2023 - Employment Lawyers Labour Lawyers attorneys in Johannesburg Labour Law specialists #employment law Happy New Year
check out our new website - free information for businesses, especially small business enterprises - SBE portals and loads of advice.
If you are reading this, you obviously have a labour law issue that you want to resolve - please feel free to contact our hotline on 0832607530 and speak to Andrew. CALL NOW!
Zoom or contact on Microsoft teams. Invite us to your meetings and learn from the best. Do not retrench yourself. We promise you great advice at an unbelievable price.
Please email us at email@example.com Whatsapp on 0832607530. What are you waiting for? Call Andrew now!
Who are we / About us?
Goldberg Attorneys Inc. is a labour law boutique firm conveniently situated in the same building that houses the LABOUR COURT, Arbour Square Building. The firm is headed up by Mr Andrew Goldberg (20 years' experience in Labour Law).
We are Labour Law specialists. We deal with all labour law-related issues, and in particular in Labour Court matters - Labour Court referrals, drafting of pleadings including complex review applications, rescissions, exceptions, opinions, heads of argument, review applications, urgent applications; joinders / legal representation; Opposing review applications on a minimal fee basis; Contempt applications, Drafting Statements of Claim concerning collective retrenchments, strikes and discrimination. Judge's directives on retrenchments, strikes and racism. Drafting bill of costs and attending taxation, arbitrations, Labour Appeal Court - Appeals, submissions, heads of arguments and arguing before Court. We also do CCMA arbitrations and disciplinary hearings, as well as human resources policies and industrial relations.
We are the best labour attorneys/labour lawyers. If anyone can win your case, it is us! Do not settle for less than the best! Goldberg Attorneys have an impeccable record, having won most of their cases!! Presently we have five costs orders which we are enforcing!!!
We can represent you at Arbitration at the CCMA for as little as R3,000 / full day! So call Lethu now to book us for your next Arbitration date!
Read Acting Judge Goldberg's Judgment here
AND his latest Judgment here
We are swamped handling the thousands of cases that are referred to us every month, and as such, should you not get through on our normal number 0114030015, please pop us an email or call us on the alternative number 0113395102. We want your case!!
When to call an attorney
Do you have an Arbitration Award in your favour - if so, we can help you enforce it wherever you are - be it Mpumalanga, North West or KZN or even the Cape - we work out of Johannesburg, Cape Town, Port Elizabeth, and Durban Labour Courts.
Let Andrew Goldberg, who has acted as a Judge of the Labour Court, handle your matter!
Watch Mr Goldberg on TV dealing with Labour Issues.
See the link for the episode here.
We do CORRESPONDENT work at less 1/3 - call Andrew on 0113395102.
We do filing of cases at the Constitutional Court - Remember, you need 25 copies!
Goldberg Attorneys have had over 60 cases reported on the internet !!
Watch Mr Goldberg on SABC Live speaking with Cameron Morajane of the CCMA and Paul Benjamin on the New Amendments to the LRA here.
GOLDBERG ATTORNEYS BEST LAWYER LABOUR LAW
Let us do the work and ensure you get the results you seek.
I LOVE what I do - you'll find me in COURT.
CONTACT US NOW!!!!!!! WE WILL WIN YOUR CASE!!!!!!!
We now host disciplinary hearings at our offices in Braamfontein with an appointed independent chairperson, interpreter, and recording system. Please book in advance with Lethu to secure a date and time.
Mr Goldberg, the CEO/Director, has the most appearances and reported cases of any single Labour Attorney in the last ten (10) years. Mr Goldberg is a well-spoken, trustworthy, confident individual and runs cases from start to finish, including urgent interdicts and complex matters all by himself. Mr Goldberg is also a well-known and respected attorney at the Labour Court with over 800 appearances at Labour Court and ten at Labour Appeal Court.
We are here to service you!!
Here below are our last five reported cases for you to peruse at your leisure.
[Reported cases with the relevant internet site hyperlink where available]
Please phone us on 0114030015 or 0832607530 (Andrew) for a copy of any of these judgments.
