Tag: HRManagement

Personal problems rarely stay at home. In modern workplaces, financial pressure, emotional stress, family responsibilities and health concerns often spill into performance, morale and team dynamics. As a result, employers must balance operational demands with empathy, fairness and legal compliance.

The concept of insubordination means ‘refusal to obey a lawful and reasonable instruction’. Gross insubordination can be a ground for dismissal. However, the employer has the onus of proving that the act was, in fact, one of insubordination and that it was gross (very serious). An employer’s belief that insubordination has occurred can easily trigger an emotional response from the executive who issued the instruction.

The Labour Appeal Court (LAC) has handed down a significant decision addressing a question that many employers and legal practitioners regularly confront. Can a disciplinary chairperson reject a lenient sanction emerging from a plea-bargaining process? The LAC answered this question in South African Police Services vs Mkonto and Others. The judgment also highlights the limits of leniency within disciplinary proceedings.

People are the beating heart of every business. They bring perspective, ingenuity, skills and experience that help organisations excel and deliver results. However, employment relationships do not always work out. A person may not suit their role and responsibilities. They may also fail to align with the company culture or behave poorly in the workplace.

When arbitrators and judges assess whether a dismissal was fair, they must apply the objective test. In simple terms, they must decide whether a reasonable person would conclude that the conduct justified dismissal. This assessment must remain unemotional and evidence-based. However, misunderstanding the objective test often leads to incorrect conclusions.

In many organisations, operational breakdowns do not stem from incompetence. Instead, they stem from unclear responsibility. When problems arise in the workplace, the most common explanations are predictable: “I thought HR was dealing with that”, “Management should have handled it”, or “That’s not my function”.

South African labour law is often accused of being “too employee-friendly”. Employers complain that the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) favours workers, that dismissal has become impossible, and that labour regulation is strangling business.

Section 187(2)(b) of the Labour Relations Act (LRA) provides that a dismissal may be fair if the employee has reached the normal or agreed retirement age. This means termination based on the employee’s age might not constitute unfair discrimination if the employee has reached retirement age.This distinction is important. It is crucial when considering dismissals that occur after an employee has passed retirement age.