Public Servants Association and Another v Director General: Office of the Presidency of South Africa and Another (JR2219/11) [2015] ZALCJHB 78; [2015] 7 BLLR 700 (LC) (5 March 2015)

Public Servants Association and Another v Director General: Office of the Presidency of South Africa and Another (JR2219/11) [2015] ZALCJHB 78; [2015] 7 BLLR 700 (LC) (5 March 2015)

The court found that the Director General had a statutory and policy-based duty to allocate 1.5% of the salary budget for performance bonuses and to pay bonuses to employees who qualified after assessment. The refusal to pay bonuses on the basis of lack of funds was not sustainable, as the policy framework anticipated such situations and required scaling down the bonus or tightening criteria, not outright refusal. The right to receive bonuses was sourced in legislation, regulations, and policy, making it a dispute of right. The decision was illegal, irrational, and beyond the powers of the Director General, and thus susceptible to review under section 158(1)(h) of the LRA. The court...

Citation
[2015] ZALCJHB 78
Parties
Applicant: Public Servants Association; Applicant: Linah Matlakala; Respondent: Director General: Office of the Presidency of South Africa; Respondent: The Presidency of South Africa
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
5 March 2015
Case Number
JR2219/11
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment Delivered After Hearing on 19 November 2014
Outcome
Application granted. The decision not to pay bonuses is reviewed and set aside.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Performance Management, Public Service Act, Incentive Policy Framework, Review of Administrative Action, Dispute of Right, Legality Review
Labour Law Administrative Law Performance Management Public Service Act Incentive Policy Framework Review of Administrative Action Dispute of Right Legality Review

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Public Servants Association

Applicant

Linah Matlakala

Applicant

Director General: Office of the Presidency of South Africa

Respondent

The Presidency of South Africa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment Delivered After Hearing on 19 November 2014

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Does the refusal to pay performance bonuses to qualifying employees constitute administrative action?
  2. 2 Is the payment of performance bonuses discretionary or a matter of right?
  3. 3 Are the applicants entitled to payment of bonuses under existing legislation, regulations, and policy?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Director General had a statutory and policy-based duty to allocate 1.5% of the salary budget for performance bonuses and to pay bonuses to employees who qualified after assessment. The refusal to pay bonuses on the basis of lack of funds was not sustainable, as the policy framework anticipated such situations and required scaling down the bonus or tightening criteria, not outright refusal. The right to receive bonuses was sourced in legislation, regulations, and policy, making it a dispute of right. The decision was illegal, irrational, and beyond the powers of the Director General, and thus susceptible to review under section 158(1)(h) of the LRA. The court...

Court Disposition

Application granted. The decision not to pay bonuses is reviewed and set aside.

Orders

  • The decision of the first respondent not to pay bonuses to the Second to Further Applicants, taken during March 2011, is reviewed and set aside.
  • The matter is referred back to the Second Respondent to consider the payment of the bonuses of those who qualified.