While the existing framework for labour disputes provides a structured process, some observers and affected workers question whether current union support is sufficient to counter the power imbalance in modern workplaces. As companies increasingly cite vague reasons like restructuring or AI integration to justify layoffs, the burden of proof often falls heavily on the employee. Critics argue that without stronger legal mandates for retrenchment benefits and more aggressive intervention, the current system may leave many workers vulnerable to corporate cost-cutting measures that prioritize bottom lines over human capital.
There is also a growing concern regarding the accessibility and effectiveness of union representation for all workers. While union members have access to dedicated support, a significant portion of the workforce remains outside this umbrella, potentially limiting their ability to challenge unfair practices effectively. Even for members, the perception persists that unions may sometimes prioritize maintaining industrial harmony over securing the best possible outcomes for individuals in high-stakes dismissal cases. This can lead to a sense of disillusionment among workers who feel that the available remedies, such as limited salary compensation, do not adequately address the long-term career damage caused by wrongful termination.
Ultimately, the rise in wrongful dismissal claims suggests that the current guidelines may not be enough to deter employers from exploiting loopholes. As the nature of work continues to change, there is a clear need for more robust protections that can keep pace with evolving business practices. Relying on non-binding advisories may be insufficient in an era where job security is increasingly fragile, and workers require more than just mediation—they require enforceable rights that provide genuine security in an unpredictable economy.