Worker Gets R105K After Labour Court Finds His Dismissal Unfair Over Refusal to Take Polygraph Test
- A Johannesburg Labour Court dismissed a company's bid to overturn a CCMA ruling against it
- The case centred on an IT technician who was dismissed after refusing a polygraph test following a vehicle accident
- Acting Judge Van Voore found the employer had no valid or reasonable basis for demanding the polygraph exam
PAY ATTENTION: Mark Briefly News as a preferred source, and our content will appear higher in your Google feed!
Source: Getty Images
A Johannesburg Labour Court has dismissed an application by a company to overturn a CCMA ruling, confirming a R105,900 compensation award for a former IT technician whose dismissal was found to be substantively unfair.
The case began in February 2022, after the employee, identified as SZ, was involved in a vehicle accident. He requested leave on 14 February to deal with repairs and insurance matters, but his employer denied the request and told him to handle it from the office. SZ took the day off regardless, visited a doctor at around 3:15 PM, underwent X-rays, and returned with a valid medical certificate covering five days of sick leave.
Employer's suspicion leads to polygraph demand
Because the doctor's appointment came after his leave request had already been turned down, the employer suspected the sick note was obtained simply to avoid unpaid leave. When SZ returned to work on 21 February, the company issued him a written warning for lateness and instructed him to submit to a polygraph examination, citing a clause in his employment contract that permitted such requests.
PAY ATTENTION: You can now search for all your favourite news and topics on Briefly News.
SZ refused. He argued there was no reasonable basis for the demand and raised questions about the scientific reliability of polygraph testing. The company responded by charging him with insubordination and contract repudiation, and dismissed him on 28 February 2022.
Court finds dismissal unjustified
The CCMA initially ruled in SZ's favour, and Acting Judge Van Voore upheld that decision in the Labour Court review. The court found that the employer had failed to establish any valid or reasonable justification for invoking the polygraph clause. Crucially, the employer had never challenged the authenticity or validity of the medical certificate itself, meaning suspicion about the timing of the doctor's visit was not enough to prove misconduct.
Because the instruction to undergo polygraph testing was deemed unreasonable, SZ's refusal could not be classified as insubordination or a breach of his employment contract. The court further noted that contractual clauses do not give employers an unlimited right to demand polygraph testing without proper grounds.
The review application was dismissed, the R105,900 award was confirmed, and no order was made as to costs.
Source: Getty Images
More on South African court cases
- Briefly News recently reported on Skeem Saam actress Makgofe Moagi, who allegedly opened a domestic violence case against her husband.
- A Gauteng High Court ruling dealt with a taxi boss’s attempt to stop WhatsApp messages from being used by the Madlanga Commission.
- EFF leader Julius Malema has been granted leave to appeal his firearm convictions, opening another legal avenue in his case.
PAY ATTENTION: Follow Briefly News on Twitter and never miss the hottest topics! Find us at @brieflyza!
Source: Briefly News
