A senior lecturer at the Central Johannesburg TVET College has failed in his bid to overturn his dismissal after an Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) arbitrator found that he had acted improperly towards a student and that the sanction of dismissal was fair.

John Kubasa Vike, who had been employed by the Gauteng Department of Higher Education and Training since 2012, was dismissed following a disciplinary hearing in May 2024. His appeal against the sanction was rejected in July 2025, prompting him to refer an unfair dismissal dispute to the ELRC.

At the time of his dismissal, Vike was a senior lecturer at the college’s Langlaagte Campus.

The charge against him arose from an incident in April 2023, when he was accused of making unwelcome sexual suggestions to a student by asking about her availability for a long weekend and confirming her cellphone number.

Testifying under oath, the student said that after a morning lecture she was asked by Vike to help him carry papers to his office. On the way, he asked whether she was available for the upcoming long weekend and whether the phone number on her student file was correct. When she questioned why he needed this information, he became annoyed, grabbed the papers from her and walked off.

She told the arbitrator that she became distressed and later confronted Vike when he pleaded with her not to report the incident.

The student said she was discouraged by the campus manager from reporting the matter and only wrote a statement later after seeking help from her uncle. She denied that the interaction was a joke and said the questions had nothing to do with her studies.

She further alleged that after the incident, Vike made her uncomfortable in class, mocked the case, and that other staff members warned her that pursuing the complaint might affect her marks.

Meanwhile, the disciplinary chairperson told the arbitration that Vike never denied asking about the student’s availability or contact details and failed to explain any academic purpose for the questions. He said the conduct was assessed against the South African Council for Educators (SACE) Code of Ethics, which prohibits educators from “courting learners”.

The disciplinary chairperson said that Vike did not apologise but merely begged the student not to pursue the complaint and continued to trivialise the matter as a “joke”.

In his defence, Vike disputed the student’s version, saying the conversation was innocent and initiated by her, and that he never used the word “available”. He claimed he had gone to apologise but that the student reacted aggressively. He also alleged bias by the disciplinary chairperson.

However, during cross-examination, he was confronted with his own written statement, in which he had recorded that he was “available”. He struggled to explain why key aspects of his version were not put to the student when she testified.

In a detailed award, Commissioner Sally-Jean Pabst found the student’s version more credible and said Vike had introduced a “new and fresh” account only during arbitration.

The commissioner held that the lecturer had indeed made an improper advance towards the student and that such conduct is expressly prohibited by the SACE Code of Ethics because of the inherent power imbalance between lecturers and students.

The arbitrator concluded that dismissal was an appropriate sanction, noting the seriousness of the misconduct, the harm caused, and Vike’s failure to show remorse or insight.

It was ruled that Vike’s dismissal was both substantively and procedurally fair and dismissed his unfair dismissal application.

sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za

IOL News

Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel. 

Source link