Mashile v Wings Travel Management (JS1016/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 147 (11 June 2019)

Mashile v Wings Travel Management (JS1016/17) [2019] ZALCJHB 147 (11 June 2019)

The court found that the respondent had a bona fide operational rationale for retrenching the applicant, namely the overlap of IT support services and the need to cut costs. The evidence showed that the retrenchment process was preceded by proper notice and multiple consultation meetings, where the applicant was given opportunities to propose alternatives, which were considered but found unviable. The selection criterion of LIFO was objectively applied, as both consultants performed equally. The applicant's allegations of a personal vendetta were unsupported by evidence and contradicted by his own submissions. The court concluded that both the substantive and procedural requirements of...

Citation
[2019] ZALCJHB 147
Parties
Applicant: Hezekiel Mashile; Respondent: Wings Travel Management
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
11 June 2019
Case Number
JS1016/17
Procedural Posture
Unfair Dismissal Application / Trial Judgment
Outcome
Applicant's claim dismissed.
Judges
Mahosi
Legal Topics
Retrenchment, Operational Requirements, Section 189 Consultation, Selection Criteria, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness
Labour Law Retrenchment Operational Requirements Section 189 Consultation Selection Criteria Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness

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 6 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Hezekiel Mashile

Applicant

Wings Travel Management

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Dismissal Application / Trial Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the applicant's dismissal substantively fair based on operational requirements?
  2. 2 Was the dismissal procedurally fair in terms of section 189 of the Labour Relations Act?
  3. 3 Did the respondent comply with consultation and selection criteria obligations under the LRA?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the respondent had a bona fide operational rationale for retrenching the applicant, namely the overlap of IT support services and the need to cut costs. The evidence showed that the retrenchment process was preceded by proper notice and multiple consultation meetings, where the applicant was given opportunities to propose alternatives, which were considered but found unviable. The selection criterion of LIFO was objectively applied, as both consultants performed equally. The applicant's allegations of a personal vendetta were unsupported by evidence and contradicted by his own submissions. The court concluded that both the substantive and procedural requirements of...

Court Disposition

Applicant's claim dismissed.

Orders

  • The applicant's claim is dismissed.
  • There is no order as to costs.