- Labour Court dismissed former municipal traffic manager's late review application.
- Judgment details alleged R5,000 cold drink money scheme at Stilfontein testing station.
- Court found misconduct amounted to malfeasance, a gross abuse of power and a breach of trust
A former City of Matlosana traffic manager’s attempt to get his job back has failed. The Labour Court in Johannesburg found he was involved in a R5,000 cold drink money scheme, where a motorist allegedly paid for a licence without taking a driving test.
Acting Judge D Cithi also found that Ronald Allen Erens waited more than 10 months to challenge the arbitration award upholding his dismissal, and that his explanation for the delay was unacceptable.
Whistleblower exposed alleged licence scheme
Erens was employed as a Management Representative at the Stilfontein Traffic Department, where he supervised the testing station, allocated work to driving licence examiners and monitored their performance.
Under the service level agreement between the municipality and the North West Provincial Government, management representatives were prohibited from conducting driving tests while examiners were on duty unless the Assistant Director first obtained provincial authorisation.
The matter began after an anonymous whistleblower alleged that Erens had fraudulently issued three driver's licences during November 2016 and accepted bribes in return. A SAPS detective investigated the allegations by collecting licence application forms, testing sheets, identity documents and witness statements.
The investigation found that Erens had prepared the duty roster assigning two examiners to conduct tests on 18 November 2016 before later reallocating two of those tests to himself. He also requested authority to conduct the tests without the knowledge or approval of Assistant Director Shaya Muntu, despite Muntu being the only official authorised to make such a request.
Alleged R5,000 cold drink money
The allegations centred on Nombulelo Elsie Mokoena, who testified that she initially attended AA Driving School but, because she was heavily pregnant, was advised not to book a driving test. She later approached He & She Driving School, where an instructor identified in the judgment only as Shadrack allegedly introduced her to a plan to obtain a licence.
According to her evidence, Shadrack asked whether she had the "cold drink money" needed to secure the driver's licence. The amount was R5,000.
After agreeing to pay, Mokoena was allocated a test date for 18 November 2016. She testified that she handed the cash to Shadrack, who took it into the testing station before returning and telling her everything had been arranged. She later met Erens, signed documents, had her photograph taken and was issued with a temporary licence without ever completing a driving test.
Investigators also discovered that the testing sheet reflected she had supposedly used a white Nissan Cabstar belonging to Ntaoleng Joyce Kameta, owner of Orkney Driving School.
Kameta told investigators that her truck never left her premises on the day and was being used for driving lessons. The court also noted that Kameta and Mokoena did not know each other, while Erens had known Kameta for more than 20 years and that they belonged to the same church congregation.
Dismissal upheld
Erens was charged with gross dishonesty for allegedly soliciting R5,000 in exchange for issuing a driver's licence, and with dishonesty for falsely recording that Mokoena had completed a driving test and for allocating the test to himself without authority.
He was found guilty and dismissed on 9 April 2019. A commissioner of the South African Local Government Bargaining Council later ruled that the dismissal was substantively fair.
Court rejects delay explanation
Erens launched review proceedings only in August 2020, more than 10 months after the statutory deadline. He argued that he delayed because his lawyers advised him to wait for the outcome of his criminal prosecution, which arose from the same facts. The criminal case ended when he was discharged under section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Act after the State closed its case.
He maintained that because the disciplinary hearing, arbitration and criminal prosecution relied on the same evidence, the criminal outcome showed the bargaining council commissioner had been wrong. Judge Cithi rejected the explanation.
"The explanation proffered by the Applicant, that he had to await the outcome of his criminal case before instituting review proceedings, is flawed and does not constitute a reasonable explanation for the excessive delay," the judge said.
The judge added that waiting for the criminal proceedings was "a deliberate tactical decision" and that the outcome of the criminal case was irrelevant when deciding whether the arbitration award was reasonable.
Evidence overwhelmingly supported dismissal
Although the application failed because of the unexplained delay, Judge Cithi also found that Erens had virtually no prospects of succeeding on review.
The court found the objective evidence established that examiners were already on duty when Erens conducted Mokoena's test, that he lacked authority to do so, requested access without Muntu's approval, arranged the test within two days of the alleged bribery discussion, recorded the use of a truck that was elsewhere and faced evidence from Mokoena, who had no apparent reason to falsely implicate herself because she admitted her own involvement in the unlawful arrangement.
Judge Cithi said, "The facts, in my view, corroborate the Municipality's version of events and reveal conduct that is improper and fairly warranting of dismissal. Such conduct, which is characterised by malfeasance, constitutes a gross abuse of power and strikes at the heart of the trust relationship inherent in the employment relationship."
The court dismissed the condonation application and made no order as to costs.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
