In this appeal, the complainant, as a union, did not challenge the constitutionality of section 25 of the LRA, but argued that a correct interpretation of Section 21 (8C), which provides that the CCMA may grant registered unions certain rights that do not conform to the thresholds of representation set by a collective agreement, resulted in the agency agreement between the employers and the majority union being out of place. In dismissing the appeal, the LAC found that the source of the agency fee requirement was different from that of members` dues. The LAC estimates that agency fees are paid by the employer to the majority union activity in section 25 of the LRA agreement. That`s how the statue is needed. These fees are paid for work that is done to promote the interests of workers through collective bargaining, without forcing the parasites to join the majority union. On the contrary, union fees are payable within the meaning of an agreement between the union and its member. The amount agreed in the agency contract does not exceed the monthly contribution of trade unions and the money must be used to promote the socio-economic interests of all workers. b) by members of an employer organization in a sector and territory subject to the agency agreement. 1. A representative union and an employer or employer organization may enter into a collective agreement, called an agency enterprise contract, which requires the employer to deduct agreed agency fees from the salaries of workers mentioned in the agreement who are not members of the union but who are eligible for membership in the agreement.
If the agency`s shop is illegal, as is the case in the labour law of U.S. public sector unions, a “fair sharing commission” can be agreed by the union and the employer.   The provision requires non-union workers to pay a “fair proportional fee” to cover the costs of the union`s collective bargaining. The “fair share” is similar to the agency shop, but it is generally more restrictive, which can be charged to the non-member. [Clarification needed]   In Canada, agency fees are generally referred to as a marginal formula.  In the United States, in June 2018, Janus declared unconstitutional the mandatory payment of agency fees for non-unionized public sector employees to Janus against AFSCME. In addition, the LAC found that Section 21 (8C) of the LRA empowered the CCMA to terminate only a collective agreement that sets a threshold for minority unions seeking organizational rights. It did not give the authority to terminate an existing agency contract. Conclusion is that agency operating agreements advance the legitimate legislative policy of the majority in collective bargaining as a preferred option for orderly collective bargaining at the sectoral level. Shop agency agreements are governed by the Labour Relations Act (LRA) and provide that many companies belonging to a sector governed by a collective agreement may be linked to a boutique agency contract without their knowledge. A boutique agency agreement obliges the employer to deduct agency fees from the worker`s remuneration and to pay the amount on an account controlled by the unions. The nature of all bargaining councils is, among other things, the negotiation of terms of employment by employers` organisations and trade unions, both of which represent the majority of workers in a given sector or sector, and as such, most Council parties will have the right to enter into such agreements within the meaning of (2)b).
In the recent case between the Municipal Trade Union and Allied SA/Central Karoo District Municipality – Others, the Labour Tribunal (LAC) was required to rule whether minority union workers were exempt from paying the Agency`s contractual costs, in accordance with Section 21 (8C) of labour relations Act 66 of 1995 (LRA), which stems from an agency-boutique agreement between the employer and the majority union within the meaning of Section 25 of the Lra.