Discussions regarding the protracted labor dispute with Legal Aid have been extended for another two weeks. The South African Lawyers for the Advancement of Workers Union (SALAWU) warned that it will not tolerate further postponements as negotiations enter a new phase.
Following the strike in June, SALAWU informed its members that it rejected Legal Aid SA's response to the memorandum of claims, which was submitted to the employer, Parliament, and the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development during the two-day industrial action in mid-June.
The union stated: 'We confirm that Legal Aid SA (Management / Board) sent us a 'response' which we completely rejected.' It was further reported that Legal Aid SA notified the union about a request for a meeting with the Minister and proposed holding a meeting with SALAWU on July 10. It was also confirmed that the Minister requested additional time to consider the memorandum.
Despite SALAWU's agreement to the extension, the union warned that there would be no further postponements. It emphasized that this is their first and final deadline, and other delays will not be considered. The Parliamentary Secretariat also requested additional information after receiving the memorandum, and the exchange of views between Parliament, the Minister, and Legal Aid SA marked the 'beginning of engagement' on the union's demands.
The main dispute concerns several labor issues, including the organization's retirement policy, salary comparison, workload, staff shortages, and employee consultation.
In response to IOL's questions, Legal Aid SA confirmed that it sent its response to the SALAWU memorandum on June 26 and that engagement with the union and other stakeholders continues. The organization stated: 'Legal Aid SA confirms that the response to the SALAWU Memorandum was sent to the Union on June 26, 2026. The structure confirms that engagement with SALAWU and all relevant stakeholders, including the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development, continues. Several meetings are planned within this ongoing engagement process.'
The organization specified that it will not comment on the issues raised by the union while these negotiations are ongoing. Legal Aid SA stated: 'As these engagements are active and ongoing, it would be inappropriate for Legal Aid SA to comment on specific issues raised in the Union's submission or the substance of discussions at this stage.'
Before the June strike, Legal Aid SA noted respect for the constitutional right of employees to participate in protected industrial action while activating business continuity measures to maintain legal services. Furthermore, the organization acknowledged that SALAWU expressed concern regarding the retirement age stated in its Terms of Employment Policy and stated that it would 'carefully review all issues formally presented in the memorandum' and 'engage constructively with the Union through appropriate labour relations mechanisms.'
Previously, Legal Aid SA asserted that the official retirement age has been 60 since 2009, and the current Terms of Employment were approved by its Board in 2018 and by the Ministers of Justice and Finance in 2020 after consulting with employees. The organization insisted that the December 2024 notification allowing employees to work past 60 was a temporary pension extension regime provided for in its employment policy, not a change to the retirement age itself.
It was also noted that the reduction in the medium-term budget by 813 million rand forced the board to cease annual pension extensions starting in January of this year. Additional funds and management processes outlined in the Legal Aid South Africa Act would be required for any permanent changes to the retirement policy.
In response to broader concerns raised by SALAWU, Legal Aid SA previously indicated that employee compensation accounts for about 80% of its budget, and mandatory budget cuts have prevented increases in staffing levels and employee benefits. The organization previously reported: 'Staff optimization projects have been initiated to alleviate excessive workload, and we are continuously exploring non-monetary benefits to promote employee well-being.'
Despite rejecting the union's response, Legal Aid SA previously stated that it considers SALAWU a 'key stakeholder' and will continue to cooperate with the union 'in striving to resolve disputes in a friendly, meaningful, and sustainable manner within existing resources.' Legal Aid SA affirmed its commitment to 'constructive engagement through appropriate channels' and will continue to participate in established processes aimed at resolving the discussed issues.
