All too often employers are expected to be technically correct when drafting disciplinary charges. But is this fair to the employer? What if the employee has not been prejudiced?
It is the breakdown of the relationship of trust that normally justifies termination of employment in cases of employee misconduct. How serious must that breakdown be? Does the employer have to prove such breakdown of trust to justify dismissal?
When employers restructure in order to improve efficiencies, it leads to redundancies. Redundancies can lead to retrenchment, but not necessarily. This is where employers often get it wrong.
Occasionally a customer or other external party is witness to employee misconduct. It may be necessary for such person to give evidence in disciplinary proceedings. If the employee challenges the outcome of the hearing, such evidence may also be needed in arbitration proceedings. But what if the person does not want to get involved? Is hearsay evidence allowed?
When it comes to retrenchment, employers tend to make the mistake of announcing their decision to retrench before consulting with the affected employees or their union. Confronting employees with a fait accompli can be fatal to the process. But does this mean that an employer may not form any opinion before consulting?
In a disciplinary hearing an employee has the right to be heard before being judged. But does an employee have the right to be heard before being suspended pending the outcome of the hearing? Against the background of conflicting case law, the Constitutional Court has finally brought about some clarity on pre-suspension hearings.
Employers were expecting the minimum wage rates in the Wholesale and Retail Sector to be increased with effect from 1 March 2019 – this did not happen.
Adherents to certain religions are reluctant to work on their sabbath or other holy days. But what if such a refusal clashes with the employer’s operational needs?
The national minimum wage (NMW) has been signed into law. Effective 1 January 2019. What exactly does this mean to employers and employees?
A recent Labour Court judgement highlighted the importance of respecting an employee’s home language and right to an interpreter in a disciplinary hearing. But what if the disciplinary hearing is conducted in English and the employee is proficient in English?
People may no longer be prosecuted for cultivating, possessing and using small amounts of dagga for private purposes. But what are the consequences for the workplace?
Can employees escape the consequences of their actions by resigning with immediate effect? There has been uncertainty about an employer’s right to proceed with disciplinary action after an employee’s resignation ‘with immediate effect’ but a judgement of the Labour Court in Cape Town has brought about much needed clarity.
When the CCMA makes an award for the reinstatement of an employee who has been unfairly dismissed or suspended, it seldom goes down well. But what happens if the employer ignores the award?
Employers must exercise their disciplinary powers in a consistent manner. The primary reason for requiring employers to act consistently when instituting disciplinary action or meting out disciplinary sanctions, is to ensure that they do not act arbitrarily. In other words, like cases must be treated alike.
South Africans were expecting that a national minimum wage (NMW) would be implemented on 1 May 2018. This did not happen, but the NMW is still likely to be implemented during the course of this year. We can also expect some other changes to labour legislation. How will this affect employers and employees?