[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-502276-105":59,"doc-detail-502276-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","advisory-award-commissioner-maureen-de-beer-case-no-wect768-23-3-march-2023","ADVISORY AWARD - Commissioner Maureen de Beer - Case No. WECT768-23 - 3 March 2023","","Advisory award issued by Commissioner Maureen de Beer under CCMA case WECT768-23, dated 3 March 2023, concerning a refusal to bargain dispute involving the University of Cape Town and the University of Cape Town Employees Union (UCTEU) acting for its members. The award records conciliation dates, representation, and rulings on jurisdiction after special pleas including Lis Pendens. It reviews background on recognition agreements, bargaining rights across pay classes, and allegations of bad faith and failure to schedule hearings under the recognition agreement.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/advisory-award-commissioner-maureen-de-beer-case-no-wect768-23-3-march-2023/502276/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/advisory-award-commissioner-maureen-de-beer-case-no-wect768-23-3-march-2023/502276.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Alexandar","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-20","2026-10-03",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":34},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"What dispute was being addressed in the advisory award?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The matter concerns a refusal to bargain dispute in which the applicant (UCTEU acting for members) alleges that the University of Cape Town refused to commence bargaining for the 2023 period.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"Who were the representatives of the parties?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"UCTEU was represented by union officials including Mr. Tsebo Letabe, while the University of Cape Town was represented by its Employee Relations Specialist Mr. Yaseen Moolatjie and Employee Relations Director Ms. Barbara Mopara.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What jurisdiction issues were raised during conciliation?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Before the award, the respondent raised special pleas, including Lis Pendens, alleging CCMA lacked jurisdiction based on another referral. The commissioner ultimately ruled that the CCMA had jurisdiction to entertain the conciliation.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},502276,1791165844,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":34,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":44,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144},962090768658,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","ADVISORY AWARD  \nCommissioner:  Maureen de Beer  Case No.: WECT768-23   \nDate of Award:  3 March 2023   \nIn the matter between:  \nUCTEU obo Members  \nand  \nUniversity of Cape Town  \nUnion/Applicant  \nRespondent  \nDetails of hearing and representation  \n1. This matter was set down for Conciliation on 26 January 2023 and 14 February 2023 at the CCMA in Cape Town. The case was referred as a refusal to bargain dispute in terms of section 64(2) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, as amended (LRA) .  \n2. The applicant, being the trade union , University of Cape Town Employees Union (UCTEU), acting on behalf of its members, was represented by its union officials, Mr. Tsebo Letabe and others. The respondent, the University of Cape Town (UCT), was represented by the Employee Relations Specialist, Mr. Yaseen Moolatjie and the Employee Relations Director, Ms. Barbara Mopara.  \n3. At the first Conciliation hearing I requested the parties to make written submissions, in respect of an advisory award I was supposed to issue. Prior to me issuing the award, the respondent raised a special plea of Lis Pendens, alleging that the CCMA had no jurisdiction to hear this matter based on another referral by the applicant under case number WECT18892-22, which dispute related to an interpretation and/ or application of a collective agreement. The latter case was then withdrawn by the applicant. The respondent then withdrew its Lis Pendens jurisdictional point but raised another point in limine, stating that the CCMA lacked jurisdiction to entertain this dispute. The respondent made written submissions. Both parties made oral submissions on 14 February 2023. I considered the submissions and issued a written ruling on or about 24 February 2023. I ruled that the CCMA has jurisdiction to entertain the Conciliation.  \n4. I further determined that the applicant party was dominus litis and thus determined how it wanted to deal with a dispute. Should the applicant wish to proceed with the matter as a refusal to bargain dispute, it may do so. I also determined that jurisdiction to determine whether or not a strike is protected or not, lied with the Labour Court and not the CCMA. I further also found that the matter was not prematurely referred; and that whether or not the matter was that of a refusal to bargain, will be dealt with in respect of this advisory award.  \n5. I have now considered the initial written submissions of the parties in respect of this advisory award.  \nIssue to be determined.  \n6. I am required to make a written recommendation to the parties giving them guidance to resolve their dispute.  \nSurvey of submissions  \nSubmissions by the applicant  \n7. In respect of background information, the applicant submitted that UCTEU membership was solely based within the University of Cape Town (UCT) . The parties concluded the recognition agreement in 2004, which was amended in  \n2011. UCTEU had organizational rights for staff members at UCT in the pay class levels 2 to 12. The UCTEU also has  \nmembership in the pay class 13; but it was alleged that UCT has consistently refused to add the latter pay class to the Recognition Agreement. UCTEU was recognised for bargaining rights if it held a membership of 30% in a pay class anda 50% plus 1 signed-up members in a set of pay classes.  \n8. During 2016 UCT insourced staff in the cleaning, gardening, security, transport, catering and residence services. The insourced staff had their own preferred trade unions. None of the represented trade unions at UCT had a member majority of 30% in any of the pay classes 2-6. The UCTEU retained the member majority of 30% in pay classes 7-12 and satisfied the 50% plus 1 signed-up members in the set of pay classes (7 - 12) for bargaining rights. The latter remained the same in 2023.  \n9. UCT established and recognised the Coalition of Unions with respect to bargaining rights, which included UCTEU, NEHAWU, DETAWU and UAWU. Academic (teaching) staff are represented by the UC","cbCaiqHFsguNlk5A","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiqHFsguNlk5A","pdf",184078,"English","# Advisory Award Overview\n## Parties, Commissioner, Case Details\n# Conciliation and Jurisdiction Rulings\n## Hearing timeline and special pleas\n## Jurisdiction and dispute classification\n# Issue to be Determined\n# Survey of Submissions\n## Submissions by the Applicant (UCTEU)\n## Background on recognition and bargaining rights\n## Allegations of bad faith and refusal to bargain","[{\"question\":\"What dispute was being addressed in the advisory award?\",\"answer\":\"The matter concerns a refusal to bargain dispute in which the applicant (UCTEU acting for members) alleges that the University of Cape Town refused to commence bargaining for the 2023 period.\"},{\"question\":\"Who were the representatives of the parties?\",\"answer\":\"UCTEU was represented by union officials including Mr. Tsebo Letabe, while the University of Cape Town was represented by its Employee Relations Specialist Mr. Yaseen Moolatjie and Employee Relations Director Ms. Barbara Mopara.\"},{\"question\":\"What jurisdiction issues were raised during conciliation?\",\"answer\":\"Before the award, the respondent raised special pleas, including Lis Pendens, alleging CCMA lacked jurisdiction based on another referral. The commissioner ultimately ruled that the CCMA had jurisdiction to entertain the conciliation.\"}]","ADVISORY AWARD - Commissioner Maureen de Beer - Case No. WECT768-23 - 3 March 2023 | PDF",1791030873,23]