To date, it is clear that a collective agreement entered into by collective agreement binds only to the parties who are also parties to the collective agreement. In casu is the collective agreement concerned: a) to the South African Local Government Bargaining Council (SALGBC) and b) the parties are SALGA, IMATU and SAMWU. It is therefore binding only on the Council parties and the collective agreement. MATUSA is neither a party to the bargaining council nor a party to the collective agreement involved. In accordance with Section 31, the collective agreement is not binding on MATUSA and its members.  This section, which is properly interpreted, simply means that a municipality is required to respect collective agreements concluded by a local government organized within the SALGBC. This means that a municipality, even if it is not a party to a collective agreement as a legal entity, is bound to respect the collective agreement and cannot avoid it because it is a party to the collective agreement. For example, the metropolitan city of Tshwane must not refuse to comply with a collective agreement under the SALGBC simply because it is not a party to the collective agreement. Collective agreements are concluded by an organized local government, an organization created in accordance with Section 2 of the Organized Local Authorities Act (OLGA).
 If it is intended to replace Section 32, it is clearly at odds with the mandatory requirements of Section 32. Article 71, paragraph 3, of the MSA does not provide for: (a) written extension and (b) approval at a meeting of the bargaining council. In paragraph 4.2, the EP recognises the provisions of Section 32. Section 210 of the LRA provides that in the event of a conflict that the Court does not respect in this case and which relates to the issues dealt with in the LRA, there is between the LRA and the provisions of a statute other than the Constitution or a law explicitly amending the LRA that prevalent the provisions of the LRA. It is also for this reason that the provisions of Section 32 apply. In this regard, the conciliator correctly concluded that Section 32 of the LRA challenged the application and that its provisions were not met in order for the provisions of the collective agreement to apply to MATUSA and its members.  Once it has been established that the LRA can then apply to the LRA, any interpretation of the provisions of the LRA is an obligation to interpret it in accordance with the Constitution of the Republic. With regard to the exercise of the right to freedom of association, section 4, paragraph 1, point b) provides that a worker has the right to join a statutory union. Section 213 defines a union that designates a workers` association whose primary purpose is to regulate the relationship between workers and employers. In accordance with Section 8, point (a) (i), a union has the right to define its own constitution and rules.
Section 23 gives effect and strength to collective agreements.