SA Police Service v Psa of SA (DA01/2014) [2015] ZALAC 16 (24 April 2015) per Davis JA.
An employee who had been substituted for appointment in order to address representivity referred an unfair discrimination dispute and disputed the existence of an appropriate employment equity plan. The Labour Court found that an equity plan did not exist and that the employer did not consult about the adoption of the plan. But the Labour Appeal Court found that the evidence showed that extensive consultation did take place with organised labour and that in fact there was an equity plan. The evidence also showed that the employer’s equity plan addressed classes of victims of past unfair discrimination. The equity plan met the objectives as set out in two landmark cases and the appeal was allowed with costs. This meant that the Labour Court’s judgment was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the application of the trade union with costs.
Reported [2015] 8 BLLR 805;
Discrimination – Members of designated groups – Indian male complaining that he was victim of unfair discrimination because African male preferred for appointment – Nothing preventing employees from choosing between groups on basis of degrees of under-representation in workforce
(2015) 36 ILJ 1828; [2015] JOL 33218 (LAC)