South Africa’s 2026 Budget Speech was framed as a turning point — and for once, that is not just political rhetoric. With public debt stabilising, inflation moderating, and previously announced tax hikes withdrawn, Treasury has sent a clear message: discipline is back, but so is accountability. For HR leaders and executives, the real question is not what the Budget says, but what it demands of leadership inside organisations. Here are the key strategic takeaways for HR leaders and EXCOs — and how to implement them at workplace level. Wage Pressure Is Coming — But the Budget Won’t Absorb It for You While personal income tax brackets and rebates have finally been adjusted for inflation, this merely prevents fiscal drag — it does not meaningfully increase employees’ disposable income. At the same time: Fuel levies and sin taxes increase from 1 April 2026 Cost-of-living pressures remain structurally embedded CPI is forecast at approximately 3.4% Strategic HR response: Expect renewed collective bargaining pressure, particularly in unionised environments Budgetary relief from Treasury will not translate into wage moderation expectations from employees What to do now: Move early on data-driven wage benchmarking Revisit total reward models (benefits, flexibility, non-cash value) Prepare defensible affordability positions aligned to operational sustainability This is a year where poor wage strategy will translate directly into labour instability.   “Do More With Less” Is Now Official Policy — And It Applies to You Treasury’s emphasis on spending efficiency, headcount discipline and productivity mirrors what many private employers are already experiencing. The era of growth-through-headcount is over. Strategic HR response: Workforce planning must shift from numbers to capability density Performance management systems must withstand scrutiny Underperformance will increasingly be framed as a cost and governance issue What to do now: Audit role design and spans of control Strengthen incapacity and poor performance processes Ensure line managers are trained to manage performance lawfully and decisively Skills Investment Is a Business Imperative — Not an ESG Nice-to-Have With modest GDP growth projected, productivity — not expansion — will drive competitiveness. Strategic HR response: Skills development must be tightly linked to business-critical capability Training spend will face sharper ROI scrutiny What to do now: Align skills plans to operational bottlenecks Prioritise scarce and future-critical skills Use training as a retention and redeployment tool Small Business Relief = Restructuring Flexibility Increased VAT thresholds and CGT relief signal intent to support business sustainability. Strategic HR response: Commercial flexibility must be balanced with labour law compliance Section 197 and operational requirements dismissals remain high-risk What to do now: Review contractor and outsourcing models Stress-test restructuring strategies against labour legislation Involve legal advisors early Governance, Compliance and Ethics Are Back in the Spotlight Regulatory tolerance is shrinking. Strategic HR response: HR governance failures will increasingly be viewed as reputational and financial risk What to do now: Audit disciplinary and investigation processes Ensure consistent consequence management Align HR risk reporting with Board and audit structures The Bottom Line The 2026 Budget does not promise growth through spending. It demands growth through leadership, discipline and execution. People strategy is now fiscal strategy. Those who align workforce decisions to economic reality will build resilience. Those who do not will manage disputes, disengagement and reputational risk. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

Groundbreaking Rehabilitation, Reintegration and Return-to-Work Regulations, effective 6 March 2026 , impose far-reaching obligations on employers, the Compensation Fund and healthcare providers to actively facilitate the recovery and reinstatement of occupationally injured and diseased employees.   South Africa’s Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act (COIDA), Act 130 of 1993 , has long served as the bedrock of protection for workers who sustain injuries or contract diseases in the course of their employment. While the Act has been amended through Act 10 of 2022 — expanding coverage, modernising processes and tightening compliance — the promulgation of the Rehabilitation, Reintegration and Return-to-Work Regulations on 6 March 2026 marks the most significant humanisation of the legislative framework since its inception. Published in Government Gazette No. 54273 (No. R. 2025), these regulations move beyond the traditional focus on compensation payments and bring into sharp focus the dignity, recovery and productive reintegration of the injured or ill worker. They do so by imposing specific, procedurally enforceable obligations on multiple stakeholders — and they take effect immediately. The Bigger Picture: What the 2022 Amendments and 2026 Regulations Together Achieve The amendment of COIDA through Act 10 of 2022 updated the original 1993 legislation to reflect contemporary realities: domestic workers were granted retrospective coverage back to 27 April 1994; prescription periods were clarified; third-party intermediaries were brought under a formal registration regime; and an entirely new Chapter XA introduced dedicated inspection, compliance, and enforcement mechanisms with designated COIDA Inspectors. The 2026 Regulations build directly on this foundation. In terms of Section 97 read with the newly inserted Section 70A of the Act, Minister Nomakhosazana Meth has promulgated regulations that give legal force to a complete, multi-disciplinary system for managing the rehabilitation, reintegration, and return to work of employees who have sustained occupational injuries or contracted occupational diseases. Taken together, these developments signal a decisive shift: the Compensation Fund is no longer simply a claims-paying mechanism. It is now a legally mandated rehabilitation partner, with employers, case managers and healthcare providers all playing defined and accountable roles. The Core Principle: Rehabilitation as a Right, Not a Privilege The new regulations are grounded in a powerful principle: where an employee suffers temporary or permanent total disablement as a result of an occupational injury or disease, the Compensation Fund, Licensee, or employer individually liable is obligated — with the employee’s consent — to provide access to a formal Rehabilitation, Reintegration and Return-to-Work (RRR) Programme . This encompasses: Clinical rehabilitation: addressing physical, cognitive, sensory and psychosocial recovery; Vocational rehabilitation: preserving or restoring employment capacity through counselling, re-skilling and workplace adjustments; Social rehabilitation: restoring the employee’s independence and ability to participate in society; and Assistive devices and technology: provided according to annually Gazetted guidelines and cost schedules.   Critically, the regulations are explicit that an employee’s entitlement to compensation benefits is not forfeited by participating in the RRR Programme and resuming work. The Commissioner retains discretion to adjust benefits equitably where the employee’s disablement improves or deteriorates. What Employers Must Do: A New Layer of Accountability The regulations place substantial obligations on employers that go far beyond simply reporting accidents and paying levies. Every employer — and every employer individually liable — must: Designate an Employee Health and Wellness (EH&W) Representative to serve as the liaison between the Compensation Fund or Licensee, the injured/diseased employee, and the relevant healthcare and rehabilitation service providers. Incorporate RRR cases into formal internal governance structures, including HR departments, Health and Safety Committees, Workplace Consultative Committees, and operational management forums. Embed RRR provisions within company HR policies, communicated in writing to all employees. Provide reasonable accommodation — adjusted duties, modified work schedules, assistive devices, work trials, job transfers, and re-skilling — to support the employee’s return to work. Maintain secure RRR records for a minimum of thirty years. Submit annual reporting data on enrolled RRR cases to the Compensation Fund or Licensee. Refrain from dismissing or reducing the remuneration of an injured/diseased employee based on incapacity without complying fully with labour legislation; and where dismissal does occur, notify both the Chief Inspector and the Compensation Fund in writing, stating reasons.   Employers who actively participate in accredited RRR programmes stand to benefit from reduced assessment rates, incentivising good-faith compliance over mere technical adherence. The Role of the Rehabilitation Case Manager At the heart of the new framework is the Rehabilitation Case Manager, appointed by the Compensation Fund or Licensee. This professional is charged with coordinating the entire clinical and vocational journey of the injured or diseased employee. The Case Manager: Sets referral guidelines for the relevant multi-disciplinary team (MDT); Develops, coordinates and approves the Individual Rehabilitation Plan (IRP) in consultation with the employee, family, employer and healthcare providers; Monitors the employee’s progress toward return-to-work readiness; and Compiles detailed reports to the Compensation Fund or Licensee and the employer.   The Individual Rehabilitation Plan is the central instrument of the new system. It must address clinical, vocational and social rehabilitation goals, assistive device requirements, and defined outcome targets — and it must be funded by the Compensation Fund, Licensee or employer individually liable. Healthcare Providers and Facilities: Raised Standards The regulations also tighten the standards for rehabilitation healthcare providers and facilities. Only providers who are appropriately qualified, registered with the relevant statutory council, and rendering services within Gazette-prescribed codes and pricing may participate. Rehabilitation facilities must hold CIPC registration, DoH/DSD accreditation, Board of Healthcare Funders (BHF) registration, and OHS Act compliance. Pre-authorisation is required for all non-emergency rehabilitation services. Third Parties: Formalised and Accountable The Compensation Fund Regulations on Third Party Registration (also published on 6 March 2026) bring all intermediaries transacting on behalf of employees, employers and medical service providers under a formal registration regime. Third parties must register between 1 March and end June each year, provide full CIPC, tax, professional body and good standing documentation, and comply with strict document handling, confidentiality and conflict-of-interest requirements. Non-compliant third parties face suspension or cancellation of registration. Compliance and Enforcement The new Inspection, Compliance and Enforcement Regulations provide COIDA Inspectors with clearly defined investigation and compliance powers. Employers can expect scheduled and unannounced site inspections, formal compliance notices, 14-day response periods, and potential court orders for continued non-compliance. The Compensation Commissioner may also invoke penalties for failure to pay assessments, register with the Fund, or comply with reporting obligations. A Call to Action for Employers The effective date of 6 March 2026 means these obligations apply now. Employers who have not yet reviewed their COIDA compliance posture, updated their HR policies, designated EH&W Representatives, or established internal RRR governance structures should act without delay. The regulations represent not only a compliance obligation but an opportunity: organisations that invest in the genuine rehabilitation and reintegration of their injured workforce build more resilient, inclusive and productive workplaces. The message from the Department of Employment and Labour is clear: the era of treating injured workers as administrative claims is over. Recovery, reintegration and dignity are now the law.   COIDA REHABILITATION, REINTEGRATION & RETURN-TO-WORK: STEP-BY-STEP PROCESS GUIDE The following table sets out the prescribed process sequence, the stakeholders involved at each stage, and the specific actions required under the Regulations: Process Step Process Description Stakeholders Involved What Needs to Be Done Step 1 Accident / Disease Reporting Employee or employer becomes aware of occupational injury or disease. Employee Employer / EH&W Representative •   Employee gives notice to employer using form W.Cl .3 (injury) or W.Cl .14 (disease). •   Employer reports to the Compensation Fund using form W.Cl .1 or W.Cl .2 within prescribed timeframes. •   Employer designates an Employee Health & Wellness (EH&W) Representative. Step 2 Liability Acceptance & Initial Assessment Compensation Fund or Licensee determines liability and classifies the injury/disease. Compensation Fund / Licensee Compensation Commissioner Healthcare Service Provider •   Commissioner accepts or rejects liability for the accident or occupational disease. •   Injury/disease classified as temporary total/partial or permanent disablement. •   Healthcare provider submits request electronically for enrolment into the Rehabilitation, Reintegration and Return-to-Work (RRR) Programme. Step 3 Appointment of Case Manager A Rehabilitation Case Manager is assigned to coordinate the employee's recovery journey. Compensation Fund / Licensee Rehabilitation Case Manager Employer EH&W Representative •   Compensation Fund or Licensee appoints a Rehabilitation Case Manager. •   Case Manager sets referral guidelines for the multi-disciplinary team (MDT). •   Case Manager liaises with the employer's EH&W Representative to begin coordination. Step 4 Functional Assessment Comprehensive assessment of the employee's physical, cognitive and vocational capabilities. Rehabilitation Healthcare Providers (MDT) Case Manager Employee •   Employee undergoes assessment of current functional abilities and limitations. •   MDT (including occupational therapist, physiotherapist, psychologist, etc.) conducts clinical assessments. •   Employee cooperates with development of an Individual Rehabilitation Plan (IRP). •   Case Manager reviews and approves the IRP. Step 5 Development of Individual Rehabilitation Plan (IRP) A structured, personalised rehabilitation plan is developed and approved. Case Manager MDT / Healthcare Providers Employer EH&W Representative Compensation Fund / Licensee Employee •   IRP includes clinical, vocational, social rehabilitation goals and assistive device requirements. •   Plan developed in consultation with employee, family, employer and MDT. •   Compensation Fund or Licensee approves and funds the IRP. •   Plan must be freely communicated to the employee in writing. •   Costs borne by Compensation Fund, Licensee and/or employer individually liable. Step 6 Clinical Rehabilitation Active medical and therapeutic treatment to restore physical, cognitive and psychosocial function. Rehabilitation Healthcare Providers Frail Care / Rehabilitation Facilities Case Manager •   Providers render services within their registered scope and discipline. •   Facilities must be CIPC-registered, DoH/DSD-accredited, and OHS-compliant. •   Pre-authorisation required for non-emergency services. •   Clinical costs funded by Compensation Fund / Licensee / employer individually liable. •   Providers liaise with all parties to maximise plan efficiency. Step 7 Vocational Rehabilitation Employee is assessed and supported to preserve, obtain or regain employment. Vocational Rehabilitation Providers Case Manager Employer EH&W Representative Employee •   Vocational counselling, re-skilling and up-skilling provided. •   Work environment adjustments and tools of trade modifications identified. •   Employer facilitates vocational guidance, skills development and reasonable accommodation. •   For unemployed beneficiaries with permanent disablement, costs borne by Compensation Fund / Licensee. •   For employees returning to work, costs borne by the employer. Step 8 Social Rehabilitation & Assistive Devices Restore employee's independence and social integration. MDT / Social Workers Compensation Fund / Licensee Employer EH&W Representative •   Social rehabilitation activities implemented to restore independence and community participation. •   Assistive devices and technology provided per Gazette guidelines. •   Employer coordinates provision of assistive devices and technology in the workplace. •   Ongoing support for psychosocial well-being. Step 9 Workplace Reintegration & Return-to-Work Planning Structured and supported return to the workplace on appropriate duties. Employer / EH&W Representative Case Manager Employee H&S Committee / HR •   Employer provides reasonable accommodation: adjusted duties, modified schedule, work trial, job transfer. •   Employer communicates return-to-work process to the employee in writing. •   Case Manager monitors progress and updates the IRP. •   RRR cases integrated into HR, H&S and management committee structures. •   Co-workers educated on disability inclusion. •   Employer submits annual reporting data to the Compensation Fund. Step 10 Monitoring, Review & Outcomes Reporting Ongoing monitoring of the employee's progress and compliance with regulatory reporting. Case Manager Compensation Fund / Licensee Employer Employee •   Case Manager compiles detailed progress reports to Compensation Fund / Licensee and employer. •   Case Manager monitors overall capacity for return to work. •   Compensation Fund monitors, evaluates and reviews the RRR Programme. •   Employer keeps RRR records for minimum 30 years. •   Employee reports resumption of duty or inability to retain employment in writing (preferably electronically). •   Compensation Commissioner may adjust compensation benefits based on rehabilitation outcomes. Step 11 Employee Obligations Throughout Employee must actively participate in all stages of the programme. Employee •   Actively participate in the RRR Programme. •   Return to pre-injury duties where functionally and medically reasonable. •   Accept reasonable accommodation offered by the employer. •   Comply with the terms of the Individual Rehabilitation Plan. •   Provide consent for access to personal health and medical records. Step 12 Dismissal / Inability to Retain Where return to work is not achievable, prescribed procedures must still be followed. Employer Compensation Fund / Licensee Chief Inspector Employee •   Employer may not dismiss based on incapacity or reduce remuneration without adhering to labour legislation. •   If dismissal is necessary, employer must notify the Compensation Fund / Licensee and Chief Inspector in writing stating reasons. •   Employer must notify Fund / Licensee of inability to retain after reasonable efforts have been exhausted. •   Employee retains right to compensation benefits regardless of employment status.   SOURCE: Government Gazette No. 54273, 6 March 2026 — Department of Employment and Labour, Regulations on Rehabilitation, Reintegration and Return-to-Work under COIDA Act 130 of 1993 (as amended by Act 10 of 2022). The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

Integrated performance management, career development, and succession planning are not “nice-to-haves” – they are the backbone of lawful, future‑fit, and retention‑friendly people practices in a VUCA world.   1. Legal risk: Section 186(2) and fragmented HR practices Section 186(2) of the LRA turns promotion, training, probation, demotion and benefits into potential unfair labour practice (ULP) flashpoints if the employer’s conduct is unfair. When performance management, career paths and succession decisions are fragmented, three problems arise: Promotion and training decisions look ad hoc and are difficult to justify with evidence (no clear link to ratings, competencies or IDPs). Employees can more easily show that they were denied a fair opportunity to compete or to develop, which is central to ULP‑promotion and ULP‑training disputes. Arbitrators and courts scrutinise whether the employer’s discretion was exercised rationally and consistently—gaps in processes and records are interpreted against the employer. An integrated system—where performance outcomes flow into career discussions and succession pools—provides the objective, documented basis that section 186(2) compliance really demands. 2. How integration underpins fair promotion and training The law does not guarantee promotion, but it guarantees a fair opportunity to compete and fair conduct in relation to promotion and training. Integration supports this by: Linking promotion decisions to documented performance data, competencies and potential, rather than to vague impressions or favouritism. Using succession and talent reviews to identify high‑potential employees and then feeding that into structured development and training plans, reducing claims that training access is arbitrary. Providing defensible reasons when a candidate is not promoted – for example, gaps in readiness or critical skills that have already been identified in their performance and development records. When your performance scores, IDPs, mentorship records and succession‑pool decisions tell the same story, it becomes much harder for an employee to prove that your conduct around promotion or training was capricious, biased, or irrational in a ULP dispute. 3. Employee experience and the psychological contract From the employee’s perspective, the absence of visible career paths and succession logic is easily experienced as bias, “blocked” progression and broken promises – fertile ground for ULP referrals and turnover. Integrated systems improve the employee experience by: Making career pathways explicit and linking them to transparent criteria (competencies, qualifications, performance levels), which aligns expectations and perception of fairness. Using performance reviews as career and development conversations, not just as rating events, so employees see a line of sight from current contribution to future opportunities. Showing that development and training decisions are planned, not punitive or reactive, which helps avoid “they never trained me and then said I wasn’t ready” ULP‑style grievances. This alignment between process and perception is as important as compliance: a fair, consistent experience is often what prevents disputes in the first place. 4. VUCA skills, agility and succession pipelines VUCA (volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity) puts a premium on learning agility, self‑leadership and scarce technical skills, particularly in critical roles. Succession planning and performance management must therefore move from static, senior‑post lists to dynamic pipelines based on: Evidence‑based assessments of potential and readiness, combined with current performance and competency frameworks. Targeted development (rotations, mentoring, stretch projects) that build the adaptive, cross‑functional skills required in changing environments. Regular talent reviews that refresh succession pools and adjust for new strategic and technological demands. Legally, this VUCA‑aligned approach helps because promotions and training access are clearly tied to future‑fit competencies, not to arbitrary preferences – meeting the requirement that decisions be rational and related to the purpose of the job. 5. Retention, turnover intention and the cost of getting it wrong Research links robust succession planning with lower turnover intentions and better performance, particularly where self‑leadership and development are encouraged. Poorly managed promotion and development practices carry a double cost: Direct legal and financial exposure: CCMA awards can include promotion, protective promotion or significant compensation where an unfair labour practice is proven. Indirect strategic damage: high‑potential employees exit when they perceive unfairness or stagnation, taking scarce VUCA‑critical skills and institutional memory with them. An integrated performance–career–succession architecture therefore functions as a retention strategy: it signals investment, clarifies pathways, and reduces the sense that one’s future depends on opaque politics rather than documented merit. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

