Bridgestone SA (Pty) Ltd v Numsa (JA28/15) [2016] ZALAC 40 ; (2016) ILJ 2277 (LAC) (15 June 2016) per Tlaletsi DJP [Musi and Sutherland JJA concurring]

The LAC disallowed the appeal and upheld the judgment of Cele J in the LC.  The award which reinstated the employee was also upheld.  The reason for the dismissal was the use of a cell-phone by a fork-lift driver whilst on duty.  It was strictly forbidden because of the possible danger not only to the driver but also to fellow employees.

LAC summary:

Review of arbitration award – Appropriateness of sanction – commissioner finding that employee’s dismissal not a fair sanction – Role of commissioner regarding sanction restated- commissioner taking into account relevant mitigating factors – award falling within the band of reasonable outcome – Appeal dismissed with costs.

Earlier posts