Malie v FOSKOR (Pty) Ltd and Others (JA15/2017) [2020] ZALAC 60 (27 October 2020)

Malie v FOSKOR (Pty) Ltd and Others (JA15/2017) [2020] ZALAC 60 (27 October 2020)

The Labour Appeal Court held that the retention allowance was a discretionary benefit administered by Foskor to retain scarce skills. Although the appellant was eligible, Foskor exercised its discretion not to pay him the allowance because his earnings already exceeded those of other SHEQ and operations trainers, even after they received the allowance. The evidence showed that technical trainers who earned more than the appellant were in a different category. The Court found that the employer’s discretion was exercised rationally and fairly, with a clear and acceptable basis for the decision. The commissioner’s conclusion that no unfair labour practice was committed fell within the band...

Citation
[2020] ZALAC 60
Parties
Appellant: Ronald Maile; Respondent: FOSKOR (Pty) Ltd; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Nelson Ledwaba N.O.
Court
Labour Appeal Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
27 October 2020
Case Number
JA15/2017
Procedural Posture
Labour Appeal / Appeal Against Labour Court Judgment Dismissing Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.
Judges
Coppin, Murphy, Savage
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Discretionary Benefits, Remuneration Vs Benefit, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Unfair Labour Practice Discretionary Benefits Remuneration Vs Benefit Review of Arbitration Award

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Ronald Maile

Appellant

FOSKOR (Pty) Ltd

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Nelson Ledwaba N.O.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Labour Appeal / Appeal Against Labour Court Judgment Dismissing Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the employer's refusal to pay the retention allowance to the appellant constituted an unfair labour practice.
  2. 2 Whether the exercise of discretion by the employer in not paying the allowance was rational and fair.
  3. 3 Whether the commissioner’s award was reviewable for unreasonableness.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Appeal Court held that the retention allowance was a discretionary benefit administered by Foskor to retain scarce skills. Although the appellant was eligible, Foskor exercised its discretion not to pay him the allowance because his earnings already exceeded those of other SHEQ and operations trainers, even after they received the allowance. The evidence showed that technical trainers who earned more than the appellant were in a different category. The Court found that the employer’s discretion was exercised rationally and fairly, with a clear and acceptable basis for the decision. The commissioner’s conclusion that no unfair labour practice was committed fell within the band...

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.
  • No order as to costs.