In the matter of  Public Investment Corporation v More and Others (JR 2121/2022) [2025] ZALCJHB 159; (2025) 46 ILJ 1775 (LC) (16 April 2025) , the Labour Court heard a Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA ) ruling that reinstated former Public Investment Corporation (PIC) chief financial officer (CFO). The employee, a chartered accountant, was appointed CFO of the PIC and reported directly to the then - CEO. In 2014, the PIC approved a R350 million revolving credit facility for VBS Mutual Bank , subject to strict conditions. In June 2015, the employee signed a memorandum recommending the execution of agreements for the loan. Later investigations revealed that the agreements did not match the original terms approved by the fund investment panel. Key differences included the absence of the approved R200 million/R150 million funding split and the addition of clauses not authorised by the panel. On this basis, the PIC charged the employee with misconduct in June 2020. Following a disciplinary process, she was found guilty. While the Chairperson recommended a final written warning, the PIC board opted instead to dismiss her in October 2021. The employee challenged her dismissal at the CCMA, raising three preliminary objections: prescription (that the charges had lapsed in law due to the five-year delay), waiver, and undue delay. The arbitration, presided over by two senior Commissioners, upheld her prescription argument. They found that the misconduct had occurred in 2015 and had been prescribed by 2018 under the Prescription Act . They therefore ruled her dismissal substantively and procedurally unfair. The CCMA ordered her reinstatement and awarded her backpay of over R6.7 million, plus costs. The PIC applied to the Labour Court to review the arbitration award. The LC found that the Commissioners had committed a material error of law by applying the Prescription Act to an internal disciplinary process. The Court held that prescription applies to civil litigation and arbitration awards, but not to workplace disciplinary hearings, as no “debt” in law arises when an employer disciplines an employee. The LC noted that the Commissioners strayed from their own stated approach by also considering delay and the merits of the case after finding prescription applied. This, the Court held, undermined their reasoning. The Court reviewed and set aside the arbitration award and directed that the matter be heard de novo  (from the beginning) before a new senior Commissioner at the CCMA. The record of the previous arbitration will form part of the evidence. No costs order was made. This ruling makes clear that employers may still discipline employees years after alleged misconduct, although unreasonable delay could affect fairness. The key legal principle is that the Prescription Act does not limit the right to discipline. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

Why 2026 will be a defining year for employers South African employers are heading into a year where the “people agenda” and the “technology agenda” can no longer be run separately. HR leaders are expected to manage legal compliance, labour stability, workforce capability, productivity, and culture while also responding to the accelerating adoption of artificial intelligence (AI) and digital tools. The result is a new kind of employment risk: not only whether you comply, but whether your organisation can adapt fast enough to remain competitive and credible to employees, unions, clients, and regulators. That is why the Annual Employment Conference (#AEC2026) is positioned around a practical theme that many organisations are actively wrestling with: how to combine Human Insight and Artificial Intelligence  to make better workforce decisions, improve execution, and protect the organisation in a fast-changing environment. The key conversations employers are prioritising right now The most valuable employment conferences are the ones that help teams connect the dots across disciplines that usually sit in silos. In 2026, those dots increasingly include labour-law risk, the impact of AI on HR decision-making, and the operating reality of transformation, productivity, and governance. #AEC2026 is framed as a one-day, case-study-driven platform where HR, ER, and leadership teams can align on what’s changing and what to do next, with an emphasis on real-world implementation rather than theory. What “future of work” means in practice, not slogans For many organisations, “future of work” has become shorthand for several concrete challenges. The first is decision quality: hiring, performance, discipline, and policy decisions must be consistent, defensible, and data-informed. The second is speed: policy shifts and workforce pressures require rapid interpretation and rollout across sites and business units. The third is trust: employees need to believe decisions are fair, explainable, and not outsourced to opaque tools. Any HR or leadership strategy that ignores these three pressures tends to create unnecessary conflict and reputational risk. Why CPD-focused learning still matters for business outcomes When HR and ER teams stay current, the payoff is usually operational: fewer avoidable disputes, cleaner processes, stronger manager capability, and better internal communication. Events that package learning into clear takeaways and practical examples help teams build shared language and improve consistency across the organisation. AEC2026 also offers SABPP-accredited CPD HR points , which can be useful for professionals who need formal recognition alongside practical learning. A low-key next step If this is on your 2026 priority list, the Annual Employment Conference (#AEC2026)  takes place on 12 March 2026 , with an in-person option at The Maslow Hotel, Sandton , and a virtual option on Microsoft Teams . Pricing on the event page is R3,990 (excl. VAT)  for the Johannesburg session and R2,990 (excl. VAT)  for the MS Teams virtual session, and there is also a table booking option  with a group discount code listed for teams attending together. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

A landmark reform process has concluded at NEDLAC. Proposed amendments to four major pieces of labour legislation are now gazetted for public comment. Here is what you need to know — and why you need to act. After more than two years of intensive tripartite negotiations involving Government, Organised Labour and Organised Business, the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC) has finalised its report on the most comprehensive review of South African labour law in over a decade. Proposed amendments to the Labour Relations Act (LRA) , the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA) , the Employment Equity Act (EEA), and the National Minimum Wage Act (NMWA) have now been gazetted for public comment. This is not routine legislative housekeeping. These amendments represent a fundamental reshaping of the employment law ecosystem — with far-reaching implications for how South African businesses hire, manage, discipline, retrench and compensate their workforce. What Has Changed — And What Remains Contested Business representatives, led by BUSA Labour Market Convenor Jonathan Goldberg , fought hard at the negotiating table and achieved some remarkable outcomes. Key wins for the employer community include: A new earnings threshold of R1.8 million per annum limiting reinstatement as a remedy for high-paid employees in non-automatic unfair dismissal cases — reducing lengthy and costly CCMA disputes; A simplified test for procedural fairness — requiring only that an employee had a fair and reasonable opportunity to respond — aligned with updated case law; A two-year exemption for start-up businesses with fewer than 50 employees from extended bargaining council collective agreements, providing critical breathing room for new entrants; Reforms to section 189A large-scale retrenchment proceedings, restoring the ability to challenge all aspects of a retrenchment dismissal after the fact — reducing procedural complexity; A 24-month validity cap on section 77 socio-economic protest certificates , curtailing the abuse of stale certificates; Expanded CCMA jurisdiction and efficiency reforms — including the ability to consolidate related claims, expand the use of inquiries by arbitrators, and carry forward unexpended budget balances. These are meaningful achievements. They reflect sustained, strategic engagement by the business constituency and should be recognised as such. But There Are Areas That Demand Your Attention Not every outcome will be straightforward to manage. Several proposed amendments will require conscious and proactive risk management on the part of employers: Statutory severance pay is set to double — from one to two weeks per year of service for completed years after the Amendment Act commences. This has direct cost implications for workforce restructuring plans and financial modelling. The extended definition of "employee" — through a new Schedule 11 to the LRA — seeks to extend organisational, collective bargaining and freedom of association rights to non-standard workers and platform-based workers. The cost and operational implications of this extension are significant and not yet fully understood. New protections for "on call" workers under a proposed section 9B of the BCEA will impose minimum pay guarantees and advance notice obligations — directly affecting businesses that rely on flexible staffing models. The narrowing of the unfair labour practice definition — removing disputes about promotion, demotion, probation, training and benefits from the CCMA's jurisdiction — while welcomed by business, will require a careful review of internal escalation and grievance procedures. The Quantum Foods NMW amendment , which seeks to exclude contractual bonuses from minimum wage calculations, resolves a contentious LAC ruling — but requires businesses to review their remuneration structures and payroll configurations without delay. Proposed EEA amendments on arbitrary wage differentiation — while not yet agreed — signal a trajectory toward increased litigation risk on pay equity grounds that employers should begin stress-testing now. This Is a Call to Action The public comment period on these proposed amendments is a critical opportunity. Submissions made at this stage have real influence on whether amendments proceed in their current form, are modified, or are withdrawn entirely. If you are an employer, business owner, HR professional or industry body, you have both the right and the responsibility to make your voice heard. Consider the following steps: Read the proposed Amendment Bills (LRA, BCEA, EEA and NMWA Amendment Bills) and assess their specific impact on your sector and workforce model; Submit formal commentary through industry bodies, employer associations or directly to the Department of Employment and Labour; Attend briefings and webinars to ensure you fully understand what is proposed before the comment window closes; Begin scenario planning now — particularly around severance pay obligations, flexible staffing arrangements and employment equity compliance; Review contracts, policies and procedures in light of the new dismissal code, the revised ULP definition and the expanded definition of employee. Understand the Implications — Before It's Too Late Global Business Solutions (GBS), in partnership with Jonathan Goldberg, Labour Market Convenor for BUSA and one of the key business negotiators in the NEDLAC process, will be hosting a 2-hour webinar specifically designed to walk employers and stakeholders through these amendments — what they mean in practice, where the risks lie, and how to prepare. This is your opportunity to hear directly from those who were in the room. 📌 Given the importance and potential compliance impact of these reforms, we are hosting two Navigating South Africa’s Landmark Labour Law Reforms Pop-Up  sessions to unpack what this means in practice and what organisations should already be preparing for. Upcoming online sessions: 3 March 2026 - https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/navigating-sas-landmark-labour-law-reforms-pop-up-03-march-2026 25 March 2026 - https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/navigating-sas-landmark-labour-law-reforms-pop-up-25-march-2026 Alternatively reach out to us at: info@globalbusiness.co.za | 043 721 1030 South Africa's labour law is evolving. The question is not whether your organisation will be affected — it is whether you will be ready. COMPLIMENATRY COMPARISON: NEDLAC REPORT VS GOVERNMENT GAZETTE Provisions Unchanged from NEDLAC Report to Government Gazette Executive Summary This document compares the NEDLAC Final Report on the Labour Law Reform Process with Government Gazette No. 54220 dated 26 February 2026. The analysis identifies provisions that were agreed upon by all social partners (Business, Labour, and Government) during NEDLAC negotiations and subsequently included unchanged in the published Labour Law Amendment Bill, 2025. A total of 43 substantive provisions were agreed to by all parties in the NEDLAC process and incorporated into the Gazette without material changes. Overview of the NEDLAC Process The labour law reform process at NEDLAC ran from April 2022 until October 2024, comprising 28 task team meetings. The process addressed amendments to: Labour Relations Act (LRA) Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA) Employment Equity Act (EEA) National Minimum Wage Act (NMW) The social partners established a Labour Law Reforms Task Team with facilitators, legal drafters, and technical support to negotiate proposed amendments. Detailed Comparison: Unchanged Provisions The following table sets out all provisions where consensus was reached by Business, Labour, and Government in the NEDLAC process and which appear unchanged in the published Government Gazette. Labour Relations Act Amendments – Part 1 Topic/Section NEDLAC Position Status in Gazette Key Details Labour Court Amendments (ss 153, 156, 160, 162, 167, 169, 170, 179) Agreed by all parties Clauses 25–33 of LRA Bill Institutional improvements including appointment procedures, jurisdiction clarification, cost discretion expansion Essential Services (ss 65, 70, 71(9), 72, 74) Agreed by all parties Clauses 5, 7–10 of LRA Bill Clarification of Essential Services Committee relationship to CCMA, promotion of minimum services agreements Bargaining Councils – Secret Ballot (ss 26(15)(a), 95(9), 26(15A)) Agreed by all parties Clauses 1–4 of LRA Bill Secret ballot requirement for closed shop agreements; 3-year lapse provision Bargaining Councils – Funding (s 32A(2)) Agreed by all parties Clauses 1–4 of LRA Bill Minister empowered to renew funding agreements for up to 36 months Bargaining Councils – Regulations (s 99) Agreed by all parties Clauses 12–16 of LRA Bill Ministerial regulations on record retention for strike and lock-out ballots Registrar Powers – Guidelines (s 106(4)) Agreed by all parties Clauses 12–16 of LRA Bill Minister to publish guidelines for registrar cancellation powers after Nedlac consultation Registrar Powers – Federations (s 107) Agreed by all parties Clauses 12–16 of LRA Bill Registrar authority to regulate federations