Skip to content
Close Menu
ConvictionConviction
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Subscribe to Updates

Get the latest creative news from FooBar about art, design and business.

What's Hot

Screenshots are not evidence: The new frontier of unfair dismissal in South Africa

July 24, 2026

Why the High Court sided with Ramaphosa in the Phala Phala impeachment battle

July 24, 2026

SCOPA chair Zibi says RAF’s declining performance triggered Parliament’s inquiry

July 24, 2026
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Trending
  • Screenshots are not evidence: The new frontier of unfair dismissal in South Africa
  • Why the High Court sided with Ramaphosa in the Phala Phala impeachment battle
  • SCOPA chair Zibi says RAF’s declining performance triggered Parliament’s inquiry
  • D-day for law firm to repay R500 000 property deposit after holding money for nearly nine years
  • Dealer cannot dictate repairs for defective vehicles; BMW buyer wins full refund
  • Hospital cannot hide behind ‘error of judgment’ defence after teacher suffered brain damage
  • How March and March turned a deadline into a death sentence for migrants in South Africa
  • Municipal effort to charge student housing commercial rates ruled unlawful
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
ConvictionConviction
Sonneblom
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch
ConvictionConviction
Home » Employer ordered to pay workers years of withheld 13th cheque
Labour Law

Employer ordered to pay workers years of withheld 13th cheque

The court finds that Barrs Pharmaceutical Industries breached its employment contracts by scrapping the guaranteed annual payment and replacing it with performance bonuses.
Kennedy MudzuliBy Kennedy MudzuliFebruary 9, 2026No Comments
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest Email
  • Employees proved that the 13th cheque formed part of their contracts of employment and could not be lawfully removed during wage talks or replaced with a discretionary bonus.
  • The court rejected the employer’s claim that the benefit was merely a workplace practice and found the unilateral withdrawal amounted to a clear breach of contract under Section 77 of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act.
  • Barrs Pharmaceutical Industries (Pty) Ltd has now been ordered to pay four years of outstanding 13th cheques to 45 remaining workers within 10 days, restoring income that many families depend on each December.

Workers who lost their December 13th cheque for four consecutive years have finally secured relief after the Labour Court in Cape Town ruled that their employer, Barrs Pharmaceutical Industries (Pty) Ltd, acted unlawfully when it scrapped the guaranteed payment. Avacare Health Group (Pty) Ltd was also cited in the proceedings.

Acting Judge R Daniels held that the benefit was not a favour or perk, but a binding term of employment. The case was brought by Chemical Energy, Paper, Printing, Wood and Allied Workers’ Union (CEPPWAWU) on behalf of 45 affected members.

From the outset, the court framed the issue squarely as a contractual dispute. Judge Daniels wrote that the matter concerned terms and conditions relating to the applicants’ employment contract, in particular the payment of a 13th cheque and whether this was a term and condition of the applicants’ employment contract to which they were entitled.

A payment that families built their lives around

For years, workers received a guaranteed extra month’s pay every December. It was not treated as a bonus linked to performance, but as a predictable part of annual income. Many used it for school fees, food, debt repayments and festive season costs.

During 2021 wage negotiations, the company, Barrs Pharmaceutical Industries, told employees it intended to discontinue the 13th cheque and replace it with a performance-based bonus. Staff who accepted the change would receive a 5.5 percent increase. Those who refused would not.

The judge recorded that the message to workers was blunt. Employees were urged to accept this revised structure, which included forfeiting the contractual 13th cheque in exchange for a performance bonus and a 5.5 percent salary increase, the judgment states.

The company also warned that industrial action would achieve nothing. In one letter quoted by the court, management said it would "endure a strike rather than agree to the demand by CEPPWAWU."

Despite the pressure, many workers initially refused to surrender what they believed was their right. The company then implemented the change unilaterally. In December 2021, instead of the usual cheque, employees received only an ex gratia R3 000 payment.

Court rejects workplace practice defence

In court, Barrs Pharmaceutical Industries argued that the 13th cheque was merely a workplace practice and not legally enforceable. Judge Daniels found this argument inconsistent with the employer’s own past admissions.

