Solidarity obo Labuschagne v South African Revenue Services (JS 732/11) [2015] ZALCJHB 151; (14 May 2015) per Molahlehi J.

The Labour Court refused to grant the application alleging that the employee was unfairly discriminated against when the interview and selection process was extended and an African female was appointed in her place. It was held that although the extended plan was not formally adopted by Exco or the Commissioner, did not advance the applicant’s case.  It was not disputed that Exco was represented when the resolution was taken. There was also no evidence that Exco or the Commissioner disapproved of the extension of the plan by the EE committee.  This meant that a new plan was used as a guideline in the recruitment process and it was not been disputed that the representation of white females at grade 6 in the CHUT unit was disproportionate to that of African women.  This meant that the appointment of the African female was reasonable, objective and fair. In addition it was not shown that the approach adopted was inherently arbitrary.