South African Post Office Limited v Jansen and Others (JR 832/07) [2008] ZALC 33; [2008] 8 BLLR 798 (LC) ; (2008) 29 ILJ 2793 (LC) (22 March 2008)

South African Post Office Limited v Jansen and Others (JR 832/07) [2008] ZALC 33; [2008] 8 BLLR 798 (LC) ; (2008) 29 ILJ 2793 (LC) (22 March 2008)

The court found that the Commissioner correctly identified the suspension and written warning as unfair labour practices but failed to properly assess just and equitable compensation. The Commissioner did not consider that the suspension was with pay, the period was not long, and the warning had expired by arbitration. The employee suffered no actual financial loss. The court held that compensation should reflect the actual prejudice suffered and the infringement of the right to fair labour practice, but not exceed what is reasonable. The award of six months’ salary was excessive; compensation equivalent to one month’s salary was deemed fair. Condonation for late filing was granted due to...

Citation
[2008] ZALC 33
Parties
Applicant: South African Post Office Limited; Respondent: G S Jansen van Vuuren N.O.; Respondent: Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: Pieter Stephanus Burger
Court
Labour Court
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
22 March 2008
Case Number
JR 832/07
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation
Outcome
The review is upheld. The arbitration award is corrected to reduce compensation to one month’s salary. No order as to costs.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Compensation for Suspension, Disciplinary Procedure, Condonation of Late Filing
Labour Law Unfair Labour Practice Compensation for Suspension Disciplinary Procedure Condonation of Late Filing

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South African Post Office Limited

Applicant

G S Jansen van Vuuren N.O.

Respondent

Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

Pieter Stephanus Burger

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review and Condonation

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner committed misconduct or gross irregularity in awarding compensation for unfair labour practice.
  2. 2 Whether the suspension and written warning issued to the employee constituted an unfair labour practice.
  3. 3 Whether the compensation awarded was just and equitable under section 194(4) of the Labour Relations Act.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Commissioner correctly identified the suspension and written warning as unfair labour practices but failed to properly assess just and equitable compensation. The Commissioner did not consider that the suspension was with pay, the period was not long, and the warning had expired by arbitration. The employee suffered no actual financial loss. The court held that compensation should reflect the actual prejudice suffered and the infringement of the right to fair labour practice, but not exceed what is reasonable. The award of six months’ salary was excessive; compensation equivalent to one month’s salary was deemed fair. Condonation for late filing was granted due to...

Court Disposition

The review is upheld. The arbitration award is corrected to reduce compensation to one month’s salary. No order as to costs.

Orders

  • The award of the first respondent dated 31 January 2007 is reviewed and corrected: the respondent should compensate the applicant in the amount of R21 137.88, being an equivalent of one month’s salary.
  • There is no order as to costs.