Taking back the industry

[ACEsterhuizen]

hmmm: And yet there's a rate determination for a General Assistant in the same document.

Attachment 5031

I've raised the issue with the ECA National Labour Committee. Let's see what comes back as a response.

Morning Dave, old thread I know but did you eventually receive any feedback/response with the issue you have raised?

[Dave A]

It was supposed to go to the NBCEI National Technical Committee, but I suspect it might have fallen off the agenda.

I've made a note to follow up on Monday.

[Dave A]

A couple of updates on this thread.

First, the General Assistant exclusion - a resolution has been passed at the last NBCEI Technical Committee Meeting and subsequent National Council Meeting to delete clause 1.4.ii from the collective agreement. Apparently it was supposed to be interpreted as only a partial exclusion, but the meetings agreed the clause's presence was causing confusion and best removed entirely.

Second - some feedback on progress by the crack team effort in KZN.

The team started activities in February 2015 and here is a summary of the numbers up to and including July 2015:

Electrical contractors.
223 Total Contractors found on sites inspected. Of these -

152 Registered contractors found
71 Unregistered contractors found.

Approximately 32% of electrical contractors inspected were found to be unregistered.

Electrical employees.
1249 Total electrical employees found on sites inspected. Of these -

730 Registered employees found
515 Unregistered employees found.

Approximately 41% of electrical employees found on sites were unregistered.

Of those 515 unregistered employees -

330 unregistered employees found employed by registered contractors
185 unregistered employees found employed by unregistered contractors.

As at end July 2015, 344 of these unregistered employees had now been registered - 171 still to get sorted out.

[Sparks]

Was any action taken against the unregistered contractors? If this were to happen and be made known publicly it would help to serve as deterent to others and speed up the removal of illegitimate contractors.

[Dave A]

Sparks, there are two areas of registration where attention is needed - registrations at the bargaining council (both contractors and employees), and then the registrations of contractors with DoL in terms of the Electrical Installation Regulations.

What you see above relates to registrations at the bargaining council, and I know that non-compliance in this area is being vigorously pursued. To some extent this has always been the case, but there's been quite a ramp up in focus, resources, activity and process of late.

What I don't have at the moment is a report on progress with EIR related registrations / cease and desist orders, but I can tell you the issue is very much on the agenda. (For many of us this is probably of even greater interest / concern, frankly).

Hopefully I'll have some feedback on this aspect fairly soon. My next opportunity to ask the hard questions is on 8th September.

[ACEsterhuizen]

Ah just in time.

:-) Partial exclusion and confusion my backside. It was very clear that a General Assistant was excluded. The wording is there for anyone to read. As is a Working Employer or Admin or Manager that is why they cannot force their employment-cutting agreement on a one man business with that structure. Anyway they realized their mistake.

Thanks Andy. Is this resolution on clause 1.4 ii enacted by the minister? Gazetted? Is the aforementioned necessary in order to stand up in a court of law?

[Dave A]

Is this resolution on clause 1.4 ii enacted by the minister? Gazetted?

Only gazetted notices are of force and effect on non-parties.
Party only agreements don't need gazetting.

Is the aforementioned necessary in order to stand up in a court of law?

When it comes to non-parties, in this instance I don't know with certainty. I appreciate you believe it's a clear cut issue, but rigorous examination reveals there are conflicting clauses that create a mockery if each clause is strictly applied. Thus the final say at this point would rest with a competent court - if the issue ever gets to one...

By my understanding, the court would be required to determine "the intent of the legislator" to resolve the issue.