‘THERE ARE 38, NOT 15 TEMPORARY WORKERS’

MBABANE – Did Nedbank Limited Swaziland lie about the number of temporary staff it engaged during the ongoing strike action by its employees?

Last Friday, the Industrial Court ordered the bank to do away with the replacement labour. Before the judgment was issued, Nedbank’s attorney, Zweli Jele of Robinson Bertram, informed the court that the bank had engaged only 15 temporary staff members.

However, yesterday Mduduzi Hlophe of M.Hlophe Attorneys told the court that SUFIAW had been following what was happening in the operating branches and they allegedly discovered that there were in fact 38 temporary staff members working during the strike.

This was during hearing of the application for stay of the order to do away with replacement labour that was issued by Judge Nkosinathi Nkonyane, who was sitting with Gilbert Ndzinisa and Simon Mvubu. Nedbank filed an urgent application seeking an order staying implementation of the court order pending an appeal of the judgment.
Hlophe wondered why the bank approached the court with urgency when the replacement labour had been working since the strike started. He said the bank did not comply with the order of the court and they seemed not to be prepared to comply with it.

“The 38 I am talking about is what is currently obtaining. They came in this morning (yesterday) and they were hidden. They are working,” alleged Hlophe.
The SUFIAW representative said despite that they lowered their cost of living adjustment demand from 10 per cent by two per cent, they still experienced the problem of a disabled strike due to the bank’s engagement of temporary staff. He said the current situation was problematic, which is why they ran to court in the first place to interdict the bank from hiring replacement labour. In response, Jele denied that the bank had engaged 38 temporary staff members to alleviate the effects of the strike. He maintained that there were only 15 hired on a temporary basis.

“It is an incorrect statement. There are only 15. Those 15 I verified. I went to the branches personally to make sure. To say the number is 38 is designed to mislead the court. We are content that there should be physical monitoring of the numbers in the branches. The court can make an additional order,” said Jele.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: