Contact

New earnings threshold effective 1 April 2025

Back to top

New earnings threshold effective 1 April 2025

Malesela Letwaba, Senior Associate in the Employment Law practice, recently joined Bongiwe Zwane on SAfm to discuss the 'New earnings threshold effective 1 April 2025.'

9 Apr 2025 05:54 Minutes Radio interview
New earnings threshold effective 1 April 2025

New earnings threshold effective 1 April 2025

Podcast

New earnings threshold effective 1 April 2025

Podcast

00:00 00:00
Download MP3

Malesela explains that the earnings threshold determines which employees are covered by Chapter Two of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA), which regulates, amongst others, working hours, overtime, compressed workweeks, and meal intervals.

Malesela says that previously set at R254,371, the threshold will increase to R261,748.45 as of 1 April 2025. Employees earning below the new earnings threshold will now qualify for the protections under Chapter Two.

Malesela notes that this increase accounts for factors such as inflation and the rising cost of living. The BCEA is designed to protect vulnerable workers, often referred to as "blue-collar" employees. By falling under Chapter Two, they gain access to forums like the CCMA and bargaining councils to enforce their rights. In contrast, employees earning above the threshold are considered well-remunerated and must pursue legal action through the appropriate forums.

Click here to listen to the interview

The information and material published on this website is provided for general purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. We make every effort to ensure that the content is updated regularly and to offer the most current and accurate information. Please consult one of our lawyers on any specific legal problem or matter. We accept no responsibility for any loss or damage, whether direct or consequential, which may arise from reliance on the information contained in these pages. Please refer to our full terms and conditions. Copyright © 2025 Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr. All rights reserved. For permission to reproduce an article or publication, please contact us cliffedekkerhofmeyr@cdhlegal.com.

You might also be interested in

15 Jul 2024

by Fiona Leppan, Kgodisho Phashe and David de Goede

New asthma compensation regulations: Ensuring adequate treatment for affected workers

On 7 June 2024, the Minister of Employment and Labour officially promulgated two significant sets of regulations aimed at protecting workers affected by respiratory conditions. These are the Regulations on Irritant-Induced Asthma for the Compensation Fund (Irritant-Induced Regulations) and the Regulations on Work-Aggravated Asthma for the Compensation Fund (Work-Aggravated Asthma Regulations). These new regulations mark a crucial step forward in ensuring that workers suffering from asthma due to workplace conditions receive appropriate compensation and support from the Compensation Fund. This issue was previously dealt with in various circulars issued by the Director General of the then Department of Labour. Which we refer tobelow. 

Employment Law

2 min read

31 Jan 2025

by Brigitta Mangale and Elgene Roos

A force for justice: A fierce approach to upholding Human Rights in South Africa

Brigitta Mangale, Director, and Elgene Roos, Senior Associate in the Pro Bono & Human Rights practice, were recently featured in Public Sector Leaders in an article titled "A force for justice: A fierce approach to upholding Human Rights in South Africa."

Pro Bono & Human Rights

1 min read

24 Apr 2024

by Lydia Owuor

Can Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) be a pathway to affordable homeownership?

Kenya’s affordable housing agenda is a government initiative aimed at addressing the housing deficit in the country by providing affordable and decent housing for its citizens through homeownership. This initiative aligns with the Government’s broader development goals outlined in its Vision 2030 blueprint. The key challenges that have been identified as the barriers to delivering this agenda include (i) limited capacity for rapid construction of affordable homes even though the Government has initiated large-scale construction projects across the country; (ii) lack of guaranteed off-take, which undermines property developers’ confidence in exiting developments upon completion; and (iii) limited access to financing options that could enable developers bring more affordable homes to the market.

Real Estate Law

3 min read

14 Jun 2024

by Vivien Chaplin and Jaco Meyer

Reflecting on South Africa's mining future

Vivien Chaplin, Director in the Corporate & Commercial practice and Head of the Mining & Minerals sector, and Jaco Meyer, Director in the Corporate & Commercial practice, were featured in the Engineering News and Mining Weekly: Reflecting on South Africa's mining future. 

Mining & Minerals

1 min read

8 Jul 2024

by Taryn York and Mapaseka Nketu

The Constitutional Court dismisses the Minister’s application for leave to appeal ZEP judgment

On 28 June 2023, the High Court declared the decision by Dr Aaron Motsoaledi, the former Minister of Home Affairs (Minister), to terminate the Zimbabwean Exemption Permit (ZEP) unlawful, unconstitutional and invalid. This decision concerned the rights of over 178,000 ZEP holders. As a consequence, the court remitted the matter back to the Minister for reconsideration following a fair process in accordance with the Promotion of Administrative Justice Act 3 of 2000 (PAJA).

Immigration Law

3 min read

30 Oct 2024

by Kate Anderson and Keagan Hyslop

50/50 shareholders and oppressive conduct: When some shareholders are more equal than others

A fundamental principle of South African company law is “ majority rules ” – shareholders and directors are bound by the decisions of the majority even where such decisions are not in their interest. However, recognising the potential for unfair abuse of such a principle, the Companies Act 71 of 2008 (Companies Act) devised section 163, which allows a director or shareholder of a company to apply to court for relief from oppressive conduct of the company or a person related to it that unfairly disregards or prejudices the interests of the applicant. Section 163 therefore paints the picture of a majority shareholder abusing its ability to control the company to unfairly bully or oppress minority shareholders. But what happens if the shareholders are equals – can a 50/50 shareholder be oppressed by their equal? This was the question before the High Court in Van der Watt v Schoeman and Others 91 SA 531 (ECGq).

Corporate & Commercial Law

4 min read

This website uses cookies to enhance the browsing experience. For more information, please see our Cookie Policy.

Accept Decline