The Labour Court in Cape Town has reinstated Alistair Steenkamp, a former employee of African Bank Ltd, after ruling that his dismissal for negligence was both procedurally and substantively unfair.
Acting Judge J Duba handed down the decision on 30 May 2025, overturning a prior arbitration award that upheld Steenkamp’s termination. At the time of his dismissal, Steenkamp was earning a monthly salary of R11,140.74 and was represented by the SASBO Finance Union. His employment was terminated following a series of incidents between 2019 and 2020 that were treated as acts of negligence involving company property.
The first incident occurred between 25 and 26 October 2019, when Steenkamp left company speakers, used for marketing, overnight in a vehicle with a leaking roof, resulting in water damage. In a second incident on 28 November 2019, he failed to secure a company laptop, which subsequently went missing. A third charge related to 27 November 2020, when he left a company cellphone in an unlocked car; the device was stolen, resulting in a financial loss of R3,899.00.
Additionally, it was alleged that during 2019, Steenkamp had occasionally parked the company bus at a relative’s home without overnight authorisation, in violation of company policy.
During the disciplinary hearing, Steenkamp pleaded guilty to the first charge of negligence. The chairperson found him guilty on that count and not guilty of misconduct related to unauthorised vehicle use.
Arbitration flaws and delays raise concern
Following his dismissal on 31 March 2021, Steenkamp referred the matter to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), which upheld the dismissal. However, the Labour Court found notable shortcomings in how the disciplinary and arbitration processes were handled.
Judge Duba criticised the delayed disciplinary action, instituted more than a year after the incidents, and questioned the fairness of treating the separate incidents as a continuous pattern of misconduct. The court concluded that this framing unfairly escalated the perceived severity of the charges against Steenkamp.
Progressive discipline and remorse overlooked
The court highlighted the commissioner’s failure to apply the principle of progressive discipline, a key concept in employment law that supports rehabilitative measures over punitive ones in appropriate cases. Judge Duba stressed that Steenkamp had no previous record of misconduct and had shown genuine remorse, both of which should have influenced the decision on an appropriate sanction. “The severity of the disciplinary outcome was not commensurate with the circumstances,” the judgment noted.
Reinstatement and compensation ordered
In a complete reversal of the CCMA’s ruling, the Labour Court ordered that Steenkamp be reinstated with a final written warning. He was also awarded compensation equivalent to six months’ salary for the unfair dismissal.
#Conviction
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel
