A Limpopo school teacher who approached the Labour Court in Johannesburg to fight her two months’ suspension without pay lost her appeal. Picture: Pexels
A Limpopo school teacher who approached the Labour Court in Johannesburg to fight his two months’ suspension without pay, had his appeal dismissed after the acting judge found that the sanction was fair.
Vonani Arone Mukhari has been working as a teacher at Nkuzana Primary School in Khomanani since 1986.
Mukhari has been engaged in a four-year-long battle with the school after the school’s internal disciplinary committee found him guilty of insubordination in August 2020.
It was said that between January 2018 and March 2018, Mukhari displayed disrespect towards others in the workplace and faced four charges.
He was charged for disrespecting the principal after he told her that she was not “Alpha and Omega”.
“You told the HOD, Mrs Maluleke T.N that the learners must be helped at home by their parents,” read the court papers.
It was further added that he refused to to accept the curriculum package from the school administrator and he added that he was not going to abide by the management plan because it was not helpful to him.
A disciplinary hearing was held in March 2020 and in August 2020, he was found guilty of three charges and was cleared against disrespecting the principal.
He faced a sanction of two months suspension without pay and a final written warning was also imposed.
He unsuccessfully appealed the findings and sanction internally.
Undeterred, he approached the Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) in March 2021. The ELRC ruled that the outcome and sanction was fair and that no unfair labour practice was committed.
He took the matter to the labour court where it was heard by acting judge Luit de Haan.
The acting judge said Mukhari gave contracting evidence as to why he refused to accept the curriculum package and his argument had no merit.
Additionally, she said Mukhari’s refusal to attend the parent-teacher meeting while no exams were actually being written at the time, was a direct challenge to the authority of both the principal and the HOD.
She said his repeated refusal to comply, even after the HOD addressed the matter with him, serves as aggravation.
She further added that the fact that he was not dismissed, his sanction was lenient.
“I can find no grounds in the papers or in law for interfering with it (sanction). I therefore can’t fault the arbitrator on this score.
“Having considered that there is an ongoing employment relationship between the applicant (Mukhari) and the third respondent and the requirements of law and fairness ... I am of the view that a cost order is not merited,” read the judgment.
sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za
IOL News