of trade unions and employers' organisations Financial Records (ss 53, 98) Agreed by all parties Clauses 12–16 of LRA Bill Alignment with Companies Act 2008 financial reporting standards High-Paid Employees Remedies (ss 193(2A), 194(1), 194(4), 208B) Agreed by all parties Clauses 43, 46 of LRA Bill High earners limited to compensation (not reinstatement) except automatically unfair dismissals; compensation caps introduced High-Paid Threshold (s 208B) Agreed by all parties Clauses 43, 46 of LRA Bill R1,800,000 per annum for May 2024–April 2025; annual CPI adjustment on 1 May Test for Procedural Fairness (s 188(3)) Agreed by all parties Clause 33 of LRA Bill Fair and reasonable opportunity to respond standard; does not apply to retrenchments Labour Relations Act Amendments – Part 2 Topic/Section NEDLAC Position Status in Gazette Key Details Inquiry by Arbitrators – Whistleblowing (s 188A(13)) Agreed by all parties Clause 36 of LRA Bill Clarification of payment provisions in whistleblowing inquiries Section 189A – CCMA Rules Agreed by all parties Clause 37 of LRA Bill CCMA empowered to make rules for facilitations rather than Ministerial regulations Section 189A – Post-Facilitation Agreed by all parties Clause 37 of LRA Bill Unfair dismissal disputes may proceed to Labour Court without further conciliation after facilitation Section 189A – Procedural Fairness Challenge Agreed by all parties Clause 37 of LRA Bill Restoration of pre-189A position allowing retrenchment challenges post-dismissal CCMA – Picketing Jurisdiction Agreed by all parties Clauses 6, 18–22 Clarification of who may conciliate picketing disputes CCMA – Rules & Procedures Agreed by all parties Clauses 6, 18–22 Expanded CCMA jurisdiction across employment laws CCMA – Enforcement Role Agreed by all parties Clauses 6, 18–22 Legal status confirmed for CCMA enforcement role CCMA – Inquiry Fees Agreed by all parties Clauses 6, 18–22 Regulation of fees charged in section 188A inquiries CCMA – Expanded Mandate Agreed by all parties Clauses 6, 18–22 Statutory mandate expanded to include dispute prevention Arbitration Awards as Court Orders (s 143(5)) Agreed by all parties Clauses 38, 44, 45 Awards treated as Magistrate’s Court or Labour Court orders BCEA, EEA and Other Amendments Topic/Section NEDLAC Position Status in Gazette Key Details EEA – Harassment Claims Agreed by all parties Clauses 1–2 of EEA Bill Low-paid employees may refer any harassment claim to CCMA EEA – Bargaining Council Jurisdiction Agreed by all parties Clauses 1–2 of EEA Bill Accredited councils may determine EEA disputes BCEA – Severance Pay CCMA Jurisdiction Agreed by all parties Clause 4 of BCEA Bill CCMA jurisdiction clarified BCEA – Condonation Applications Agreed by all parties Clauses 6–10 CCMA may consider condonation for employer appeals BCEA – Compliance Orders Agreed by all parties Clauses 6–10 Clarification of adjudication powers BCEA – Consolidation of Claims Agreed by all parties Clauses 6–10 Arbitrator may consolidate related claims BCEA – Fines for Non-compliance Agreed by all parties Clauses 6–10, 12 Clarification of fine imposition proceedings Code of Good Practice on Dismissals Agreed by all parties Annexure G Updated unified Code applying to all dismissal categories Summary Statistics Total agreed provisions by all parties (Business, Labour, Government): 43 LRA amendments agreed by all parties: 32 BCEA amendments agreed by all parties: 7 EEA amendments agreed by all parties: 2 Codes and Regulations agreed by all parties: 2 Key Themes of Unchanged Provisions Institutional Efficiency and Jurisdiction Expanded CCMA jurisdiction across all employment laws Clarification of enforcement powers and procedures Streamlined dispute resolution processes Enhanced rule-making authority for dispute resolution bodies Labour Court Reforms All parties agreed to significant Labour Court reforms, including: Appointment procedures for judges Expanded discretion on costs Jurisdictional clarifications Confirmation as final court of appeal (subject to Constitutional Court) Essential Services and Bargaining Councils Enhanced Essential Services Committee processes Secret ballot requirements for closed shop agreements Extended funding agreement periods Improved registrar oversight mechanisms High-Paid Employees Restriction to compensation (not reinstatement) except automatically unfair dismissals Compensation caps for unfair dismissals and labour practices Annual CPI adjustment of threshold CCMA Operational Improvements Jurisdictional clarity across employment statutes Enhanced rule-making powers Expanded mandate including dispute prevention Consolidation of related claims Enforcement mechanisms and cost recovery Conclusion The Government Gazette No. 54220 of 26 February 2026 reflects substantial consensus achieved through the NEDLAC labour law reform process. All 43 provisions agreed upon by Business, Labour, and Government during negotiations have been incorporated unchanged into the published Labour Law Amendment Bill, 2025. These unchanged provisions primarily address: Institutional efficiency of labour market institutions Jurisdictional clarity and operational improvements Essential services regulation Bargaining council operations Dispute resolution procedures Enforcement mechanisms The high level of agreement on these technical and operational matters demonstrates the effectiveness of the NEDLAC social dialogue process in achieving consensus on labour law reform, even while other contested provisions remain subject to ongoing debate. References [1] National Economic Development and Labour Council. (2024). Final NEDLAC Report on the Labour Law Reform Process. NEDLAC. [2] Department of Employment and Labour. (2026, February 26). Labour Relations Act, 2025: Labour Law Amendment Bill, 2025. Government Gazette, 54220, Notice 3801. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), B-BBEE Session 2 : Leadership That Looks Like South Africa, WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

The Labour Court (LC) in Johan­nes­burg recently heard the mat­ter of National Reg­u­lator for Com­puls­ory Spe­cific­a­tions v Cor­nelius and Oth­ers (JR2789/18) [2025] ZALCJHB 191 (10 April 2025) . The employee, employed as Fin­an­cial Man­ager at the NRCS, faced a dis­cip­lin­ary hear­ing in April 2018 after adverse audit find­ings by the Aud­itor Gen­eral , South Africa. Dur­ing the pro­ceed­ings, she wrote a private note to her legal rep­res­ent­at­ive refer­ring to her Chief Fin­an­cial Officer as a “bitch”. The note, never inten­ded for her employer, was non­ethe­less seen by her. Rely­ing on this, the NRCS charged the employee with insolence and dis­missed her on 31 July 2018. The employee referred the mat­ter to the Com­mis­sion for Con­cili­ation, Medi­ation and Arbit­ra­tion (CCMA) . At arbit­ra­tion, both parties agreed not to lead oral evid­ence but to rely on a com­mon bundle of doc­u­ments and writ­ten argu­ments. The Arbit­rator expressed con­cern over this approach but pro­ceeded. The Arbit­rator ruled that the note was a priv­ileged com­mu­nic­a­tion between the employee and her attor­ney. Since the priv­ilege had not been waived, the note was inad­miss­ible. Con­sequently, the Arbit­rator found the dis­missal sub­stant­ively unfair and ordered the employer to pay the employee com­pens­a­tion of R572,064 . The employer sought to review the award. The LC high­lighted that arbit­ra­tions should not pro­ceed without evid­ence unless a proper stated case is sub­mit­ted. By rely­ing solely on doc­u­ments, the Arbit­rator lacked suf­fi­cient mater­ial to reach a reas­on­able decision. The Court also referred to pre­vi­ous cases, includ­ing S A Social Secur­ity Agency v NEHAWU 2015] 36 ILJ 2345 (LC); [2023] ZALCJHB 286 and Hill­side Alu­minium v Math­use 2016) 37 ILJ 2082 (LC); [2016] 10 BLLR 1041 (LC) , which cau­tion against resolv­ing dis­putes without evid­ence being prop­erly tested. The LC found that the Arbit­rator failed to ensure a fair trial of the issues, par­tic­u­larly regard­ing how the note came to be admit­ted and whether priv­ilege had been waived. The Court set aside the arbit­ra­tion award and remit­ted the dis­pute back to the CCMA to be heard afresh before a dif­fer­ent Com­mis­sioner. No order as to costs was made. This rul­ing under­scores the import­ance of proper pro­ced­ure in arbit­ra­tion, espe­cially where dis­missal is at stake. It rein­forces that parties should not bypass oral evid­ence unless a clear and agreed stated case exists, as doing so risks the award being over­turned on review. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), B-BBEE Session 2 : Leadership That Looks Like South Africa , How to conduct a Disciplinary Enquiry, WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

