The Public Service Act, 1994 [Proclamation 103 of 1994] is intended to assist the government when employees absent themselves from work or assume other employment. Section 17(3), which replaced s 17(5), means that, subject to certain exceptions and conditions, employees who are absent from their official duties without permission for more than one calendar month are deemed to have been dismissed from the public service on account of misconduct with effect from the date immediately succeeding their last day of attendance at their place of duty. In addition if such employees assume other employment they are deemed to have been dismissed irrespective of whether the said period has expired or not.
Now that the Labour Appeal Court (LAC) has replaced the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) as the highest court of appeal in labour matters there must be some consternation in legal and other circles when the SCA overturns a decision of the LAC. This happened last week.
in Solidarity obo Kotze v PHWSBC (Dept of Health, Free State) (442/13) [2014] ZASCA 70 (28 May 2014) in which the SCA upheld the dissenting judgment of Acting Justice of Appeal John Murphy and not the majority judgment of the current Judge President and Deputy Judge President of the LAC in Solidarity obo Kotze v PHWSBC (Dept of Health, Free State) [2013] 4 BLLR 362 (LAC). The majority in the LAC had upheld the judgment of Justice Molahlehi in the Labour Court Solidarity obo Kotze v PHWSBC (Dept of Health, Free State) [2010] 11 BLLR 1203 (LC), which in turn upheld the ruling of the arbitrator that the bargaining council lacked jurisdiction to deal with the dispute.