Justicia Shipena
Northern Regional Electricity Distributor (Nored) has approached the Labour Court on an urgent basis to stop a planned strike by the Mineworkers Union of Namibia (MUN).
Nored warns that the industrial action could disrupt electricity supply across large parts of northern Namibia.
This move comes after Nored workers issued a notice of strike action last Friday, following the collapse of wage negotiations that had lasted for more than a year.
MUN, which represents Nored employees, has accused management of intimidation aimed at preventing workers from exercising their right to strike.
In its founding affidavit, deposed to by Nored’s executive manager for human resources and acting chief executive officer, Mirjam Kondjeni, the power utility argues that the strike is unlawful.
Kondjeni says the dispute was referred under the wrong section of the Labour Act and that the company provides essential services.
She argues that disputes involving essential services must be resolved through compulsory arbitration under section 78 of the Act, not through conciliation and strike procedures under section 74.
According to the affidavit, NORED and MUN signed a recognition and procedural agreement in 2017, allowing the union to negotiate wages on behalf of workers.
Wage talks for the 2024/25 and 2025/26 financial years began in June 2025 but reached a deadlock by September 2025, despite several meetings and ongoing correspondence.
After talks failed, MUN referred a dispute of interest to the labour commissioner in October 2025 under section 74 of the Labour Act.
A conciliation meeting was held on 31 October 2025, but no agreement was reached, and a certificate of unresolved dispute was issued.
The parties then agreed to engage on strike rules.
However, when the labour commissioner later scheduled an arbitration hearing for January 2026, Nored objected, arguing that the dispute had been incorrectly referred to and should be dealt with under Section 78 due to its essential service status.
The conciliator, according to Nored, declined to rule on the objection and proceeded to determine the strike rules under section 74.
Nored said this was unlawful and outside the conciliator’s authority.
Nored stated that they finalised the strike rules in its absence on 16 January 2026, despite requests for a postponement.
Later that day, Nored received notice from MUN that a strike would begin on 22 January 2026.
The company warned that it would approach the court if the strike was not halted.
Kondjeni noted the strike would have serious consequences.
MUN represents about 225 of Nored’s 253 employees, close to 89% of the workforce.
The utility says it cannot operate effectively with less than 10% of its staff and would fail to meet its obligation to supply electricity to northern regions.
Nored is also seeking a rule nisi calling on MUN to show why an order should not be granted preventing the strike until proceedings before the labour commissioner under chapter 8 of the Labour Act are finalised.
The power utility is also asking for condonation for not fully complying with standard court rules, citing urgency.
MUN has opposed the application and has asked the Labour Court to dismiss it. In its heads of argument, the union said the strike is lawful and that Nored failed to meet the legal requirements for an urgent interdict.
The union asserted that wage negotiations commenced in June 2025 and ended in September 2025, following which the labour commissioner correctly received the dispute.
MUN rejected Nored’s claim that the dispute was incorrectly referred and said the Labour Court lacks jurisdiction to grant the interdict sought.
It argued that the court may only issue urgent interdicts where a dispute is properly.
The union said workers in technical and maintenance roles fall under essential services, while employees in administrative, financial, and corporate roles do not. It said the strike will involve only non-essential staff, with essential services continuing as required by law.
MUN also said Nored previously acknowledged this distinction and only raised the issue of essential services in January 2026, shortly before approaching the court.
MUN asserted that Nored’s own actions created any perceived urgency. It also disputed claims of irreparable harm, saying essential services will continue and that some non-essential staff will remain on duty.
The union further questioned whether the Nored official who launched the application was properly authorised, arguing that the resolution relied on by the company is unsupported.
MUN has asked the Labour Court to dismiss the application with costs, saying the court action is intended to delay a lawful strike rather than resolve the dispute.
The Labour Court is expected to rule on whether the strike may proceed and whether Nored’s urgent application meets the requirements of the Labour Act.
