PRASA Metrorail v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1914/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 202 (26 May 2017)

PRASA Metrorail v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (JR1914/16) [2017] ZALCJHB 202 (26 May 2017)

The court found that the arbitrator's award was reasonable and supported by the evidence. The misconduct committed by both employees was identical, and there was no valid basis for imposing different sanctions. The applicant failed to prove that the previous final written warning was a wrong sanction or that dismissal was the only permissible sanction. The arbitrator correctly applied the parity principle, considering that the employee could not have anticipated dismissal as a sanction, given the precedent. The review application was dismissed as the grounds lacked particularity and did not demonstrate that the award was unreasonable.

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 202
Parties
Applicant: PRASA Metrorail/Metrorail Gauteng South; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: M.P Shai N.O.; Respondent: Rudzani Charlotte Mulaudzi; Respondent: United National Transport Union
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
26 May 2017
Case Number
JR1914/16
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Review application dismissed; substitution and condonation granted; no order as to costs.
Judges
Makinta
Legal Topics
Parity Principle, Unfair Dismissal, Consistency of Sanction, Code of Good Practice Dismissal, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Parity Principle Unfair Dismissal Consistency of Sanction Code of Good Practice Dismissal 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 3 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PRASA Metrorail/Metrorail Gauteng South

Applicant

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

M.P Shai N.O.

Respondent

Rudzani Charlotte Mulaudzi

Respondent

United National Transport Union

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator misapplied the parity principle in finding the dismissal of Rudzani Charlotte Mulaudzi unfair.
  2. 2 Whether the sanction of dismissal was inconsistent with previous sanctions for similar misconduct.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitration award was reasonable and supported by evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the arbitrator's award was reasonable and supported by the evidence. The misconduct committed by both employees was identical, and there was no valid basis for imposing different sanctions. The applicant failed to prove that the previous final written warning was a wrong sanction or that dismissal was the only permissible sanction. The arbitrator correctly applied the parity principle, considering that the employee could not have anticipated dismissal as a sanction, given the precedent. The review application was dismissed as the grounds lacked particularity and did not demonstrate that the award was unreasonable.

Court Disposition

Review application dismissed; substitution and condonation granted; no order as to costs.

Orders

  • The United National Transport Union (UNTU) is substituted for the South African Transport and Allied Workers Union (SATAWU) as the fourth respondent.
  • The applicant's late service of the review application on UNTU is condoned.