Seleoane v Tshwane University of Technology (J1525/08) [2017] ZALCJHB 29 (24 January 2017)

Seleoane v Tshwane University of Technology (J1525/08) [2017] ZALCJHB 29 (24 January 2017)

The court found that the applicant's dismissal arose from the objective application of the respondent's new employment structure and match and place policy, negotiated with unions after a statutory merger. The applicant's substantive post did not exist in the new structure, and he did not meet the requirements for the alternative posts. The evidence did not support the contention that the grievance was the dominant or most probable cause of dismissal. The placement and redeployment processes were properly followed, and there was no manipulation or preferential treatment. The applicant's retrenchment was a result of operational requirements, and both procedural and substantive fairness...

Citation
[2017] ZALCJHB 29
Parties
Applicant: Lebohang Seleoane; Respondent: Tshwane University of Technology
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
24 January 2017
Case Number
J1525/08
Procedural Posture
Unfair Dismissal Application / Final Judgment
Outcome
Application dismissed. The applicant's dismissal was substantively and procedurally fair under operational requirements.
Judges
Whitcher
Legal Topics
Automatically Unfair Dismissal, Operational Requirements Retrenchment, Procedural Fairness, Substantive Fairness, Redeployment Policy, Grievance Procedure
Labour Law Automatically Unfair Dismissal Operational Requirements Retrenchment Procedural Fairness Substantive Fairness Redeployment Policy Grievance Procedure

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 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lebohang Seleoane

Applicant

Tshwane University of Technology

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Unfair Dismissal Application / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the applicant's dismissal automatically unfair due to the pursuit of a grievance against the Vice-Chancellor?
  2. 2 Was the applicant's dismissal substantively and procedurally fair under operational requirements?
  3. 3 Did the respondent comply with its match and place and redeployment policies in considering the applicant for alternative positions?

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the applicant's dismissal arose from the objective application of the respondent's new employment structure and match and place policy, negotiated with unions after a statutory merger. The applicant's substantive post did not exist in the new structure, and he did not meet the requirements for the alternative posts. The evidence did not support the contention that the grievance was the dominant or most probable cause of dismissal. The placement and redeployment processes were properly followed, and there was no manipulation or preferential treatment. The applicant's retrenchment was a result of operational requirements, and both procedural and substantive fairness...

Court Disposition

Application dismissed. The applicant's dismissal was substantively and procedurally fair under operational requirements.

Orders

  • Applicant was dismissed due to respondent's operational requirements.
  • Applicant's dismissal by respondent was substantively and procedurally fair.