Performance on the Edge: Managing Underperformance in a Rapidly Changing Workplace As the workplace continues to evolve — driven by technology, hybrid models, and shifting skill demands — poor performance disputes are likely to become more common and more complex. Employers are having to recalibrate what “acceptable performance” looks like in a world where job content, tools, and expectations are changing faster than ever before. Three recent cases shed light on the evolving boundaries between  poor performance due to incapacity or misconduct and the practical steps employers should take to stay legally compliant and fair. Poor Performance (Ill‑Health): Abels v Stellenbosch University In this case, a long‑serving faculty administrator faced dismissal after years of underperformance despite counselling, feedback, and a structured performance improvement plan (PIP). The employee later argued that depression was the real cause of his inability to perform and that the university should have followed an ill‑health incapacity process. The court, however, found that the  dominant reason for dismissal was poor performance , which both pre‑dated and continued despite the diagnosis and support. Crucially, there was no proven causal link between the mental health condition and the inability to meet work standards. Key takeaway:   A medical diagnosis does not automatically transform poor performance into incapacity. What matters is evidence of causation. Employers must apply and document a full performance‑management process — setting standards, providing guidance, allowing time to improve — while still enquiring into possible health issues and making reasonable accommodation. Procedural Fairness Extends to Litigation: Pule v HPCSA Here, the Labour Court dealt mainly with a postponed hearing, occasioned by unavailable witnesses in a poor performance dispute. The judgment reaffirmed that even sound substantive cases can be undermined if  procedural fairness in litigation is compromised . The court warned that fairness extends beyond the internal disciplinary or performance process to the  conduct of the trial itself  — both parties must be given proper opportunity to call witnesses, especially in fact‑sensitive performance dismissals. Key takeaway:   Plan ahead for litigation. Identify and secure attendance of your key witnesses early, as their availability can determine whether a dismissal ultimately survives judicial scrutiny. Misconduct or Poor Performance? Cape Thai Restaurant v CCMA and Others This case revisited a frequent point of confusion: whether an employee’s shortcomings amount to  inability  (poor performance) or  wilfulness/negligence  (misconduct). The court reiterated the practical test — if the employee  tried but could not  meet the required standard, it’s poor performance; if the employee  could but did not , it’s misconduct. It further cautioned arbitrators against “re‑charging” employees or reframing the employer’s case. Their role is to test fairness based on the  charge actually brought , not to invent new characterisations afterwards. Key takeaway:  Diagnose the real problem upfront. Mis‑labelling underperformance as misconduct (or vice versa) risks procedural unfairness and may render a dismissal vulnerable on review. Build evidence that clearly shows whether the issue was inability or deliberate non‑compliance. Looking Ahead: From Skills Deficits to Adaptability Gaps As technology reshapes almost every job function, we’ll see growing performance pressure tied to digital competence, data literacy, and adaptability. The  skills mismatch  that’s emerging will inevitably reflect in more poor‑performance cases — not necessarily due to laziness or unwillingness, but because job roles are evolving faster than employees’ ability to keep up. For employers, this underscores the need for: Clear performance standards aligned with modern role expectations. Training and reskilling interventions before punitive action. Careful documentation and fair, staged PIP processes. A nuanced understanding of when to pivot to an incapacity route. Handled properly, performance management can still be a vehicle for growth — but managed poorly, it remains one of the most contested areas in labour law. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), B-BBEE Session 2 : Leadership That Looks Like South Africa , How to conduct a Disciplinary Enquiry, WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) was born out of a bold vision: to redress the economic injustices of apartheid and build a more inclusive, equitable South African economy. It was never meant to be a bureaucratic exercise it was a moral and economic imperative. Yet today, many are asking: Has BEE become more about ticking boxes than transforming lives? The Compliance Conundrum Over time, BEE has become heavily codified, with scorecards, verification agencies, and compliance audits dominating the conversation. While these mechanisms were intended to ensure accountability, they’ve inadvertently created a culture of minimal effort. Companies often focus on meeting the bare minimum requirements to secure contracts or licenses, rather than embracing the deeper purpose of empowerment. This shift has led to several unintended consequences: Superficial transformation : Ownership deals that lack real control or participation. Elite capture : A small group of politically connected individuals benefiting disproportionately. Stagnation in grassroots impact : Limited support for black-owned SMEs, especially in rural and township economies. Rediscovering the Purpose of BEE To reclaim the transformative power of BEE, we must revisit its foundational goals: Economic inclusion : Empowering black South Africans to participate meaningfully in all sectors of the economy. Capacity building : Investing in education, skills development, and mentorship to create long-term impact. Entrepreneurial support : Creating ecosystems that nurture black-owned businesses beyond procurement quotas. BEE should be a springboard not a ceiling. It should unlock innovation, drive competitiveness, and foster a new generation of leaders and entrepreneurs. Toward Conscious Empowerment The future of BEE lies in conscious empowerment a shift from transactional compliance to transformational intent. This means: Rethinking scorecards to prioritise impact over inputs. Celebrating success stories of black excellence in business, tech, and the creative economy. Building inclusive value chains that uplift entire communities, not just individuals. It’s time to ask: What kind of economy do we want to build? One that reflects our demographics, values, and aspirations or one that perpetuates inequality under the guise of transformation? Let’s Start the Conversation BEE is not just a policy it’s a promise. A promise to create a fairer, more dynamic South Africa. But promises require action, introspection, and courage. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), B-BBEE Session 2 : Leadership That Looks Like South Africa , How to conduct a Disciplinary Enquiry, WSP/ATR, Needs Analysis, Planning & Reporting , Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.