He pointed to earlier proceedings and a written settlement where the company had acknowledged: "The Respondent is contractually obliged to pay each employee a 13th cheque."

After reviewing the evidence, the court concluded there was no real dispute. Judge Daniels stated: "There can be no doubt that the employees are contractually entitled to a 13th cheque."

He went further, finding that the employer’s conduct amounted to a breach. "I am furthermore in agreement with the applicants and find that Barrs is in breach of the contract between itself and its employees," he wrote.

Attempts to create factual disputes were dismissed. The judge described the company’s version as "bald and far-fetched" and said it did not raise "real, genuine and bona fide disputes of fact."

Order brings long-awaited relief

By the time the case was heard, many workers had felt forced to accept the employer’s offer and give up their claim. Only 45 remained. The court acknowledged the unequal power dynamics, noting they were ordinary salaried employees who live from pay cheque to pay cheque in order to provide for themselves and their families.

The final order was decisive. The judge declared that the applicants are entitled to payment of a 13th cheque in terms of their contract of employment and directed Barrs Pharmaceutical Industries to pay each of the 45 workers every unpaid 13th cheque from 2021 to date within 10 days.

No costs order was made, given the ongoing employment relationship.

Conviction.co.za

Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.

BCEA Employment contracts Labour law Trade unions workplace rights
Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Telegram Email
Kennedy Mudzuli

Multiple award-winner with passion for news and training young journalists. Founder and editor of Conviction.co.za

Related Posts

Screenshots are not evidence: The new frontier of unfair dismissal in South Africa

July 24, 2026

Labour Court stops municipal disciplinary hearing over AI citation concerns

July 22, 2026

Wedding rehearsal or workplace protest? Judge rules in favour of singing mineworkers

July 21, 2026
Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Prove your humanity: 10   +   4   =  

Subscribe to our newsletter:
Top Posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024

Irregular levy increases, mismanagement, and legal threats in a sectional title scheme

June 2, 2025
Don't Miss
Employment and Labour Law Series
5 Mins Read

Screenshots are not evidence: The new frontier of unfair dismissal in South Africa

By Ann-Suhet MarxJuly 24, 20265 Mins Read

A recent Labour Court judgment has reshaped how digital evidence should be treated in workplace disputes. Ann Suhet Marx argues that screenshots, without proof of authenticity, authorship and context, cannot fairly justify dismissing an employee.

Why the High Court sided with Ramaphosa in the Phala Phala impeachment battle

July 24, 2026

SCOPA chair Zibi says RAF’s declining performance triggered Parliament’s inquiry

July 24, 2026

D-day for law firm to repay R500 000 property deposit after holding money for nearly nine years

July 24, 2026
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • WhatsApp
Demo
About Us
About Us

Helping South Africans to navigate the legal landscape; providing accessible legal information; and giving a voice to those seeking justice.

Facebook X (Twitter) YouTube WhatsApp Twitch RSS
Latest posts

Making sectional title rules that work: A practical guide

January 17, 2025

Protection order among the consequences of trespassing in an ‘Exclusive Use Area’

December 31, 2024

Between a rock and a foul-smelling place

November 27, 2024
OUR PICKS

Judge dismisses bid to suspend attorneys over R23 million dispute, citing unfair investigation

July 22, 2026

Wedding rehearsal or workplace protest? Judge rules in favour of singing mineworkers

July 21, 2026

Mpumalanga records highest initiation death toll, prompting CRL Rights Commission inquiry

July 21, 2026
© 2026 Conviction.
  • Home
  • Law & Justice
  • Special Reports
  • Opinion
  • Ask The Expert
  • Get In Touch

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.

Powered by
►
Necessary cookies enable essential site features like secure log-ins and consent preference adjustments. They do not store personal data.
None
►
Functional cookies support features like content sharing on social media, collecting feedback, and enabling third-party tools.
None
►
Analytical cookies track visitor interactions, providing insights on metrics like visitor count, bounce rate, and traffic sources.
None
►
Advertisement cookies deliver personalized ads based on your previous visits and analyze the effectiveness of ad campaigns.
None
►
Unclassified cookies are cookies that we are in the process of classifying, together with the providers of individual cookies.
None
Powered by