Contributors

Following last week's article on the definition and legal consequences of entrapment, this week Ivan Israelstam explains other illegal and unethical practices, which may be used at disciplinary hearings. Under pressure to achieve a dismissal, supervisors and managers may be tempted to use these practices.  However, as Ivan explains they are highly likely to backfire on management.   

At a hearing arranged to discipline an employee both parties are entitled bring witnesses. These witnesses may come from inside or outside the workplace. The accused employee has the right to cross-examine the witnesses brought by the employer. Ivan Israelstam explains further.

"Don't miss the arbitration hearing! It may well continue without you." Good advice from Ivan Israelstam this week. But what should you do if you didn't receive the notice of the arbitration hearing? Ivan explains how to proceed with a rescission application.   

At some time or other, most employers are faced with the decision on whether dishonesty by an employee warrants dismissal. This week Ivan Israelstam explains what the Code of Good Practice Dismissal requires employers to take into account. Ivan also explains the importance of mitigating factors that need to be taken into account before an employer makes the decision to dismiss.

Why is is important that disciplinary action takes place timeously? This week Ivan Israelstam explains how difficult it is to prove that the trust relationship has been broken sufficient to warrant dismissal - if the disciplinary procedure was delayed and the employee was allowed to continue working.

This week Ivan Israelstam explains the concept of double jeopardy, and why it is important that employers understand what it is, and how to avoid actions that count as double jeopardy.  

Fines of up to R1 500 000 require desperate measures from defaulting employers reports Ivan Israelstam. The Department of Labour Employment Equity Division is very serious about getting designated employers to comply with the requirements of the Employment Equity Act. If you have failed to meet the 15 January 2018 deadline for online reporting, then read on for Ivan's advice. 

Sex related acts not always sexual harassment - that is the outcome of a case Ivan Israelstam examines this week.  This case indicates how important it is to ensure that disciplinary action is taken timeously.  A delay - and allowing the employee to continue working - would indicate that the trust relationship is not broken. Therefore, dismissal may be found to be unfair.

At this time of year, all employers who are "designated employers" in terms of the Employment Equity Act should be finalising their EE reports (EEA2 and EEA4) for submission before 15th January 2018. Therefore, this week's article by Ivan Israelstam is of great interest.  He explains why a Chinese employee is included for the definition of previously disadvantage, how the cases based upon affirmative action have been decided, and points out the very large penalty for a first offence of non-submission of the EE report.

Ivan Israelstam explains the many ways that communication can go astray between the CCMA and the employer - and the very expensive consequences of the mis-communication.  This week Ivan explains why it is essential for business owners and executives to take labour law seriously and ensure that all management and supervisory levels understand how to manage employees within the law. 

This week Ivan Israelstam explains why it is necessary to ensure that no names with racial meanings are used at the workplace. Also why it is important that employers investigate any allegations of racism at the workplace. Decisions of the Labour Court and a Bargaining Council provide good guidance.

This week Ivan Israelstam pays attention to the use of labour brokers and temporary employment service agencies (TES). There are many reasons why employers make this decision on how to fill their company needs. But are there risks to using these services, instead of employing people on the company payroll as permanent employees? Read on for further details.  

This week Ivan Israelstam covers disciplinary hearings. What should an employer take into account when an employee does not attend a disciplinary hearing, and what does the law say about employees who deliberately try to delay the disciplinary hearing from proceeding? 

This week Ivan Israelstam looks at the cases of alleged sexual harassment.  Questions answered are: how should an employer respond to sexual harassment allegations by an employee, and what are the obligations placed upon an employer?   

What is the procedure for an arbitration? Must I take my witnesses along with me? Must I take the evidence - the documents/video recordings along to the CCMA with me? This week Ivan Israelstam makes clear exactly how the CCMA Commissioner will run the arbitration.  The following questions are answered: who speaks first, what do the participants present, what is the role of the witnesses, and how is the evidence presented?  

This week Ivan Israelstam explains why it is important for employers to understand the rights of pregnant women and the responsibilities of the employer. How should the employer deal with maternity leave? There is an entitlement for 4 months maternity leave and employees should not be pressured to take a shorter period of maternity leave. 

This week Ivan Israelstam provides a comprehensive explanation on what is required to investigate allegations of misconduct.  Ivan points out that ignoring incidents represents poor management, but before acting upon allegations of misconduct, it is important to conduct investigation into the all the relevant evidence of misconduct. 

This week Ivan Israelstam addresses the danger of an approach used by some employers, who have not effectively managed performance and behaviour. To remove "troublesome" employees - who should have been disciplined or performance managed - the employer goes to great lengths to manipulate positions, and to create a redeployment pool, which effectively amounts to a redundancy pool. Ivan demonstrates how the Labour Appeal Court has the power to uncover alternative agenda, and the consequences of such poor management performance. 

This week Ivan Israelstam persuades employers to protect themselves by joining an employer organisation - so that they have protection at the CCMA. Ivan expresses the opinion that labour law provides very little protection for employers and that the protection of employees has been increasing over time. He provides examples from the cases.

Many employers will be able to provide examples of how employees ignore or don't comply with requests or instructions. When does failure to comply with instructions constitute sufficient grounds for dismissal?  This week Ivan Israelstam quotes from actual CCMA cases, where employees have been re-instated. Ivan highlights the challenge employers face - achieving a fair dismissal acceptable to the CCMA.