- Nepotism in Perspective
- Absentieesm Management: Putting the Wagon behind the Horse
- Non disclosure at Job Interviews
- Double Jeopardy
- Probation in a nutshell
- Resination: A Unilateral Act
- Land Reform for farmers
- The Marikana experience
- The self-supervising employee
- Constructive dismissal
- The New Revolution in Labour
- Under the influence
- Equal Pay
- Non Disclosure

The self-supervising employee

The issue of the requirements of a fair dismissal for poor work performance came to play in a decision of the CCMA in the case of Harding vs The Congress of the People (COPE) (2011) 20 CCMA 8.1.1. In this case the employee’s job description as office manager provided broadly, amongst others, that he was to oversee and manage all aspects of the day to day operations of the party and to ensure that the operations were in line with strategy. The employee was appointed in the light of his previous experience as a senior employee of another political party. The employee did not dispute that the tasks in question were his responsibility, but argued that he was not responsible for the overall weakness in the administration system. The commissioner found that the employer knew that there were problems in the administration much earlier and that the employer had still not paid the required attention to the issues of office management. It looked like the organization as a whole and the other managers simply abandoned their responsibility to ensure that the office manager is held accountable for doing the work. The commissioner found that the employer had simply left the employee to his own devices and never brought any of the performance issues to his attention. No attempt was made to guide or correct the employee’s performance. Although the facts of the case are of an extreme nature, it serves as an eye opener to employers appointing employees into senior positions upon the assumption that they are self – supervising based upon previous experience. It highlights the importance of the substantive requirement for a fair dismissal based upon poor work performance: that the employee was given a fair opportunity to meet the required performance standard. (Sec 9 (b)(ii) of the Code of Good Practise: Dismissal). It also highlights the importance of job descriptions, formulated key performance areas or indicators to measure the performance of employees in administrative, clerical and managerial positions and sends a warning to seniors higher up in the hierarchy of authority: You cannot sit back and wait for things to go wrong without having at least brought your poor work performance concerns to the attention of the underperforming sub – ordinate!

Please CLICK HERE to send us your comments on this article!