Numsa v Transnet Soc Ltd (JA96/2014) [2015] ZALAC 46 (6 November 2015) per CJ per Musi JA [Tlaletsi DJP and Savage AJA concurring]

[31]      Although NUMSA had clearly articulated demands, those demands could not be addressed before the recognition of the union was addressed.  The strike could therefore only be prevented and/or stopped when the conditions preceding collective bargaining were met.  Only after the issues pertaining to recognition and organizational rights were settled could NUMSA’s demand be attended to.  The dispute was therefore a dispute concerning a refusal to bargain and not a refusal by the respondent to meet NUMSA’s demands.

[32]      The respondent’s lock-out demands also made plain that it wanted NUMSA to accept that it will not engage in collective bargaining with it unless and until NUMSA met the threshold of representativeness as set out in the recognition agreement.