Recent labour law decisions reinforce several important workplace principles: South Africans are no strangers to extreme heat, but the recent heat waves across parts of the country raise an important workplace question: can an employee refuse to work when temperatures become dangerously high?

For many workers, particularly those in construction, agriculture, security and other outdoor industries, working through extreme heat is not merely uncomfortable, it can be dangerous. Temperatures above 35°C increase the risk of dehydration, heat exhaustion and heatstroke. Media reports during recent heat waves have highlighted outdoor workers continuing to work in temperatures exceeding 40°C, raising serious concerns about workplace safety.

Legally, the issue involves balancing two duties: an employee’s obligation to obey lawful and reasonable instructions, and an employer’s duty to provide a safe working environment.

The Occupational Health and Safety Act 85 of 1993 requires employers to ensure, as far as reasonably practicable, that the workplace is safe and without risk to employees’ health. This includes identifying hazards and taking steps to mitigate them. Extreme heat can constitute such a hazard, particularly where workers are exposed to the sun for prolonged periods without shade, water or adequate rest breaks.

The Act also recognises that employees should not be required to expose themselves to situations that pose a serious and imminent danger. In such circumstances, an employee may raise a safety concern and, where necessary, refuse to work until the risk is addressed.

However, this right is not absolute. Employees are still required to take reasonable care for their own safety and to follow lawful and reasonable instructions. The Basic Conditions of Employment Act also regulates working conditions, including working hours and rest periods, and employers may be expected to adjust working arrangements during extreme heat by allowing additional breaks, providing water or shifting work to cooler parts of the day.

Disputes often arise when an employee refuses to work and the employer views this as insubordination. In labour law, insubordination generally involves refusing to obey a lawful instruction. If an employee refuses to work without a valid reason, disciplinary action may follow.

However, where the instruction exposes the employee to a genuine safety risk, the refusal may be justified. The key question is whether the refusal was reasonable in the circumstances. For example, a worker instructed to perform heavy outdoor labour in extreme heat without adequate protective measures may well have grounds to refuse.

Refusal to work can become a dismissible offence where the instruction was lawful and safe, and the employee refused without justification. Repeated refusal after warnings may amount to gross insubordination. At the same time, employers must tread carefully,  dismissing an employee who raises legitimate safety concerns could render the dismissal unfair.

Workplace safety during heat waves is likely to become an increasingly important labour law issue. The law does not require employees to endanger their health, but it also expects reasonable conduct from both parties. Ultimately, preventing conflict requires common sense, cooperation and proactive safety measures in the workplace.