No compensation for sex worker
2008-07-31 13:04
Cape Town - A Labour Court judge on Thursday dismissed an application by a Cape Town sex worker who sued a Bellville massage parlour for allegedly violating her rights as a worker.
"The applicant's claim for 12 months' compensation is refused," Judge Halton Cheadle told the Labour Court on Thursday morning, without reading further from the 30-page judgment in the controversial case.
The woman, referred to as Kylie by her legal team at the Women's Legal Centre (WLC), pressed charges of unfair and improper dismissal procedures after her termination from Brigitte's Massage Parlour in 2006.
Jennifer Williams, the Director of the WLC and Kylie's attorney, said in a press statement before the hearing that the application was not about legalising prostitution but rather about ensuring that the law protects everyone, and especially the most vulnerable workers in our society.
Kylie worked and lived at the parlour from 1993 to 30 April 2006. On 23 April 2006 she was dismissed for not having had sufficient bookings and refusing to perform oral sex, amongst other allegations.
According the WLC, Kylie said she was not charged or ever found guilty of any misconduct and never had an opportunity to defend herself.
Sex workers 'particularly vulnerable'
"Sex workers are particularly vulnerable to exploitation in the employment relationship, both because sex work is outlawed and because of the nature of their work," she said.
However Judge Cheadle dismissed the case, saying in his judgment that there was a fundamental principle in the law preventing courts from sanctioning or encouraging illegal activity.
The Labour Court first heard argument on 7 February, in a review on the application of the Labour Relations Act brought by Kylie, after the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) dismissed her case, saying it did not have jurisdiction because she had been employed to do illegal work.
But the Labour Court upheld the CCMA's decision.
"The commissioner ought to refuse to grant the compensation sought by the application because by doing so the CCMA would have been sanctioning or encouraging prohibited commercial sex," said Cheadle said.
"There is no reason to refer the matter back to the commissioner and accordingly the commission's ruling is substituted with the following: The applicant's claim for 12 months' compensation is refused."