The 15% allowance is an annual wage earned by the docs, and is payable to designated staff appointed on a full-time foundation.
In 2006, the division did not pay the allowance, and the docs employed by UCT and Stellenbosch College, and dealing at public hospitals as principal and chief specialists, took the case to the Labour Court docket.
The courtroom determined that they had been entitled to the allowance by way of a collective settlement concluded inside the Public Well being and Welfare Sector Bargaining Council (PH&WSBC).
The division took the matter to the Labour Attraction Court docket, which upheld the attraction, and held that the Labour Court docket didn’t have the jurisdiction to listen to the matter.
The docs then introduced a evaluation utility to the Labour Court docket and the events later agreed to refer the matter to the Fee for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA).
The CCMA held that the respondents had been staff inside the public service and had been entitled to the scarce expertise allowance.
Based on studies, the division argued that the docs weren’t entitled to obtain the allowance as a result of it was solely payable to public service staff, and the docs had been employed by UCT and Stellenbosch College and fell outdoors the registered scope of the bargaining council.
Additionally they argued that the docs weren’t members of any commerce union, which was a signatory to the PH&WSBC settlement.
The division then turned to the Constitutional Court docket, which discovered within the docs’ favour.
In a unanimous judgment the Constitutional Court docket held that the respondents had been members of a registered commerce union, which was a celebration to the settlement and that it was clear from the wording of the settlement that the scarce expertise allowance was negotiated for the direct advantage of these docs.
“The applicant initially denied that the respondents had been staff of the division, however later modified and contended that ‘on the very least (they) had been co- staff of the division’.
“The undisputed proof reveals that the respondents are staff of the division on the mounted institution, and thus qualify to be characterised as public servants,” the judgment learn.
“The appliance lacks cheap prospects of success, and the pursuits of justice thus militate towards the granting of go away to attraction. There isn’t any cause why prices mustn’t comply with the result,” it stated.
Provincial well being spokesperson Mark van der Heever stated: “We’ll examine the judgment with our related authorized and labour relations group.
“Solely as soon as we’ve studied it would we be able to remark.”