A recent Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) case had to consider whether the employees were fairly dismissed for gross insubordination.<\/p>\n
According to Jacques van Wyk, director at Werksmans Attorneys, the applicants were all media specialists in SABC’s department of marketing services.<\/p>\n
“Mr Mulaudzi, the group executive for Commercial Enterprises was tasked with reviewing the performance of certain divisions within SABC, one such division being the marketing services division,” he explained.<\/p>\n
“Mulaudzi instructed the applicants to do an individual presentation of their work done for the period April to September 2016, to assess their performance.<\/p>\n
“Mulaudzi drew up a template to be used by the applicants for their presentation. Prior to the date of the presentation, the applicant’s raised a concern regarding the management style of Ms Kikine, to whom the applicants reported. This concern was not addressed. On the day of the presentation, the applicants again raised their concern with regards to Ms Kikine and no presentation took place.”<\/p>\n
According to van Wyk the presentation was postponed for a week.<\/p>\n
On the following date of the presentation, Mulaudzi continuously attempted to persuade the applicants to do their presentations, but they refused to do so.<\/p>\n
Instead,\u00a0the applicants insisted that their concerns regarding Ms Kikine be addressed before they undertook to do their presentations. Mulaudzi regarded the applicants’ refusal as insubordination.<\/p>\n
CCMA<\/strong><\/p>\n One of the employees, Ms Hoohlo testified that they were never asked to do presentations in the past, said van Wyk.<\/p>\n She further testified that on the day of the presentation, the applicants were ready to present, but would not do so until their concerns were addressed.<\/p>\n “The Commissioner held that Mulaudzi’s instruction was neither unfair nor unlawful, and was given in clear terms<\/strong>,” said van\u00a0Wyk.<\/p>\n “The Commissioner assessed the meaning of ‘gross’ as denoting conduct that is so reckless as to demonstrate a substantial lack of concern for one’s obligations and whether injury or loss results<\/strong>.”<\/p>\n As such the Commissioner held that the applicants’ actions were a deliberate and gross challenge to Mulaudzi’s authority, and thus constituted gross insubordination.<\/p>\n The Commissioner further concluded that the applicants’ conduct could not be condoned, as they were acutely aware of what was required of them – as such the dismissal of the applicants was procedurally and substantively fair.<\/p>\n
\n