of core rights that cannot be abridged by a variation or sectoral determination. These rights include maximum ordinary hours of work (presently at 45 hours per week) and minimum leave requirements. The proposed amendments would change this. They would enable the Minister to change any condition of employment, including these core rights.

The Department's motivation cites the maritime sector as an example of a sector which is unable to comply with the BCEA. Once again, whilst we appreciate the problems that arise for a particular industry, we do not agree that the most appropriate response is to empower the Minister to remove those protections from all businesses. Given the pressures of the global economy, many industries may soon be demanding concessions that would allow them to increase their competitiveness by adopting a longer working week and avoiding overtime payments.

This contradicts the original intentions of our labour legislation: to work towards a 40-hour working week. A Department of Labour and Employment Standards Commission study found that South Africa has abnormally long working hours, largely due to overtime. The BCEA includes a set of procedures specifically intended to achieve the progressive reduction of working hours.

Longer working hours lead to increased stress and a whole range of health and safety problems. They damage domestic relations by curtailing time available for family activities and household maintenance. They stifle job creation.

Furthermore, we are concerned that other core rights can also be varied in this way, including regulations regarding night work and prohibitions on child and forced labour.

We believe that Parliament should not be expected to delegate such substantial powers to the Minister.

Thank you for taking the time to meet with us. We recognise the difficulty in balancing the conflicting interests that you and your department confront daily. However, our concerns are not narrowly Christian in nature. They relate to the well-being of all our people and reflect ethical principles shared by all religious groupings. We trust therefore that you will give serious consideration to our concerns.