CCMA and the Law - with Craig Berkowitz

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 19 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 5

  • @mrb2643
    @mrb2643 3 года назад +1

    The LAC found that the evidence showed that the employee did suffer from depression. However, the employee failed to present compelling evidence to show that he was dismissed for being depressed. Due to the nature of the employee's misconduct, the employer therefore had a legitimate reason for instituting disciplinary proceedings against him.

  • @pogisojacobmatlala9504
    @pogisojacobmatlala9504 4 года назад +1

    I'd like to disagree with what Graig said about giving the employee opportunity to give reasons why they shouldn't be suspended. The Constitutional Court in Long v South African Breweries (Pty) Ltd and Others [2018] ZACC 7, recently held that ‘there is no requirement’ for an employer to afford an employee an opportunity to make representations why the employee should not be suspended (in the case of precautionary suspensions), prior to suspending the employee.

    • @ohmsm.kayama4679
      @ohmsm.kayama4679 3 года назад

      Hi Pagiso, I suspect that Mr. Craig's opinion regarding the issue of affording Audi before precautionary suspension was given prior to the Constitutional court judgement in Long as it were.

  • @johanvandeventer3784
    @johanvandeventer3784 6 лет назад

    Refuse of leave what and update of Contract after 3 years from general worker to driver