Recent Case Law Report
Fidelity Fund Security Services v Ngqola (JA 61/21)  ZALAC 87 (7 April 2022) GOLDBERG ATTORNEYS WIN IN THE LABOUR APPEAL COURT WITH COSTS
The issue at hand was what constitutes reinstatement. That is when can it be said that an employee has been reinstated. The facts of the matter are as follows: Following the dismissal of the Employer's Review Application, it sought that the Employee returns to work. On 16 February 2017, the Employee complied with the letter and reported to work on 16 February 2017 as instructed. It is common cause that the Employee worked that day. The Employee complained that she had been paid a lesser salary at a grade lesser than grade A position and that she was being forced to sign a new contract. The Employer's attorneys answered to the Employee on 17 February 2017 and informed that the Employee would be placed at Head Office in the control room until a position at her previous placement, Bank City, became available, and further stated that she would be earning the same salary she earned at the time of her dismissal, that is she was not being given any increase despite the passage of time. On 17 February 2017, the Employee then resigned. The question is, was she reinstated or not?
The matter was argued before Snyman JA at the Labour Court, and he found that the Employee had been reinstated and that the Employee was entitled to her outstanding salaries. The appellant contends that the learned acting judge erred in failing to apply the principles enunciated in the case of Mhlupheki Willem Kubeka & Others v NI-DA Transport (Pty) Ltd. The NI-DA Transport case’s ratio was that a contract of employment is not revived by a Court Order or by an arbitration award and that there must be some element of actual physical reporting by the Employee before it can be said that the Employee was reinstated and before it can be said that as a result that the Employee can be awarded any portion of the outstanding salaries, this is in that the issue of outstanding salaries is not covered in the award. The NI-DA Transport case was founded on the dictum in National Union of Mineworkers SA obo Fohlisa & others v Hendor Mining Supplies where the court set out that: “… the judgment ordering reinstatement does not in and itself reinstate the contract of employment, rather it is an order directing the Employer to accept those services. If the Employer fails to do so, the remedy is to bring contempt proceedings to compel the Employer to do so. As such, it was the finding in the NI-DA Transport case that a contract of employment is only restored when the Employee tenders their services and reports for work and the Employer accepts the tender and/or takes them back to work. So here the question is was the Employee reinstated or not.
REPORT BACK BY MR GOLDBERG - Reportable LAC Judgment dealing with the issue/point as to when (or at what stage) reinstatement occurs. Here I went before 3 Judges & managed to convince them of my client’s case. What transpired here is a long & arduous story of a poor Employee (EE) & the trouble she had getting her Employer (ER) to comply. The EE was transferred after failing to perform; she failed to report leading to her dismissal on 31 August 2011 (nearly 11 years ago). The EE then referred a matter to the CCMA, who awarded her reinstatement with some backpay. She then reported, but the ER refused to comply. The EE then sought to make the Award an Order of Court in terms of section 158 (1) (c) of the LRA. This was the process used in those days to enforce an Award as there was no trust in the certification process, which process is in common use today. The Award was made an Order of Court on 17 October 2012. Nothing happened for a period. The ER then brought a Review Application on 19 September 2013. The EE managed to send the sheriff & was paid the arrear salary as contained in the Award. As such, the issues remaining were the reinstatement & the backpay. In December 2016, the ER eventually brought an Application for rescission of the Court Order. It argued that because the EE had failed to obtain a contempt of court order & had involved itself in the reconstruction of the record that the Review was still alive & as such, the Order had been stayed by the actions of the EE. The Rescission & Review were dismissed. The EE then demanded compliance. The ER sought the EE report so she could be reinstated. The EE reported but then was given a contract that amounted to a demotion. It was disputed whether the EE signed, but she then failed to report & resigned. The EE then sought to claim the monies for the period between when she was meant to be reinstated & the date of her resignation. The Labour Court granted her claim less a period when it set out that she failed to report. On Appeal, the ER contended that she was not reinstated because she did not work in her previous position. Accordingly, she was not entitled to arrear salary. The Appeal Court found that she had already tendered her services in 2012. The Award had been converted into an Order which was meant to be complied with by the ER reinstating the EE.
Further that because the ER had sought to reinstate the EE in 2017 & she reported this amounted to reinstatement. In Court, the Judges lambasted my poor opponent setting out that the ER was belligerent & deceitful; it had sought to use the law & the processes to avoid compliance. In the Order, the Court set out that its tactics were deplorable. The Appeal was dismissed with costs. A big win for #GoldbergAttorneys! #thankyou #TEAMGOLDBERGS. #reinstatement #SeanSnyman
Other links and Resouces
Do you need the Labour Court website - if so, it can be accessed using the links below. Just copy them and add them to your browser: