Hospitality sector resists collective agreement extension

The beleaguered hospitality sector is heading to court over the extension of the Bargaining Council collective agreement for fast food, restaurant, catering and allied trades without consultation.

Constructive engagement with government revealed that consultation was not required by law for an extension.

The extension of the Bargaining Council collective agreement to non-parties may well be the last nail in the coffin for the sector that was hit the hardest by the pandemic and the closure of its business for a large part of the lockdown in the country.

Collective agreement

According to the Government Gazette published on 8 January, all tearooms, restaurants, catering establishments, coffee shops, pubs, taverns, roadhouses, cafes, snack bars, fast food outlets, convenience stores and industrial, commercial and function caterers across the country, excluding Johannesburg and Pretoria, which already have an agreement in place, will be required to adhere to new conditions of employment.

The conditions of employment include that employers must pay monthly membership fees to the bargaining council. Employers and employees will also have to contribute towards provident and funeral funds.

Fedhasa

The Federated Hospitality Association of South Africa (Fedhasa), that represents an alliance of hospitality stakeholders, has met with the department of labour to raise concerns over the recently gazetted collective agreement extension to non-parties from 18 January this year.

According to Fedhasa, members of the alliance are challenging the basis of the extension, because the listed employer organisations and employee unions “allegedly have 50% plus one membership within the geographical scope of the council”, which is countrywide, excluding Johannesburg, Pretoria and surrounds.

“It is our view that this data is totally inaccurate.

“While the hospitality industry supports the need for fair employee benefits, the agreement was extended without ascertaining the extent to which the listed parties to the current collective agreement truly represent the industry.

“Consultation with industry will yield a more positive outcome for both business and employees,” said Rosemary Anderson, national chairperson Fedhasa.

No consultation

The department of labour said there was no period of consultation since the minister was not obliged in terms of the law if the registrar convinced him that there was 50% plus one representation.

Court must decide

“Our consultation with the department was amicable and constructive. They have confirmed that, while they are sympathetic to our arguments, our only recourse is to test whether the listed parties represent the industry in court, which will provide clarity for both parties,” Anderson said.

“Since this is the only option available, a hospitality sector alliance, which includes Fedhasa, major restaurants, fast food brands and representatives from the tavern industry, are forced to explore legal options immediately.”