The Public sector stakeholders across South Africa face imminent disruption as the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) has issued formal notice under Section 77 of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) to proceed with protected protest action on  Thursday, 26 February 2026 . The one-day socio-economic strike targets the Government Employees Medical Scheme (GEMS) over medical aid contribution increases that have outpaced salary adjustments, creating a financial crisis for public servants. Background: A Perfect Storm of Rising Costs and Stagnant Wages The roots of this action trace back to August 2017, when COSATU first raised concerns about South Africa's economic crisis with the National Economic Development and Labour Council (NEDLAC). After NEDLAC deemed the matter unresolved in November 2017, any subsequent protest action on these socio-economic grounds received protected status under the LRA. The current flashpoint centres on GEMS's aggressive contribution increases: 13.4% increase  implemented in 2025 9.8% increase  from January 2026 Further 9.5% adjustment  effective 1 April 2026 Cumulative two-year increase: 23.2% These increases starkly contrast with: Public servants'  5.5% salary increase  for 2025/26 Public servants'  4% salary increase  for 2026/27 (effective April 2026) Council for Medical Schemes' recommended  3.3% contribution increase  for 2026 COSATU argues that GEMS disregarded regulatory guidance, exceeding CMS recommendations by 6.5 percentage points, while government subsidies remain "wholly inadequate" at just 4.5% (rising to 5% from April 2026). Additional grievances include governance failures, costly outsourcing models, allegations of fraud and waste, inadequate benefit redesign for lower-income members, and the exclusion of labour representatives from the GEMS board. Timing and Legal Compliance Protest Action Date:  26 February 2026 (00:00 to 23:59) Notice Period Compliance:   ✅ 14+ days (Section 77(1)(d) requirement met) The protest will take the form of marches and pickets at GEMS Head Office, Vutomi House, 124 Mercy Avenue, Menlyn Maine Precinct, Pretoria, Gauteng,  during working hours . Shift workers will be absent for one complete shift—the shift with the majority of hours falling on 26 February 2026. Following the action, COSATU reserves the right to extend the programme based on an assessment of outcomes. Critical Impact on Employers: Your Legal Obligations and Rights Protected Status = No Dismissals Because COSATU has complied with Section 77(1)(b), (c), and (d) of the LRA: ✅   This is protected protest action ✅ Employees participating are shielded from dismissal (Section 67 read with Section 77(3)) ✅ Dismissing employees for participation constitutes  automatically unfair dismissal  under Section 187(1)(a) No Work, No Pay Principle Applies While employees are protected from dismissal, employers  may lawfully withhold remuneration  for time not worked during the protest action. This is a fundamental principle of South African labour law—employees who do not render services are not entitled to payment for that period. What Employers CANNOT Do: Dismiss employees for participating in the protected action Pursue civil claims for damages arising from the strike Intimidate, threaten, or victimise participants Discriminate against employees who participated What Employers CAN Do: Deduct wages  proportionally for time not worked (no work, no pay) Request employees to give reasonable notice of their intention to participate (although not legally required for protected action) Maintain essential operational continuity through management and non-participating staff Monitor whether conduct during the action remains lawful (violence, intimidation, or property damage are not protected) Operational Implications: Public Sector Employers  should prepare for: Significant absenteeism on 26 February 2026 Potential disruption to service delivery during working hours Shift workers being absent for entire shifts Heightened security considerations if protests occur near government facilities Private Sector Employers  may experience: Indirect disruption if suppliers, clients, or service providers are affected Possible solidarity action from affiliated union members (subject to separate legal requirements) Delays in public sector-dependent processes (licensing, permits, government payments) Employer Action Checklist   Brief management teams  on protected status and legal limitations   Communicate with employees  about the no work, no pay principle   Review operational plans  for 26 February 2026   Confirm attendance management procedures  for accurate payroll deductions   Prepare contingency plans  for essential services or critical operations   Advise employees  on safety protocols if participating in marches   Monitor for procedural irregularities  that might render action unprotected   Document participation  carefully (for payroll purposes only—not for disciplinary action)   Ensure no retaliation  against participants post-action Broader Context: Socio-Economic Protest Rights Section 77 of the LRA recognises that workers have legitimate interests extending beyond their immediate workplace. Unlike traditional strikes (which target specific employers over workplace-specific disputes), socio-economic protest action allows unions to challenge government policy, economic inequality, and systemic issues affecting worker welfare. This mechanism gives effect to constitutional rights to: Freedom of assembly Freedom of association Collective bargaining beyond the employment relationship COSATU's 2017 NEDLAC certificate remains valid, meaning this action is part of an ongoing programme addressing economic crisis, neo-liberalism, trickle-down economics, and calls to review the National Development Plan's chapters on economy and employment. The Road Ahead COSATU has signalled that 26 February 2026 is the opening salvo, not the conclusion. The Federation will assess outcomes and "reserves the right to extend the programme of action should it be necessary." Employers should anticipate the possibility of escalated or repeated action if demands remain unaddressed. For Employer Advisory Services: Employers requiring guidance on managing protected protest action, payroll implications, or legal compliance should consult experienced labour law practitioners. Understanding your rights and limitations under Section 77 is critical to navigating this action lawfully and maintaining constructive labour relations. Key Takeaway:  This is lawful, protected action. Manage it professionally, respect employee rights, apply the no work/no pay principle fairly, and avoid any conduct that could be construed as victimisation or retaliation. This advisory is based on COSATU's Section 77(1)(d) Notice submitted to NEDLAC on 9 February 2026 and current provisions of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. The Annual Employment Conference #AEC2026 brings together South Africa’s leading labour, HR, and employment-relations experts for a deep dive into the most urgent challenges facing employers in a changing world of work. 2026's conference promises to unpack the economic, technological, and legislative forces reshaping the workplace, offering practical insights on navigating organisational change, managing workforce risks, strengthening compliance, and preparing for the next wave of policy reform. Delegates will gain forward-looking guidance from top practitioners, case-based analysis of emerging employment trends, and strategic tools to build resilient, future-ready workplaces. Register now: https://www.globalbusiness.co.za/gbs-event-details/annual-employment-conference-2026 View our upcoming events: Upcoming Events  and Qualifications ,   like Annual Employment Conference 2026 (#AEC2026), Master Employment Equity in 2026, COID Amendment Update, How to conduct a Disciplinary Enquiry, Higher Occupational Certificate: HRM Administrator NQF5 , and Advanced Occupational Certificate: HRM Officer (NQF 6). *All workshops are offered as customised in-house training that can be presented virtually or on-site.