Discipline and Dismissal

 KAREN FULTON & EVA MUDELY

Generally, what an employee does after work hours is of no concern to his employer, who has no right to institute disciplinary proceedings against an employee unless it can be shown by the employer that it has some interest in the conduct of the employee outside the workplace. There would normally be such an interest where some nexus exists between the employee's conduct and the employer's business. In the absence of that nexus, the employee's conduct is likely to be non work-related conduct, or, as it is sometimes termed, ''off-the-job conduct".


It has been accepted that where an employee's misconduct occurs off an employer's premises but impacts on the workplace, the employer is entitled to take disciplinary action against the employee. In these circumstances, the employer has to establish that it has a legitimate interest in the matter – for example, the misconduct is disruptive to the employer's business or affects the employer's reputation.


The line between work-related misconduct and non-work related misconduct can sometimes be blurred. Thus, for instance, it may be none of the employer's business when an employee commits a fraud on his home loan application form or vehicle finance application form by inflating his salary. However, if this employee commits such fraud by altering his payslip, the fraud may impact on the reputation of the employer's business.


In cases of off-duty misconduct, where an employee has been found guilty of an act of domestic violence or malicious injury to property, it may be difficult to show that such misconduct impacts on the reputation of the employer's business. However, if the employee concerned is the managing director of a company, the employer may be able to show otherwise. When disciplining an employee for off-duty misconduct, the employer would have to show that the employee's off-duty misconduct is of relevance to the workplace.


Our courts have suggested that a nexus between the employee's off-duty misconduct and the employer's business exists where the employee's conduct has a detrimental or intolerable effect on the efficiency, profitability or continuity of business of the employer. In the case of an employee who is found guilty of, say, drunken driving, it may be difficult to show that such conduct has a negative effect on the business of the employer. However, the situation will be different if the employee concerned holds the position of marketing manager in a company that manufactures alcoholic beverages, and promotes responsible drinking.


In cases of more serious off-duty misconduct, such as murder, rape, attempted murder or attempted rape, where the employee has been arrested by the authorities and not granted bail, the question is not so much about whether or not the employee's off-duty misconduct is of relevance to the workplace, but rather about an employee being absent from work for a protracted period of time.

 

  • Karen Fulton is a director and Eva Mudely a senior associate of Bowman Gilfillan Inc.

  • Our appreciation to Bowman Gilfillan for permission to publish this article.

  • For more information visit http://www.bowman.co.za  

Case Law Summaries and Articles

 

Can employees be dismissed for refusing to accept new terms and conditions of employment?

Can an employer dismiss employees because they refuse to agree to a change to their terms and conditions of employment? An initial answer may be, “yes”.

Read More >>>

 

Escape route: “Resignation with immediate effect”

The latest case in the ‘disciplining employees who have resigned with immediate effect’ saga has brought about more uncertainty as to whether an employee who resigns with immediate effect shortly before a disciplinary hearing can avoid disciplinary action and subsequent dismissal.

Read More >>>

 

Freedom of expression or incitement to commit an offence? A constitutional challenge

On 4 July 2019, the North Gauteng High Court handed down judgment in the case of The EFF and other v Minister of Justice and Constitutional Development and other (87638/2017 and 45666/2017) in which the EFF and Julius Malema (the applicants) sought to have s18(2)(b) of the Riotous Assemblies Act, No 17 of 1956 (Riotous Act) declared unconstitutional.

Read More >>>

 

Consolidated, comprehensive or general final written warnings

Regarding dismissal, according to the Code of Good Practice, “the courts have endorsed the concept of corrective or progressive discipline. This approach regards the purpose of discipline as a means for employees to know and understand what standards are required of them.

Read More >>>

 

 

 

 

 

 

Courses and Workshops

 

                                         

 
 

Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Course

22 August 2019 (Fully Booked)

Tsogo Sun: Century City: Cape Town

12 September 2019

Southern Sun: Maharani Towers: Durban

Employment Equity Committee Training

23 August 2019

Emperors Palace: Convention Centre

29 August 2019 (Fully Booked)

Tsogo Sun: Century City: Cape Town

30 August 2019

Tsogo Sun: Century City: Cape Town

Shop Steward Training

28 August 2019

Emperors Palace Convention Centre

Basic Labour Relations

04 September 2019

Emperors Palace: Convention Centre

The OHS Act and the Responsibilities of Management

13 September 2019

Southern Sun: Maharani Towers: Durban

19 September 2019

Emperors Palace: Convention Centre

  

 Our Clients 

 

Android App On Google Play

Android App On Google Play