Sweeping policy changes for businesses and employees in South Africa

Businesses have mere days left to comment on sweeping labour law amendments that would significantly reshape workplace and employment rules.

This is according to LexisNexis, which said employers have until 28 March 2026 to comment on the wide-ranging proposed amendments contained in the Employment Laws Amendment Bill and the Labour Relations Amendment Bill.

The changes touch nearly every corner of the workplace and will impact how businesses contract, manage, and, where necessary, part ways with employees.

The proposed amendments span across the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA), Employment Equity Act (EEA), Unemployment Insurance Act (UIA), National Minimum Wage Act (NMWA), and the Labour Relations Act (LRA).

Read together, they revise parental leave and the related Unemployment Insurance Fund (UIF) benefits, and introduce new protections for certain “on-call, zero hours, mini-max, flexitime and ‘if and when’ contract” work arrangements.

They also raise the statutory severance floor, expand the reach of certain BCEA enforcement and dispute-resolution provisions, and strengthen recovery mechanisms for unpaid benefit-fund contributions.

The Bills also extend freedom of association, organisational rights, collective bargaining, and strike protections to a broader category of workers.

They also include proposals affecting bargaining-council agreements on terms and conditions of employment for newly established employers with fewer than 50 employees during their first two years.

Additionally, the Bills will affect large-scale retrenchment procedure and facilitation, the calculation of the national minimum wage, dismissal remedies, trade-union ballot requirements and compliance powers.

The proposed amendments carry significant operational and financial implications for companies, LexisNexis explained.

However, they are equally an effort to strengthen protection for employees, particularly those in more vulnerable or non-traditional forms of employment.

What the proposed labour law changes mean

The Department of Employment and Labour stated that these proposed changes aim to modernise key labour laws in South Africa.

They also aim to introduce practical measures to improve job security, promote fairness, and extend fundamental rights to vulnerable and previously excluded categories of workers.

They further aim to improve enforcement mechanisms, thereby ensuring that employees receive the full benefits of the law.

The operational reality not only reframes employee relations but also impacts the bottom lines of businesses in South Africa.

One policy driver, set out in the Labour Relations Amendment Bill Memorandum, is the rise of “unprotected work” and the so-called twilight zone in which workers fall outside ordinary statutory definitions.

For businesses that rely on platform-based or other non-standard arrangements, that means closer scrutiny of workforce classification, record-keeping and dispute exposure.

That carries direct implications, including statutory benefits and severance obligations, as well as compliance, record-keeping, and dispute exposure.

At the same time, the measure is intended to provide greater financial protection to employees facing retrenchment, particularly in an environment of economic uncertainty.

LexisNexis’ executive manager of content, Lizanne Engelbrecht, said the proposed amendments point toward stronger governance, while also highlighting areas that warrant careful consideration.

“We are seeing a clear policy push toward stronger worker protection and more accountable labour governance,” she said.

“The proposed changes do not amount to a blanket contractor-to-employee conversion, but they do broaden protections and presumptions in specific contexts.”

Engelbrecht said this raises cost and governance considerations and invites a broader discussion around oversight, classification, fairness, and, importantly, how to balance worker protection with business efficiency and sustainability.

New rules for non-traditional workers

For certain on-call and similar arrangements, the proposed amendments aim to curb exploitation and create greater scheduling and income predictability while preserving some operational flexibility.

Proposed section 9B of the BCEA would apply to employees below the BCEA earnings threshold who work only when the employer makes work available and must be available to accept that work.

The department has described the measure as one aimed at clearer protections around guaranteed and maximum working hours.

Employers would have to record in writing the maximum hours for the relevant period, the periods during which employees must be available for work, and the notice periods for reporting for work and for cancellations.

If the required cancellation notice is not given, the employer is required to pay the employee for the cancelled hours.

The section also limits restrictions on working elsewhere unless genuine operational reasons exist, and it would not apply to employers with fewer than 10 employees.

There is also a proposal to increase statutory severance pay from one week to at least two weeks’ remuneration per completed year of continuous service.

Engelbrecht said this will add a layer of financial exposure, particularly for businesses operating in sectors where restructuring and workforce adjustments are common.

The Department has framed this amendment as a direct financial benefit to employees facing retrenchment.

The measure is also paired with a more direct dispute route. Disputes solely about severance pay could be referred directly to arbitration through the CCMA or a bargaining council with jurisdiction.

This applies whether the dispute arises from statute, contract or collective agreement, and where the fairness of the retrenchment is not challenged.

Enforcement, arbitration, and governance risks

The broader dispute and enforcement framework may also influence how businesses approach risk management.

A clear objective is to reduce bottlenecks, avoid duplication and place more employment-law disputes in forums designed to resolve them efficiently.

The EEA amendments would allow unfair-discrimination disputes involving harassment to proceed to CCMA arbitration.

The LRA and BCEA amendments would also expand the roles of bargaining councils, accredited agencies, and the CCMA in resolving or enforcing certain employment-law claims.

They would also make it possible for related claims under different labour statutes to be heard together in appropriate cases.

On top of this, they would allow employees below the applicable threshold to elect CCMA arbitration in certain automatically unfair dismissal matters concerning the exercise of LRA rights, pregnancy or unfair discrimination.

Easier, more direct access to these processes may lead to more frequent challenges, requiring stronger internal processes and documentation.

Importantly, the proposed amendments reinforce the need for consistency between what is reported and what is practised.

“There is a growing expectation that governance is not just about policies on paper, but about how those policies are implemented day to day,” Engelbrecht said.

“Workforce classification, dispute handling, and contract structures all fall within that scope. If there is a disconnect, it will surface, whether through disputes, audits or stakeholder scrutiny.”

The changes also address how to balance stronger job security for employees with the need for businesses to remain financially sustainable and continue creating employment opportunities.

In the same breath, the proposed amendments also strengthen protections during periods of vulnerability.

“There is a policy effort to strengthen the rule of law within the labour market while ensuring that employees are able to access the full benefits of existing protections,” she said.

With the consultation window closing on 28 March 2026, employers should test the text against their workforce models, leave policies, payroll and UIF administration, bargaining-council exposure.

They should also consider their on-call staffing practices, retrenchment and dismissal processes, and dispute-handling frameworks, and submit comments while the Bills are still at the public consultation stage.

Businesses that see implementation gaps, cost pressures or unintended consequences should place those concerns on record to help shape a workable balance between protection and efficiency.