MODULE NAME: MODULE CODE:
LABOUR LAW LLAW6212
LABOUR LAW LLAW6222
LABOUR LAW LALA6311
LABOUR LAW LABL6212/d
ASSESSMENT TYPE: TAKE‐HOME EXAM (PAPER ONLY)
TOTAL MARK ALLOCATION: 120 MARKS
TOTAL TIME: 21 HOURS (midnight to 9PM on the same day)
By submitting this assessment, you acknowledge that you have read and understood all the rules
as per the terms in the registration contract, in particular the assignment and assessment rules in
The IIE Assessment Strategy and Policy (IIE009), the intellectual integrity and plagiarism rules in
the Intellectual Integrity Policy (IIE023), as well as any rules and regulations published in the
student portal.
INSTRUCTIONS:
1. Please adhere to all instructions. These instructions are different from what is normally
present, so take time to go through these carefully.
2. Independent work is required. Students are not allowed to work together on this
assessment. Any contraventions of this will be handled as per disciplinary procedures in The
IIE policy.
3. No material may be copied from original sources, even if referenced correctly, unless it is
a direct quote indicated with quotation marks.
4. All work must be adequately and correctly referenced.
5. You should paraphrase (use your own words) the concepts that you are referencing, rather
than quoting directly.
6. Marks will be awarded for the quality of your paraphrasing.
7. This is an open‐book assessment.
8. Assessments must be typed unless otherwise specified.
9. Ensure that you save a copy of your responses.
9.1. Complete your responses in a Word document.
9.2. The document name must be your Name.student number.Module Code.
9.3. Once you have completed the assessment, upload your document under the
submission link in the correct module in Learn.
22 2022
© The Independent Institute of Education (Pty) Ltd 2022
Page 2 of 7
Referencing Rubric__________________________________________________________________________
Providing evidence based on valid and referenced academic sources
is a fundamental educational principle and the cornerstone of high‐
quality academic work. Hence, The IIE considers it essential to
develop the referencing skills of our students in our commitment to
achieve high academic standards. Part of achieving these high
standards is referencing in a way that is consistent, technically
correct and congruent. This is not plagiarism, which is handled
differently.
Poor quality formatting in your referencing will result in a penalty of
a maximum of ten percent being deducted from the percentage
awarded, according to the following guidelines. Please note,
however, that evidence of plagiarism in the form of copied or
uncited work (not referenced), absent reference lists, or
exceptionally poor referencing, may result in action being taken in
accordance with The IIE’s Intellectual Integrity Policy (0023).
Markers are required to provide feedback to students by indicating
(circling/underlining) the information that best describes the
student’s work.
Minor technical referencing errors: 5% deduction from the
overall percentage – the student’s work contains five or more
errors listed in the minor errors column in the table below.
Major technical referencing errors: 10% deduction from the
overall percentage – the student’s work contains five or more
errors listed in the major errors column in the table below.
If both minor and major errors are indicated, then 10% only (and
not 5% or 15%) is deducted from the overall percentage. The
examples provided below are not exhaustive but are provided to
illustrate the error.
Required:
Technically correct referencing
style
Minor errors in technical correctness of
referencing style
Deduct 5% from percentage awarded
Major errors in technical correctness of referencing
style
Deduct 10% from percentage awarded
Consistency
The same referencing format
has been used for all in‐text
references and in the
bibliography/reference list.
Minor inconsistencies.
The referencing style is generally
consistent, but there are one or two
changes in the format of in‐text
referencing and/or in the bibliography.
For example, page numbers for direct
quotes (in‐text) have been provided for
one source, but not in another instance.
Two book chapters (bibliography) have
been referenced in the bibliography in
two different formats.
Major inconsistencies.
Poor and inconsistent referencing style used in‐
text and/or in the bibliography/ reference list.
Multiple formats for the same type of referencing
have been used.
For example, the format for direct quotes (in‐text)
and/or book chapters (bibliography/ reference
list) is different across multiple instances.
Technical correctness
Referencing format is
technically correct throughout
the submission.
Position of the reference: a
reference is directly associated
with every concept or idea.
For example, quotation marks,
page numbers, years, etc. are
applied correctly, sources in
the bibliography/reference list
are correctly presented.
Generally, technically correct with some
minor errors.
The correct referencing format has been
consistently used, but there are one or
two errors.
Concepts and ideas are typically
referenced, but a reference is missing
from one small section of the work.
Position of the references: references
are only given at the beginning or end of
every paragraph.
For example, the student hasincorrectly
presented direct quotes (in‐text) and/or
book chapters (bibliography/reference
list).
Technically incorrect.
The referencing format is incorrect.
Concepts and ideas are typically referenced, but a
reference is missing from small sections of the
work.
Position of the references: references are only
given at the beginning or end of large sections of
work.
For example, incorrect author information is
provided, no year of publication is provided,
quotation marks and/or page numbers for direct
quotes missing, page numbers are provided for
paraphrased material, the incorrect punctuation is
used (in‐text); the bibliography/reference list is
not in alphabetical order, the incorrect format for
a book chapter/journal article is used, information
is missing e.g. no place of publication had been
provided (bibliography); repeated sources on the
reference list.
Congruence between in‐text
referencing and bibliography/
reference list
All sources are accurately
reflected and are all accurately
included in the bibliography/
reference list.
Generally, congruence between the in‐text
referencing and the bibliography/
reference list with one or two errors.
There is largely a match between the
sources presented in‐text and the
bibliography.
For example, a source appears in the
text, but not in the bibliography/
reference list or vice versa.
A lack of congruence between the in‐text referencing
and the bibliography.
No relationship/several incongruencies between
the in‐text referencing and the
bibliography/reference list.
For example, sources are included in‐text, but not
in the bibliography and vice versa, a link, rather
than the actual reference is provided in the
bibliography.
In summary: the recording of
references is accurate and
complete.
In summary, at least 80% of the sources
are correctly reflected and included in a
reference list.
In summary, at least 60% of the sources are
incorrectly reflected and/or not included in
reference list.
Overall Feedback about the consistency, technical correctness and congruence between in‐text referencing and bibliography:
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
22 2022
© The Independent Institute of Education (Pty) Ltd 2022
Page 3 of 7
Question 1 (Marks: 30)
Dr Miller is a retired General Practitioner. He is recruited by Tsela Health Care, a company
rendering occupational health services to various mines in and around the Gauteng area. Dr Miller
entered into an agreement with Tsela Health in terms of which he was paid a monthly retainer to
do medical surveillance on mine employees at one of Tsela’s client companies. Dr Miller was
placed at Van Dyk Mine in Boksburg two days per week, however, was required to be on standby
for emergencies at the mine and work overtime, should the necessity arise at the premises.
The monthly retainer that he received was above the prescribed minimum threshold. As he is
retired, he exclusively worked for Tsela Health, placed at Van Dyk Mine, and rendered no
additional services to other employers or clients.
After six months of Dr Miller being placed at the mine, the mine workers complained that Dr
Miller did not have a nice bedside manner and that he was brusque and short with the mine
workers when doing health checks. Van Dyk Mine then contacted Tsela Health and requested that
Dr Miller be removed, and another doctor allocated to their premises instead. Tsela Health did not
have another client company to place Dr Miller at in place of Van Dyk Mine and subsequently
terminated Dr Miller’s contract. Dr Miller referred an unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA.
Tsela Health raised a jurisdictional point at arbitration that no employment relationship existed
between Dr Miller and Tsela Health and as a result, the CCMA lacked jurisdiction to arbitrate the
dispute. Tsela alleges that Dr Miller is not an employee, but that he was contracted by them in
terms of a commercial agreement to be placed at one of their client companies only if there was a
need for his services.
Write a legal memorandum (note) in which you advise Dr Miller whether Tsela is likely to succeed
in the jurisdictional point raised.
MARK ALLOCATION:
Twenty marks awarded in respect of correct legal theory.
Five marks awarded in respect of application to the set of facts.
Five marks awarded in respect of a legal submission that is well‐structured, concise, and
articulate.
22 2022
© The Independent Institute of Education (Pty) Ltd 2022
Page 4 of 7
Question 2 (Marks: 30)
Q.2.1 Sivu is a 25‐year‐old male who was born HIV‐positive. Since he left high school, he
has been doing odd jobs in the construction industry to help provide for his family.
He finally finds a permanent job that is being advertised that suits his skills set after
years of seeking permanent employment. The company indicates that they wish to
hire Sivu, but that it is the company’s recruitment policy that all prospective
employees will have to pass a health check, which includes a mandatory HIV test.
Sivu is conflicted as he knows that if he refuses to undergo the testing, he is unlikely
to be appointed.
Advise Sivu on the legal position and his rights in this scenario.
(15)
Q.2.2 Nachelle is a professional assistant to the CEO of the company that she works for.
Her email address is joined with the CEO’s business email address and one day she
sees a confidential email in which the CEO admits to defrauding a client in the
amount of R1 million. Nachelle approaches one of the other Directors of the
company in confidence and reports the email (of which she takes a screenshot with
her iPhone).
The other Director happens to be a golfing buddies with the CEO and alerts him to
what Nachelle has told him. The CEO’s demeanour towards Nachelle changes
abruptly and he begins to make her the time at work unbearable by verbally
abusing her when nobody else is around, whispering to her that ‘he knows that she
is an ungrateful, dirty little snitch’, and screaming at her for the most minor errors
in her work. When she gathers up the courage to address the situation, he tells her
that if she doesn’t like working there anymore, she can leave and that nobody can
prove that he has done anything wrong as he always treats her politely in front of
other people.
Advise Nachelle on the legal position and her rights in this scenario.
(15)
22 2022
© The Independent Institute of Education (Pty) Ltd 2022
Page 5 of 7
Question 3 (Marks: 60)
On 15 October 2012, Dr W was appointed by the Department of Health as the CEO of the Fort
England Hospital in Grahamstown, Eastern Cape. The hospital is a state psychiatric hospital that
provides mental health care services and houses some 300 patients with mental disorders, some
of whom are extremely disturbed and require constant supervision. The hospital is further
entrusted with statutory responsibilities to manage South Africa’s most difficult and dangerous
state patients in its national maximum‐security unit.
When Dr W was appointed, the situation at the hospital was, in his words, “an endemic crisis”.
The system of administration at the hospital was in chaos, many of the staff were often absent
from work without approved leave and the staff members at the hospital were taking illegal
payments from patients. As a result, the quality of clinical care being delivered at the hospital was
greatly concerning and urgent leadership and intervention was required to address the situation.
As a result, Dr W reviewed various policies that regulated the administration and management of
the hospital and implemented various disciplinary action measures. These changes were met with
resistance by many staff members who took an attitude of complete defiance of management
authority which included:
Unions leading staff on various unprotected strikes and pickets;
Nurses abandoning their workstations and leaving patients unattended during these
unprotected strikes;
During the course of these unprotected strikes, the kitchens were locked, and the keys
removed, so that the patients could not be fed;
Nurses refusing to take blood samples and dispense medication regularly as required;
Shop stewards walking out of meetings and calling Dr W “a dictator”;
Nursing staff signing petitions calling for Dr W’s resignation for implementing workplace
discipline;
Blocking Dr W’s vehicle from entering the hospital and, on one occasion, physically trying to
stop him from entering the hospital and fracturing his arm;
Nurses physically removing all the furniture from Dr W’s office and placing it in the parking
lot and throwing heaps of soil onto the furniture;
Shop stewards arming themselves with sticks and surgical implements to intimidate nurses
to leave their workstations and telling them that their houses would be burnt down if they
did not participate in the unprotected strikes;
22 2022
© The Independent Institute of Education (Pty) Ltd 2022
Page 6 of 7
Union representatives sending written threats to the hospital HR stating that Dr W “must
leave in a bakkie or they will make the hospital ungovernable and set the administration
building alight”.
Q.3.1 The unions represented at the hospital were the following:
National Education Health and Allied Workers Union (NEHAWU) – 55%
representation
National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers Union (NUPSAW) – 5%
representation
Democratic Nursing Association of South Africa (DENOSA) – 32% representation
Health and Other Services Personnel Trade Union of South Africa (HOSPERSA) and
the Public Servants Association (PSA) – 8% representation
Q.3.1.1 Explain whether the LRA provides for a legally enforceable duty to
bargain.
(3)
Q.3.1.2 Describe the type of representation that NEHAWU has. (2)
Q.3.1.3 List the organisational rights that DENOSA has. (3)
Q.3.2
Q.3.2.1 Describe the procedure that would have to be followed for a strike to be
protected.
(6)
Q.3.2.2 What disciplinary action could have fairly been taken against nurses and
hospital staff who participated in these unprotected strikes?
(6)
Q.3.2.3 Describe the procedure that would have to be followed to implement the
disciplinary action identified in Q.3.2.2 above.
(10)
Q.3.3 As a result of the continuing unlawful actions of the hospital staff, the Department
of Health issued Dr W with a letter transferring him to the Department of Health’s
head office in Bhisho (140 km away). Dr W would not agree to this proposed
redeployment as he resided permanently in Grahamstown and had young children
attending school there. Furthermore, his refusal was on the basis that there was no
valid reason for it as he was not the one acting unlawfully and that no legal
procedures had been followed.
(30)
22 2022
© The Independent Institute of Education (Pty) Ltd 2022
Page 7 of 7
The Department of Health then sent a formal instruction to Dr W telling him not to
report for work and stating that his continued refusal to transfer would be a
“deemed dismissal” if he continued to refuse the transfer which was “in the best
interests of the patients, whose safety is compromised as a result of the situation”.
Write a legal note in which you argue whether the transfer constitutes an unfair
labour or a dismissal.
MARK ALLOCATION:
Twenty marks awarded in respect of correct legal theory.
Ten marks awarded in respect of a legal opinion that is succinct,
articulately argued, and well‐structured.
END OF PAPER