Constitutional Court’s decision on Temporary Employment Services

Share This Post

Temporary Employment Services (TES):

In the matter between Assign Services (Pty) Ltd and National Union of Metal Workers of South Africa (NUMSA).

Parties involved:

Assign Services (Pty) Ltd Appliant

NUMSA First respondent

CCMA Second respondent

Abdool Carrim Osman n.o Third respondent

Krost Shelving & Racking (Pty) Ltd Fourth respondent

Causal workers advice office Amicus curiae

On the 26th day of July at 10h00, the Constitutional Court (Here in after referred to as the CC) handed down the judgement in relation to the interpretation of section 198A (3) (b) of the Labour Relations Act (Here in after referred to as the LRA) in terms of Temporary Employment Services (Here in after referred to as TES) and employee’s. As of now, the conclusion in terms of TES staff had been made that after a period of three (3) months of the employee being placed on the client site, the employee became a permanent employee of the client. This is true, however within the parameters of sole employment between the client and the employee.

The purpose of the case concerned the interpretation of Section 198A (3) (b) of the LRA 66 of 1995 and whether this section and it’s elements resulted in a “sole employment” relationship between the TES and the employee’s or a “dual employment” relationship between the TES, the client and the employee’s.

In this matter, a TES placed twenty two (22) workers with the client Krost shelving and paving (Pty) Ltd in 2015, whom were members of NUMSA. The workers provided a service at the client exceeding a three (3) month period. The client was of the view that a “dual employment” relationship existed between themselves and the TES regarding the rights and obligations of the employee’s, however NUMSA was of the view that a “sole employment” relationship existed and as such any action to be taken would be against the client ‘Krost shelving and paving (Pty) Ltd.

Section 198A (3) (b) stipulates the following in terms of TES:

In terms of employee’s earning below the stipulated threshold and who’s employment on the client premises exceeds a three month period:

(i) is deemed to be the employee of that client and the client is deemed to be the employer and;

(ii) Subject to the provisions of section 198B, employed on an indefinite basis by the client.

In the absence of the LRA making mention of the expectations of the TES involvement with the employee’s post three months of employment on the client site, thus being deemed a permanent employee of the client, it had been deduced that it can be read into law and legislative requirements that the TES would cease to be the employer after three months service on the client’s site.

As seen from the above, the purpose of the LRA is to protect the employment rights of low earners, to bring about job security and eradicate of unemployment rates, with this being said the outlook of the CC supports this as the “sole employment” relationship best protects the rights of placed workers and promotes the purpose of the LRA.

What does this mean for TES and clients?

  • Clients may be more apprehensive to enter into agreements with a TES based on the foundation that after three month’s service, they will be fully responsible for the employee’s in terms of obligations and rights.

  • The fear of formulating business deals with TES will reduce the number of TES industries, bringing about more opportunities for permanent employment of employee’s and thus reducing the unemployment rate- this being the purpose and strive of the LRA.

In conclusion- the LAC found that section 198A (3) (b) of the LRA concludes a “sole employment” relationship after a three month period lapses of the TES employee’s having worked on the client premises. Companies conducting business agreements with TES is to be fully aware of this as they will be held fully responsible in terms of rights and obligations moving forward, bearing in mind permanent employment relationship/employment contracts exist.

For more information on the above topic, please contact the LabourNet Helpdesk at

0861 LABNET (0861 522638).

Not yet a LabourNet client, but would like to know more about our service and products?

Email us:

More To Explore

Bumping in 189 Proceedings
Industrial Relations

Bumping in 189 Proceedings

Fischer Tube Technik SA v Bayene and Another ZALAC (21 May 2024) In a recent Labour Appeal Court Judgement handed down in May 2024, the court investigated the application of

Industrial Relations

Fire Protection in the Workplace

Fire protection plays a key role in safeguarding companies, employees, assets, and operations from the negative impact of fires. Implementing effective fire protection measures offers numerous benefits that contribute to