EXCLUSIVE: Parliament steps into Legal Aid SA labour dispute after talks hit setback
Parliament has stepped into the escalating labour dispute at Legal Aid South Africa, moving to bring management and workers’ representatives together after warning that the issues raised require urgent attention for the proper functioning of the justice system.
The intervention comes after a two-day protected strike in June and as direct engagements between Legal Aid SA and the South African Lawyers and Allied Workers Union (SALAWU) hit a further setback.
Correspondence in IOL’s possession shows Legal Aid SA cancelled a scheduled meeting with the union at short notice, less than 24 hours before the parties were due to meet.
The meeting, scheduled for 1pm on Friday, 10 July, was cancelled at 4.15pm the previous afternoon. The cancellation notice contained no explanation in the correspondence seen by IOL.
SALAWU president Andile Mavatha responded shortly afterwards, asking: “Is your below email simply cancels [sic] tomorrow’s scheduled meeting?”
Rejected
The meeting had been formally scheduled after the Legal Aid SA board delegated management to engage SALAWU to better understand the union’s concerns about the organisation’s response to workers’ demands.
In a letter dated 7 July, Legal Aid SA confirmed the 10 July meeting and asked SALAWU to elaborate on the “specific issues of concern and/or areas of dissatisfaction” with its response.
SALAWU had already rejected Legal Aid SA’s response, describing it as disappointing and vague, and requested an urgent meeting within three calendar days. The union subsequently told Legal Aid SA that management and the board were already in possession of the memorandum setting out workers’ demands.
“It is unbelievable that the Management can even go as far asking labour about concerns when they absolutely did nothing in terms of resolving our demands,” Mavatha wrote.
Parliament moves in
Against this backdrop, Parliament’s Portfolio Committee on Justice and Constitutional Development has signalled its intention to bring the parties together.
In a letter dated July 8, committee chairperson Xola Nqola acknowledged receipt of SALAWU’s memorandum, which was delivered during the June strike, and said the matter was receiving attention.
“The Committee is of the view that the issues raised in your memorandum deserve urgent attention for the proport [sic] functioning of the justice system,” Nqola wrote. “Consequently, the Committee intends hosting a meeting with SALAWU and Legal Aid SA Management as soon as its programme permits.”
The National Assembly is currently in recess until 3 August.
The parliamentary intervention marks a new phase in a dispute that has widened beyond the retirement-age issue that initially triggered the industrial action.
Extensive issues
SALAWU’s June memorandum includes grievances over salaries and salary benchmarking, workloads, staffing, performance incentives, labour relations and governance.
The union maintains that retirement was the catalyst rather than the sole cause of the dispute.
SALAWU said some employee concerns dating back to 2019 had been resolved under the current management, including life insurance, funeral cover and payment of professional or registration fees.
However, it said retirement age and salary benchmarking remained unresolved, while new or resurfacing concerns had emerged.
The union had also asked Parliament to investigate allegations raised in its memorandum and to examine Legal Aid SA board meeting minutes and recordings from May 2024. These are allegations made by SALAWU and have not been independently established by IOL.
Meetings cancelled
In an update to members dated 10 July, SALAWU described the cancellation of its meeting with Legal Aid SA as an “eleventh hour” decision and said no explanation had been provided.
The union also said a separate meeting scheduled for 7 July between Legal Aid SA and the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development had been cancelled, with neither a reason nor a rescheduled date provided.
The Minister had separately requested a further two weeks to respond to the workers’ memorandum. SALAWU agreed to the extension but said it would grant no further extensions.
The developments follow months of unsuccessful attempts to resolve disputes through the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration. SALAWU’s memorandum records that two disputes were referred to the CCMA and certificates of non-resolution were issued.
Funding pressures
The labour dispute is unfolding against severe financial constraints at Legal Aid SA.
In May, Legal Aid SA appealed to Parliament for help with its budget reduction challenges, saying it required at least R261 million for the 2026/27 financial year to restore staff capacity and cover operational costs.
The organisation warned that continued budget cuts could prevent it from performing optimally and said that, without intervention, it was likely to struggle to meet expected demand.
Deputy Justice Minister Andries Nel also warned Parliament that Legal Aid SA’s expanding mandate had not been accompanied by a corresponding increase in resources.
Nel warned that failing to resource interconnected parts of the justice system could lead to court backlogs and matters dragging on, describing the pressure facing Legal Aid SA as “a real danger” and “a real risk that is unfolding”.
Hefty bill
Legal Aid SA has previously told IOL that staff compensation accounts for 80% of its budget and that mandatory budget cuts precluded increases in headcount and improvements to its employee value proposition.
It said staff optimisation projects were being initiated to alleviate excessive caseloads and that it continued to explore non-remunerative benefits to promote employee wellbeing.
The organisation has also said it regards SALAWU as an important stakeholder and would continue engaging the union in an effort to resolve disputes in an “amicable, meaningful and sustainable manner within the available resources”.
Legal Aid SA was approached for comment on the short-notice cancellation of the 10 July meeting, the reason for the cancellation and whether a new date had been scheduled but was not available for comment.
It has, however, said: “As these engagements are active and ongoing, it would not be appropriate for Legal Aid SA to comment on the specific matters raised in the Union’s communication or on the substance of the discussions at this stage.”
IOL BUSINESS
