It has become common for employers and workers to enter into what is called a reciprocal termination contract, which would result in the termination of an employment relationship between the parties. The conclusion of a reciprocal termination agreement could be motivated by a number of reasons. In practice, one of the reasons why the parties quickly arrive at an amicable solution and a labour dispute may be proactive. Openings to a reciprocal termination agreement may be the work of either an employer or a worker and, as a general rule, prior to the initiation of a formal workplace investigation (whether it is a disciplinary incapacity or incapacity to work). In Gbenga-Oluwatoye/Reckitt Benckiser South Africa (Pty) Limited and Another (JA 95-2014)  ZALAC 2 (February 3, 2016), the Labour Appeals Tribunal examined the validity of mutual separation agreements in South Africa. With the exception of disciplinary measures against the employee, a strained relationship between the employer and the employee due to personal relationships and the urgent need to be frightened, some of the frequently cited reasons for entering into a transaction contract are. Mutual dismissal is one of the quickest ways to end the employment relationship. In this case, a separation agreement was reached between the parties, which ”acquires in full and definitively all claims of any kind, but which arise between the parties.” The worker also acknowledged in the agreement that he had accepted the agreement without undue coercion or influence and that he had voluntarily and unconditionally waived his right to severance pay and his right to go to any competent authority, including the CCMA and/or the labour tribunal, to obtain remedies arising from the agreement against his employer. If the employer and the employee agree, they can enter into a reciprocal redundancy contract in order to end the employment relationship by mutual agreement. This is an acceptable practice of the CCMA and the labour tribunal.
Reciprocal separation is not the same as dismissal or dismissal – It confirmed the labour tribunal`s finding that the blocking of legal remedies, i.e. the waiver of another remedy under the reciprocal termination contract, was nothing more than a means of effect of a final settlement agreement. She also cited the barkhuizen/Napier  ZACC 5; 2007 (5) SA 323 (CC) with respect to the test, in order to determine whether a contractual clause (s) is contrary to public policy; An exceptional precedent. Thank you for this solid and perfectly formatted agreement. I have every confidence in this and I will be sure that you will use your other precedents if necessary. I wish you good luck with your business. Thank you again. That the applicant was ”involved in a completely masterish deception and misrepresentation”, that he himself admitted to having no defence, and that he then ”entered into a final agreement to bring to bed a current dispute” and ”knowingly” did so. In addition, the applicant intended (within the meaning of the agreement) to separate from Reckitt (his former employer) on final terms that also protected him from further action by Reckitt. Such a finality ”involved an agreement that the courts should not be associated”; There is a practice in the workplace that is not the fault, the occupational requirements and the inability to work that ends the working relationship.
This practice is called a reciprocal termination agreement, also known as a transaction agreement.