- A Shoprite cash office clerk who lost her job after R10,000 went missing has been reinstated, as the Labour Court found her dismissal unjustified.
- Shoprite could not prove there was a workplace rule requiring her to lock the safe whenever leaving the cash office.
- The Court ruled that her actions did not amount to gross negligence and that dismissing her was too harsh a penalty.
A Shoprite employee with nearly 30 years of service has successfully fought to keep her job after a court found her dismissal unfair.
Thandeka Mabel Ngcobo, who began working at Shoprite in 1988 and rose to become a Cash Office Clerk in 2003, was dismissed in November 2017 after R10,000 went missing from a safe under her responsibility.
Shoprite did not accuse Ngcobo of stealing the money, but held her responsible for leaving the safe unlocked while she briefly stepped out of the cash office.
After the CCMA ruled that her dismissal was unfair and ordered her reinstatement with back pay, Shoprite took the matter to the Labour Court in Durban, hoping to overturn the decision. Judge K Allen-Yaman, however, dismissed Shoprite’s application, upholding the order to reinstate Ngcobo.
Events leading to dismissal
On 3 November 2017, Ngcobo was working alongside a trainee manager, Ntombifuthi Buthelezi. Shortly before 5pm, Ngcobo left the cash office to use the bathroom, leaving Buthelezi alone. The next day, during a cash handover, the R10,000 shortfall was discovered.
An internal investigation followed, including polygraph tests for staff with access to the cash office, but Buthelezi was not tested. Shoprite accepted that Ngcobo had not taken the money, but charged her with gross negligence for not locking the safe.
At her disciplinary hearing, Ngcobo was found guilty and dismissed. The outcome read: "You left the cash office without securing the safe, which you were responsible for. The mere fact that you failed to follow simple rules, such as locking the safe and keeping the keys with you, cannot be denied, and has resulted in gross negligence."
Court finds no clear workplace rule
The Labour Court identified major flaws in Shoprite’s case, finding no written policy or rule requiring cash office employees to lock the safe whenever they left. Judge Allen-Yaman noted, “The source of the rule was not explained.” No evidence was provided to show Ngcobo was aware of such a rule.
Ngcobo testified that it was common for staff to leave the safe unlocked during working hours and only lock it when leaving for the day. “It wasn’t the first time I left the safe; all of us leave the safe,” she told the arbitration hearing. “Even Ms Skye Jones and all that, they say, ‘We leave the safe, but we trust one another’, and nothing happened at all.”
No proof of gross negligence
The court also rejected Shoprite's claim that Ngcobo was grossly negligent. Judge Allen-Yaman found that it was never established who took the money, nor that leaving the safe unlocked directly caused the loss. The court accepted that Ngcobo could not have foreseen that the trainee manager would take the cash.
“The consequences which ensued were not patently foreseeable,” the judge said. The ruling concluded that Ngcobo’s actions did not even meet the lower threshold of simple negligence, let alone gross negligence.
Long service and clean record overlooked
Judge Allen-Yaman also pointed out that Shoprite failed to properly consider Ngcobo’s 29 years of unblemished service and her difficult personal circumstances. She was the sole breadwinner in her family and, at 53, would struggle to find new employment.
The court found no evidence that the working relationship was damaged beyond repair or that dismissal was the only available sanction.
In the end, the court ruled that the CCMA’s decision to reinstate Ngcobo was reasonable. “The award does not fall to be reviewed and set aside,” Judge Allen-Yaman said. Shoprite’s application was dismissed, and no order was made regarding legal costs.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
