SUMMARY Glencore Holdings (Pty) Limited (“the Employer”) dismissed Sibeko (“the Employee”) following an investigation in which it was discovered that the Employee had failed to follow stipulated workplace protocol, namely for failing to wear ear muffs. The Employee chose to refer the matter to arbitration, as he was adamant that he was not guilty of
SUMMARY The factual background from which this judgment arises concerns an Automatically Unfair Dismissal dispute. Sky Services (Pty) Limited (“the Employer”) dismissed S N (“the Employee”) following a comprehensive enquiry into the health of the Employee in which he was declared unfit to work as a packer. At the heart of the Employee’s contention was
SUMMARY This is a review application of an arbitration award in an unfair dismissal disciplinary dispute. Lebogang Teteme (“Third Respondent”) was employed as a drill rig supervisor and was dismissed for failing to adhere to safety working procedures. Despite other employees committing the same violation, he was singled out by the employer and dismissed. The
SUMMARY This matter concerns a review application brought about by Moeti John Lesedi (the “Applicant”) who is reviewing an arbitration order made by the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (the “CCMA”), who is the First Respondent in the matter and Commissioner Timothy Boyce (the “Second Respondent”). The Applicant’s review application concerns Dischem Pharmacies (the
SUMMARY In 2006 the Twincare International (Pty) Ltd (“Twincare 1”) entered into an employment agreement with Deborah Nel (“Nel”), containing confidentiality and restraint of trade clauses. As an employee of Twincare, Nel was involved in the education of staff members of Twincare’s clients regarding the various beauty and skincare products that Twincare produces. In 2013,
BACKGROUND In this case the First Respondent being a Mr Godfrey Motsa (“Motsa”) resigned as a senior executive employee of the Applicant being Vodacom (Pty) Ltd (“Vodacom”) and took up employment with the Second Respondent being, MTN Group LTD (“MTN”). Motsa was employed by Vodacom in or during January 2007. On or about 23 December
SUMMARY The factual matrix from which this judgment arises concerns a retrenchment dispute. The matter pivoting on the consultation process adopted by Oyster Box Hotel (Pty) Ltd (the “Employer”), SACCAWU obo Bongumusa Mvuyana (the “Trade Union”) disputing the Employer’s compliance with the consultation process stipulated in S189(2) of the Labour Relations Act No. 66 of
SUMMARY In August 2015, Ms Mokwena (the Respondent) instituted an action in the Land Claims Court (the LCC) claiming an order that she be declared a labour tenant under the Land Reform (Labour Tenant) Act 3 of 1996 (the LTA). She further claimed that she be awarded a portion of Portion 50 of the farm
SUMMARY – Background to Review This is an opposed review application of an award in which the arbitrator found that the third respondent, Mr I Juries (‘Juries’), was dismissed by the applicant (‘Unitrans’) unfairly because he did not deliberately falsify payroll information which caused a shop steward, Mr G Coetzee (‘Coetzee’), to receive additional remuneration
SUMMARY This matter concerns the First Respondent’s award finding that the dismissal of the Fourth Respondent was substantively unfair, ordering his reinstatement. The Applicant sought an order setting aside the award, while the Fourth Respondent applied for the award to be made an order of court. The Fourth Respondent’s dismissal arose from his failure to