On 26 February 2026, draft amendments to various employment laws were published by the Minister of Employment and Labour. This follows the publication a year ago of the initial drafts of the amendment bills, together with the NEDLAC Report on the Labour Law Reform Process. The public has until 28 March 2026 to submit comments on the proposed legislation.

This article outline some of the significant amendments proposed by the Labour Relations Amendment Bill, 2025, which largely mirrors the 2024 draft of the Bill, barring a few key updates.

Proposed changes to the unfair labour practice regime removed and Schedule 8 repealed

The most notable update is that the 2025 Bill no longer contains the proposed changes to the definition of ‘unfair labour practice’.

The previous draft of the Bill proposed to delete sub-sections 186(2)(a) and (c) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA), meaning that justiciable unfair labour practice disputes would be limited to those relating to the unfair suspension of an employee or other unfair disciplinary action short of dismissal; and an occupational detriment on account of the employee having made a protected disclosure (ie protected whistleblowing). The corresponding transitional provisions have also been removed.

For now, section 186(2) is accordingly proposed to remain unchanged.

The other notable change from the previous draft of the Bill is that Schedule 8 (which contains the original Code of Good Practice: Dismissal) is proposed to be deleted. This follows the new Code of Good Practice on Dismissal having been published by the Minister on 4 September 2025. The notice by the Minister in the Government Gazette publishing the new Code purports to repeal the code in Schedule 8, but in terms of the provisions of the LRA this, in fact, requires an amendment to the LRA itself (hence this amendment).

Temporary relief for ‘new businesses’

As in the previous draft, several amendments are proposed relating to collective bargaining provisions. Among them are new sub-sections 32(12) and 32(13) which provide for employers of ‘new businesses’ employing fewer than 50 employees to be exempt from conditions of employment set by extended bargaining council collective agreements.

For purposes of these sections, a ‘new business’ is one that has been in operation for less than two years but excludes a new employer who has taken transfer of a business as a going concern as contemplated in section 197(1)(b), or any business that was formed by the division or dissolution of any existing business. During this initial two-year period, employers of new businesses will be obliged to comply with all other provisions of the LRA, the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA) and the National Minimum Wage Act, as well as other labour legislation.

Restrictions on remedies for unfair dismissal of higher earners and capped compensation for all employees

A new section is proposed to be included in the LRA providing that high-paid employees are only entitled to reinstatement or re-employment in the case of automatically unfair dismissals. In respect of all other dismissals, such employee’s remedy would be limited to compensation.

This restriction on remedies for higher earners is in line with the International Labour Organisation Convention on Termination of Employment which allows for differentiation in the treatment of higher-paid employees.

Further, while the maximum compensation that may be awarded to any employee (whether high-paid or not) for an unfair dismissal or unfair labour practice remains the equivalent of 12 months’ remuneration, it is proposed that this amount be subject to a cap. The cap on compensation will not apply to automatically unfair dismissals and unfair labour practices involving whistleblowing.

The high-earnings threshold and compensation cap will be determined by the Minister and adjusted annually in line with the consumer price index (CPI) by way of notice in the Government Gazette, to take effect on 1 May each year. The initial threshold/ cap amount is proposed to be ZAR 1 800 000 per annum, adjusted annually in terms of the CPI for the period from 30 April 2025 until the date the provisions comes into effect. 

By way of example, where an employee who earns ZAR 3-million per annum successfully challenges the fairness of a dismissal (which is not automatically unfair), the employee cannot be reinstated or re-employed even if the dismissal is substantively unfair. Insofar as compensation is concerned, the employee will not be able to receive more than ZAR 1,8-million (as adjusted at the relevant time).

Clarification of the procedural fairness test for dismissals

The previous draft of the Bill included a provision making it clear that, subject to any applicable collective agreement, a fair procedure for dismissal is one in which the employee has been given an adequate and reasonable opportunity to respond to the reason for dismissal.  The 2025 Bill further clarifies that this applies to dismissals related to an employee’s conduct or capacity. This endorses the move away from more formal, adversarial pre-dismissal processes and aligns with the provisions of the new Code of Good Practice on Dismissal published in September 2025. Because this is subject to applicable collective agreements, agreed pre-dismissal processes contained in such agreement will, however, still need to be observed.

Introduction of a ‘run-in period’ for full protection against unfair dismissal

In terms of a new section 188(4) of the LRA, the protection against unfair dismissal does not apply to a new employee during the first three months of employment, or if it is a longer period, a period of probation specified in the employment contract that is both reasonable and operationally justifiable. Such employees will, however, still be protected against automatically unfair dismissals.

This effectively renders employees ’at-will’ during the probation period and their contracts may be terminated simply on notice during this time. New hires will therefore need to earn the right to a fair dismissal by successfully completing their probation periods. It is not clear whether this provision will also apply to lawful extensions of the probation period.                   

Amendments to provisions dealing with large-scale retrenchment processes

A number of changes have been proposed in relation to (large-scale) retrenchment processes under section 189A.

One of these amendments is that the authority to make rules (as opposed to regulations) relating to facilitation is given to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), rather than the Minister. A facilitator appointed in terms of section 189A would also be able to determine picketing rules in circumstances where a trade union has given notice of a strike in accordance with section 189A(7) in the same manner as a commissioner conducting a conciliation.

In addition, the process for challenging the procedural fairness of a retrenchment under section 189A is proposed to be amended. In particular, sub-sections (13) to (18) (which provide for a challenge to procedural fairness to be made by way of urgent application, usually while the process is still ongoing) are proposed to be deleted and sub-sections (7) and (10) amended to allow all aspects of a retrenchment dismissal to be challenged after the dismissal. Further, where there has been a facilitated consultation process, a dispute concerning the fairness of a dismissal can proceed straight to the Labour Court without first having to be conciliated. These changes effectively restore the legal position on the process for challenging the fairness of a retrenchment that prevailed before the introduction of section 189A of the LRA.

Prevention of duplication of claims

In terms of a new section 196, an employee who has referred a dispute about the fairness of a dismissal may not also bring a claim, arising from the same facts, in respect of the unlawfulness of that dismissal; and vice versa.  This is aimed at preventing duplication of claims, which is increasing the burden on the CCMA and Labour Court.

Extended rights to individuals who fall outside the statutory definition of ‘employee’

A new schedule 11 is proposed to be inserted that will extend the rights to freedom of association, organisational rights and bargaining rights to a broader category of employees. For purposes of this schedule, an employee is defined to mean ‘an individual, other than an employee as defined in section 213 of the Act, who works for a person that is not a client or customer of any profession, business or undertaking carried on by the individual’. There is a presumption of employment unless the employer demonstrates that the person:

• is not subject to the control and direction of the employer in connection with the performance of the work or provision of the services;
• is not part of the organisation of the employer; and
• does not perform work for or provide services to customers or clients on behalf of the employer under terms set by the employer.

The rationale behind this insertion in the LRA is to respond to changes in the nature and organisation of work that have resulted in a variety of forms of unprotected work (eg gig work or platform work). The aim is to extend protection and access to rights to these categories of workers, referred to internationally as ‘dependent contractors’, who currently fall outside the protections of the LRA and other labour legislation because they do not meet the current statutory test for ‘employee’.  

A copy of the Labour Relations Amendment Bill, 2025 can be found here.

Written by Talita Laubscher, Partner, and Chloë Loubser, Knowledge and Learning Lawyer, Bowmans