ICHAWU and Others v CCMA And Others (C 308/13) [2015] ZALCCT 48; [2015] 9 BLLR 958 (LC); (2015) 36 ILJ 3086 (LC) (29 July 2015)
The court held that the employer's instruction to work under the new roster, imposed unilaterally without agreement and in the face of a pending dispute referred under section 64(4) of the LRA, was not a reasonable instruction. The employees' refusal to comply did not amount to gross insubordination. The arbitrator misconceived the inquiry by failing to consider the reasonableness of the instruction and by deferring unduly to the employer's sanction. The dismissal was not for a fair reason, and the arbitration award upholding the dismissal was so unreasonable that no reasonable arbitrator could have reached the same conclusion. The award was reviewed and set aside, and compensation...
- Citation
- [2015] ZALCCT 48
- Parties
- Applicant: ICHAWU; Applicant: MANQUNYANA, Zimakhaya and 8 others; Respondent: CCMA; Respondent: Commissioner Anele Mgubasi; Respondent: Suid-Kaap Stene Electroplating And Powdercoating CC
- Court
- Labour Court Cape Town
- Jurisdiction
- South Africa
- Judgment Date
- 29 July 2015
- Case Number
- C 308/13
- Procedural Posture
- Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
- Outcome
- Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; replaced with order that dismissal was not for a fair reason and compensation awarded.
- Judges
- Steenkamp
- Legal Topics
- Unilateral Change to Terms, Gross Insubordination, Unfair Dismissal, Remedies for Unilateral Change, Compensation for Unfair Dismissal
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
ICHAWU
Applicant
MANQUNYANA, Zimakhaya and 8 others
Applicant
CCMA
Respondent
Commissioner Anele Mgubasi
Respondent
Suid-Kaap Stene Electroplating And Powdercoating CC
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the employer's instruction to work under new terms constituted a reasonable and lawful instruction.
- 2 Whether the employees' refusal to comply amounted to gross insubordination.
- 3 Whether the dismissal of the employees was substantively fair given the unilateral change to terms and conditions of employment.
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that the employer's instruction to work under the new roster, imposed unilaterally without agreement and in the face of a pending dispute referred under section 64(4) of the LRA, was not a reasonable instruction. The employees' refusal to comply did not amount to gross insubordination. The arbitrator misconceived the inquiry by failing to consider the reasonableness of the instruction and by deferring unduly to the employer's sanction. The dismissal was not for a fair reason, and the arbitration award upholding the dismissal was so unreasonable that no reasonable arbitrator could have reached the same conclusion. The award was reviewed and set aside, and compensation...
Court Disposition
Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; replaced with order that dismissal was not for a fair reason and compensation awarded.
Orders
- The arbitration award of 11 February 2013 under case number WEGE 2616-12 is reviewed and set aside.
- The award is replaced with an order that the dismissal of the individual applicants was not for a fair reason.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment