South African Post Office Limited Gungubele NO and Others (JR2947/2010) [2014] ZALCJHB 116 (25 February 2014)

South African Post Office Limited Gungubele NO and Others (JR2947/2010) [2014] ZALCJHB 116 (25 February 2014)

The court found that the Commissioner erred in concluding that the acting allowance was a benefit to which the third respondent was entitled. The evidence showed that the acting arrangement was intended to develop managerial skills and that no acting allowance had been paid to employees acting in managerial positions since 2000. The third respondent conceded that his predecessor was not paid an acting allowance and failed to produce any policy granting such entitlement. The delay in claiming the allowance further indicated that the third respondent knew he was not entitled to it. Consequently, the Commissioner’s decision was unreasonable and reviewable, and the arbitration award was set...

Citation
[2014] ZALCJHB 116
Parties
Applicant: South African Post Office Limited; Respondent: Q Gungubele N.O.; Respondent: Commissioner K G Mngezana N.O.; Respondent: The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration; Respondent: South African Postal Workers Union obo Wayne Coetzee
Court
Labour Court Johannesburg
Jurisdiction
South Africa
Judgment Date
25 February 2014
Case Number
JR2947/2010
Procedural Posture
Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award
Outcome
Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; substituted with a finding that the applicant did not commit an unfair labour practice in not paying the acting allowance.
Judges
Molahlehi
Legal Topics
Unfair Labour Practice, Acting Allowance, Benefits Under Lra, Review of Arbitration Award
Labour Law Civil Procedure Unfair Labour Practice Acting Allowance Benefits Under Lra 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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

South African Post Office Limited

Applicant

Q Gungubele N.O.

Respondent

Commissioner K G Mngezana N.O.

Respondent

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration

Respondent

South African Postal Workers Union obo Wayne Coetzee

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Review Application / Judgment on Review of Arbitration Award

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Commissioner had jurisdiction to determine the dispute regarding the acting allowance as a benefit under section 186(2) of the LRA.
  2. 2 Whether the non-payment of the acting allowance constituted an unfair labour practice.
  3. 3 Whether the Commissioner misconstrued the evidence and applicable policy regarding entitlement to the acting allowance.

Ratio Decidendi

The court found that the Commissioner erred in concluding that the acting allowance was a benefit to which the third respondent was entitled. The evidence showed that the acting arrangement was intended to develop managerial skills and that no acting allowance had been paid to employees acting in managerial positions since 2000. The third respondent conceded that his predecessor was not paid an acting allowance and failed to produce any policy granting such entitlement. The delay in claiming the allowance further indicated that the third respondent knew he was not entitled to it. Consequently, the Commissioner’s decision was unreasonable and reviewable, and the arbitration award was set...

Court Disposition

Arbitration award reviewed and set aside; substituted with a finding that the applicant did not commit an unfair labour practice in not paying the acting allowance.

Orders

  • The arbitration award made under case number GATW 10336-10 is reviewed and set aside.
  • The arbitration award is substituted with the award that the Applicant did not commit an unfair labour practice in not paying the Third Respondent an acting allowance.