With respect to the first dispute, the respondents argue that the applicant set up a service posted without consultation with the “Shop Stewards” against the practice relied upon in one of its filings and that it obtained the approval of the Shop Stewards. The documents show that the amendment in question took place in the Kazerne filing. It is customary for the parties to have entered into a amendable agreement under the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 in April 2009. The variation agreement was then extended until March 2011. The agreement provides, in its area and scope, that, following the variation agreement, the applicant informed the Shop Stewards that management was responsible for the formulation of the rolling plan. It is clear that the employees of Karzene Farm were not satisfied with what they were told. They expressed their anger and disapproval by launching a work stoppage on July 23, 29 and 30, 2010. I agree with the applicant that the terms of the proposed strike must be determined on the basis of the content of the strike notice, so that the lack of indication of the proposed strike location meant that the applicant was unable to submit informed contingency plans for the strike. The fact that the applicant was able to conclude on the basis of the facts and circumstances of the continuation of the variation agreement is not, in my view, in favour of correcting the lack of communication on the strike. It was not disputed that the variation contract is a binding collective agreement for the parties. For Section 23 of the LRA, a collective agreement is entered into for the duration of the collective agreement.
The section also provides, under the subsection (3), that a collective agreement varies for each employment contract between the worker and the employer, both of which are bound by the collective agreement. “The positions are ordered, after consultation with the workers and their representatives, in accordance with the provisions of this agreement and in accordance with the requirements of the company” “Unless otherwise stated in this agreement or in another agreement, the terms of this agreement apply to all workers in the fare unit employed by Transnet Freight Rail in the Republic of South Africa, whether or not they are represented by a union.” “This agreement aims to create conditions of employment acceptable to both parties, with due consideration of legal requirements, and to distinguish by agreement the areas of the law within the meaning of Section 49 that allow the flexibility of the enterprise without compromising the health and safety of workers.” The variation agreement reads with the collective agreement signed by the parties. Unlike the practice in Karzene, the agreement does not require the agreement of the shop`s hosts until management can modify and implement a mailed service. With respect to the broader principles, the agreement provides that, in my view, the respondents` right to strike, in the circumstances of this case, relates to the reading of clauses 32 and 33 of the variation agreement, which is read in Section 23 of the LRA.