Please note that this pertains to South African Labour Relations & Best Practice requirements.
So here we are, still at the CCMA arbitration, and now awaiting the verdict of the Commissioner.
Based on the evidence that was presented at the CCMA Arbitration hearing, the Commissioner rejected both claims made by George. You will remember that George stated that he had not received any training in relation to the search procedures and that he actually objected to his being transferred to this particular post.
The Commissioner said that he agreed with Mike’s rule that the searches should be conducted in a certain and specific way and he said that he thought that this was a valid way in which to perform this task. He approved of this particular rule. The Commissioner also said that he agreed that George had failed in his duty has he had not obeyed the rule. A problem arises later on though when the Commissioner decides that George only contravened the rule as a mistake – in other words, it was unintentional. George did not intentionally fail to adhere to laid down procedures – George made a mistake! But I digress and get ahead of myself – let’s return to the story where it is now.
The Commissioner also took into account Section 188(2) of the Labour Relations Act which states “when a person is considering whether the reason for dismissal is a fair reason, he must take into account the Code of Good Practice – Dismissal.”
Next time we will get the final episode on this particular saga.