Limpopo man fights for job after losing position due to CCMA dispute with former employer
A Limpopo man who was rejected as a potential employee by the Limpopo Gambling Board (LGB) had his application dismissed by the Labour Court in Johannesburg.
Johannes Motatetsi Mantsho applied for a job as a company secretary at the LGB after a position was advertised in November 2018.
He was shortlisted and attended an interview in February 2019. The interview panel noted that he met the minimum requirements of the position and had approximately five years of relevant experience.
However, the panel expressed concern about his employment history, which indicated frequent movement between positions, raising doubts about his long-term commitment.
The panel resolved that reference checks should be conducted on all shortlisted candidates before a final recommendation was made.
In May 2019, information gathered during the reference checks revealed that at the time of his resignation from the North West Gambling Board (NWGB), Mantsho had referred a dispute to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA). However, details of the dispute were not disclosed.
There were further unproven allegations that he had been facing a disciplinary hearing at the NWGB at the time of his resignation.
As a result, Mantsho was informed that his application was unsuccessful. He requested written reasons, and he was provided.
He referred a dispute to the CCMA and the matter remained unresolved. He then referred the matter to arbitration. In February 2023, the arbitrator ruled that the CCMA lacked jurisdiction and directed the dispute to the Labour Court.
In court, Mantsho argued that he was unfairly discriminated against based on false information. He maintained that he was the best candidate for the position, and because of the misrepresentation regarding his resignation from the NWGB, he lost the position.
He argued that the decision not to appoint him was irrational and procedurally flawed, and that the re-advertisement of the position was a disguised attempt to conceal irregularities in the process.
In response, LGB argued that Mantsho’s referral to arbitration was defective, as it failed to meet Section 10(6)(a)(ii) of the Employment Equity Act.
According to the section, an employee can refer an unresolved unfair discrimination dispute to the CCMA for arbitration if that employee earns below a specific earnings threshold set by the Minister of Labour.
Presiding over the matter, acting judge Suhayl Rajah noted that evidence shows that LGB also considered his employment history, his five years of experience, his tendency to move between jobs, and LGB’s assessment that all candidates were better suited to advisory roles.
Judge Rajah said the record shows that LGB made several considerations before coming to an informed conclusion.
Additionally, he said Mantsho’s argument that the re-advertisement of the post was a disguised attempt to conceal irregularities, was not supported by any evidence.
“There is no sufficient basis to conclude that the readvertisement was motivated by an ulterior purpose or that it rendered the process procedurally unfair.
“The court is of the view that the decision not to appoint the applicant was lawful, rational, and valid. It does not fall to be reviewed or set aside,” said the judge.
The application was dismissed with no costs.
sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za
IOL News
Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel.