- In the case of Chauke & Others v Lee Service Centre CC t/a Leeson Motors (1999), the employer dismissed 20 employees for misconduct in a situation where management was unable to pinpoint the actual perpetrator.
- The employer operated a panel beating shop where it repaired and spray painted accident damaged vehicles. Some of these vehicles became the target of malicious acts of sabotage. Although management could prove that the damage was committed by one or more of the employees, they were unable to identify which employee(s) where guilty.Management asked the staff to assist in identifying which employee(s) were guilty.
- When the staff failed to co-operate they were dismissed.
- The Labour Appeal Court agreed with the employer’s decision.
Employment Practices Liability
This policy covers an employer’s legal expenses and the awards made against it by the CCMA, Bargaining Councils and Labour Court for unfair labour practices such as unfair dismissal, sexual harassment, discrimination and failure to employ.
Question: Example 1 – Illustrate Derivative Misconduct?