PSA obo Rae v General Public Services Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR755/14) [2017] ZALCJHB 410 (6 April 2017)

PSA obo Rae v General Public Services Sectoral Bargaining Council and Others (JR755/14) [2017] ZALCJHB 410 (6 April 2017)

The Labour Court found that the arbitrator failed to consider the totality of circumstances and the relevant legal principles in determining whether dismissal was an appropriate sanction. The arbitrator did not properly evaluate the seriousness of the misconduct, the possibility of progressive discipline, the applicant's remorse, personal circumstances, and the issue of inconsistency. The evidence showed that the applicant's misconduct, while a breach of the code, was not sufficiently serious to justify dismissal, especially as other diplomats who committed similar or more serious misconduct were not dismissed. The trust relationship had not broken down, and the applicant continued to...

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 410
Parties
Applicant: PSA obo Andrew Rae; Respondent: General Public Services Sectoral Bargaining Council; Respondent: M J Matlala N.O. (as arbitrator); Respondent: Minister of International Relations and Cooperation
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
6 April 2017
Case Number
JR755/14
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
The review application is granted. The arbitration award upholding the dismissal is reviewed and set aside. The dismissal of the applicant is declared substantively unfair. The applicant is reinstated with retrospective effect, subject to a final written warning, and back pay is limited to twelve months' salary. No...
Judges
S Snyman
Legal Topics
Unfair Dismissal, Progressive Discipline, Inconsistency, Review of Arbitration Award, Remedies for Unfair Dismissal, Back Pay Limitation
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Dismissal Progressive Discipline Inconsistency Review of Arbitration Award Remedies for Unfair Dismissal Back Pay Limitation

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 5 Authorities cited 32 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

PSA obo Andrew Rae

Applicant

General Public Services Sectoral Bargaining Council

Respondent

M J Matlala N.O. (as arbitrator)

Respondent

Minister of International Relations and Cooperation

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the arbitrator's award upholding the dismissal of the applicant was reasonable and sustainable.
  2. 2 Whether dismissal was an appropriate and fair sanction for the misconduct committed.
  3. 3 Whether the arbitrator failed to consider the issue of inconsistency in sanction.

Ratio Decidendi

The Labour Court found that the arbitrator failed to consider the totality of circumstances and the relevant legal principles in determining whether dismissal was an appropriate sanction. The arbitrator did not properly evaluate the seriousness of the misconduct, the possibility of progressive discipline, the applicant's remorse, personal circumstances, and the issue of inconsistency. The evidence showed that the applicant's misconduct, while a breach of the code, was not sufficiently serious to justify dismissal, especially as other diplomats who committed similar or more serious misconduct were not dismissed. The trust relationship had not broken down, and the applicant continued to...

Court Disposition

The review application is granted. The arbitration award upholding the dismissal is reviewed and set aside. The dismissal of the applicant is declared substantively unfair. The applicant is reinstated with retrospective effect, subject to a final written warning, and back pay is limited to twelve months' salary. No...

Orders

  • The applicant's review application is granted.
  • The arbitration award of the second respondent dated 24 February 2014 under case number GPBC 1254/2013 is reviewed and set aside.