LLW2602 May/Jun 2026 exam paper — questions

Every question, by topic

1. Question 1.1 · Organisational rights of trade unions · 15 marks

   Metro Fresh (Pty) Ltd runs a food distribution business, and its Polokwane depot employs 240 workers. Two trade unions operate at the depot: the Transport and Allied Workers Union (TAWU), which represents 46% of the employees, and the General Workers Front (GWF), which represents 18%; the rest of the workforce belongs to no union. TAWU has demanded the following from Metro Fresh: access to the workplace to recruit members; stop-order facilities; leave for trade union office-bearers; disclosure of information on disciplinary statistics, overtime allocations and possible restructuring; and the right to elect shop stewards. Metro Fresh has granted TAWU workplace access and stop-order facilities but has refused the remaining demands, contending that TAWU is not a majority union and that some of the information sought is confidential. GWF backs TAWU's demands, arguing that the two unions' combined membership should be taken into account since together they represent most of the employees. In addition, Metro Fresh already has a collective agreement with a separate union, the United Logistics Union (ULU), under which only ULU may appoint shop stewards at the Polokwane depot; ULU's membership has since fallen to 12% of the workforce. Give a full discussion of the legal framework governing organisational rights in South African collective labour law, explaining the distinction between those rights that may be claimed by a sufficiently representative trade union and those reserved only for a majority union. In your answer, critically assess whether TAWU, whether acting on its own or jointly with GWF, is likely to succeed in obtaining the organisational rights that Metro Fresh has refused to grant. Your discussion must also address the significance of joint representativeness between TAWU and GWF, the possible impact of the existing collective agreement between Metro Fresh and ULU on the shop steward issue, and the legal restrictions on an employer's obligation to disclose information.Show the full questionShow less

2. Question 1.2 · Organisational rights of trade unions · 5 marks

   Metro Fresh (Pty) Ltd runs a food distribution business, and its Polokwane depot employs 240 workers. Two trade unions operate at the depot: the Transport and Allied Workers Union (TAWU), which represents 46% of the employees, and the General Workers Front (GWF), which represents 18%; the rest of the workforce belongs to no union. TAWU has demanded the following from Metro Fresh: access to the workplace to recruit members; stop-order facilities; leave for trade union office-bearers; disclosure of information on disciplinary statistics, overtime allocations and possible restructuring; and the right to elect shop stewards. Metro Fresh has granted TAWU workplace access and stop-order facilities but has refused the remaining demands, contending that TAWU is not a majority union and that some of the information sought is confidential. GWF backs TAWU's demands, arguing that the two unions' combined membership should be taken into account since together they represent most of the employees. In addition, Metro Fresh already has a collective agreement with a separate union, the United Logistics Union (ULU), under which only ULU may appoint shop stewards at the Polokwane depot; ULU's membership has since fallen to 12% of the workforce. Based on your discussion in 1.1, give a reasoned conclusion identifying which of the organisational rights refused by Metro Fresh TAWU is most likely to succeed in obtaining, and which rights TAWU is least likely to be granted.Show the full questionShow less

3. Question 2.1 · Collective bargaining and collective agreements · 8 marks

   The National Textile Employers' Organisation (NTEO) concludes a collective agreement with the National Garment Workers Union (NGWU) in the bargaining council for the clothing sector. The agreement provides for annual wage increases for bargaining unit employees; a prohibition on any strike concerning wages during the agreement; a requirement that all disciplinary appeals be heard by an employer-appointed chairperson; an agency shop clause requiring non-union members to pay an agency fee; and an undertaking that the agreement will also bind employees who are not members of NGWU. Six months later, non-union employees employed by Style Stitch (Pty) Ltd refuse to pay the agency fee, arguing that they never consented to the agreement. At the same time, a minority union, Workers' Voice Union (WVU), calls on its members to embark on strike action demanding a mid-term wage adjustment because inflation has increased sharply. Style Stitch argues that the strike is prohibited and that all affected employees are bound by the collective agreement. WVU argues that because it was not a party to the agreement, its members are not bound by it. Discuss the legal nature, purpose and binding effect of collective agreements in South African collective labour law, explaining in your answer how and under what circumstances a collective agreement may bind persons who were not actual signatories to it.Show the full questionShow less

4. Question 2.2 · Collective bargaining and collective agreements · 6 marks

   The National Textile Employers' Organisation (NTEO) concludes a collective agreement with the National Garment Workers Union (NGWU) in the bargaining council for the clothing sector. The agreement provides for annual wage increases for bargaining unit employees; a prohibition on any strike concerning wages during the agreement; a requirement that all disciplinary appeals be heard by an employer-appointed chairperson; an agency shop clause requiring non-union members to pay an agency fee; and an undertaking that the agreement will also bind employees who are not members of NGWU. Six months later, non-union employees employed by Style Stitch (Pty) Ltd refuse to pay the agency fee, arguing that they never consented to the agreement. At the same time, a minority union, Workers' Voice Union (WVU), calls on its members to embark on strike action demanding a mid-term wage adjustment because inflation has increased sharply. Style Stitch argues that the strike is prohibited and that all affected employees are bound by the collective agreement. WVU argues that because it was not a party to the agreement, its members are not bound by it. Critically discuss whether the agency shop clause contained in the collective agreement between NTEO and NGWU is enforceable against the non-union employees of Style Stitch (Pty) Ltd.Show the full questionShow less

5. Question 2.3 · Collective bargaining and collective agreements · 6 marks

   The National Textile Employers' Organisation (NTEO) concludes a collective agreement with the National Garment Workers Union (NGWU) in the bargaining council for the clothing sector. The agreement provides for annual wage increases for bargaining unit employees; a prohibition on any strike concerning wages during the agreement; a requirement that all disciplinary appeals be heard by an employer-appointed chairperson; an agency shop clause requiring non-union members to pay an agency fee; and an undertaking that the agreement will also bind employees who are not members of NGWU. Six months later, non-union employees employed by Style Stitch (Pty) Ltd refuse to pay the agency fee, arguing that they never consented to the agreement. At the same time, a minority union, Workers' Voice Union (WVU), calls on its members to embark on strike action demanding a mid-term wage adjustment because inflation has increased sharply. Style Stitch argues that the strike is prohibited and that all affected employees are bound by the collective agreement. WVU argues that because it was not a party to the agreement, its members are not bound by it. With reference to the facts, discuss whether the members of Workers' Voice Union (WVU) may lawfully embark on strike action over wages during the currency of the collective agreement between NTEO and NGWU, and in your answer also consider whether the disciplinary appeal clause is necessarily invalid merely because it appears to favour the employer.Show the full questionShow less