South Africa Case Law

UNTU obo Motheng v Mafa N.O and Others (JR285/21)

UNTU obo Motheng v Mafa N.O and Others (JR285/21) [2024] ZALCJHB 411 (25 October 2024)

Court

Labour Court Johannesburg

Case number

JR285/21

Judge

Ngwenya

The Court found that although the Commissioner did not expressly rule on the admissibility of the psychometric assessment report as hearsay evidence, this omission did not materially affect the outcome of the arbitration. The central dispute was whether the employer’s policies permitted the use of psychometric testing as a selection criterion for the position in question. The Commissioner focused on whether the employer had committed an unfair labour practice by requiring all candidates to undergo psychometric testing, and the content or result of the psychometric assessment was not in disput…

Source excerpt

• Unfair Labour Practice
• Promotion Dispute
• Psychometric Testing
• Admissibility Of Hearsay
• Recruitment Policy

Pratten v Afrizun KZN (Pty) Ltd (D439/15)

Pratten v Afrizun KZN (Pty) Ltd (D439/15) [2020] ZALCD 9; (2020) 41 ILJ 2899 (LC) (17 April 2020)

Court

Labour Court Durban

Case number

D439/15

Judge

Cele

The Labour Court held that a retrenchment following restructuring was substantively fair, and that psychometric testing used to rank candidates was not an unfair selection method.

• Unfair Dismissal
• Operational Requirements
• Selection Criteria
• Psychometric Testing
• Retrenchment
• Alternatives To Dismissal

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd (Generation, Koeberg Operating Unit) (C636/2014)

National Union of Mineworkers and Others v Eskom Holdings Soc Ltd (Generation, Koeberg Operating Unit) (C636/2014) [2018] ZALCCT 24 (25 July 2018)

Court

Labour Court Cape Town

Case number

C636/2014

Judge

Myburgh

The court found that the 48-month completion clause in the applicants' contracts was directory and not a guarantee, given the unpredictable nature of nuclear reactor operator training and the parties' conduct. Eskom's requirement for psychometric re-assessment was authorised by incorporated policies and procedures, and the applicants were estopped from re-litigating this issue due to the prior CCMA arbitration award. The suspension of the applicants from the training programme pending remediation was lawful, based on expert advice and the need to protect the integrity of the training group. T…

Source excerpt

• Breach Of Employment Contract
• Issue Estoppel
• Psychometric Testing
• Remediation In Training
• Damages Quantification