- Buhle Sikhakhane made deposits that activated two MyMo accounts while the customers were absent.
- She said she did not know the accounts were MyMo accounts and had followed a colleague’s instruction, wanting to be a team player.
- The Labour Court found that the circumstances justified dismissal, despite her seven years’ service and clean disciplinary record.
A Standard Bank employee activated two customers’ MyMo accounts by making deposits while they were not present, even though she had recently been warned that employees could not activate accounts for customers.
Buhle Sikhakhane was a Customer Liaison Officer at the bank’s Scottburgh branch when she made the deposits on 18 May 2022. She later admitted breaking the bank’s rules, but insisted she didn’t know the accounts were MyMo accounts.
The warning came before the deposits
Sikhakhane had been permanently employed by Standard Bank since September 2015, after working for the bank through labour broker Quest from 2008.
MyMo accounts are aimed at lower-income and unemployed customers, and must only be activated through a deposit made by the customer. Activating these accounts also counted towards staff performance targets.
On 14 March 2022, after a whistleblower reported that staff were activating accounts without customers present, the bank warned staff that they were not allowed to make activating deposits for customers. The bank said 34 employees had already been disciplined, with some dismissed.
Sikhakhane received this warning. Her team leader sent it again about 30 minutes later, calling it “Important communication” and reminding staff, “We need to do the right thing first time.”
She followed a colleague’s instruction
On 18 May 2022, Sikhakhane accompanied a Universal Banker on visits to prospective customers to sell MyMo accounts. The customers were mostly in rural areas or on construction sites and spoke isiZulu, so Sikhakhane assisted the banker.
When they got back to the branch, the banker gave Sikhakhane some cash and two account numbers, asking her to make deposits at an ATM. She did as asked, which activated two MyMo accounts while the customers were absent.
Sikhakhane said she couldn’t tell from the account numbers that they were MyMo accounts. She explained she was just following instructions, trying to be a team player. She later expressed regret and accepted that she should have asked more questions before making the deposits.
The banking environment made the breach serious
Sikhakhane was found guilty at a disciplinary enquiry and dismissed on 21 November 2022. She had around seven years of service and no previous disciplinary issues.
At the CCMA, Commissioner Vino Subramoney found that she had broken the bank’s rules, and that the misconduct was serious enough in the banking world to damage the relationship of trust and confidence.
Sikhakhane challenged the decision, arguing that the commissioner had relied on a broader rule than the specific MyMo misconduct, and had not properly considered her clean record, long service, remorse, the absence of dishonesty or personal gain, or the possibility of progressive discipline.
Judge SJ Harvey of the Labour Court in Johannesburg agreed that the commissioner had described the misconduct too broadly. However, Judge Harvey found that this error did not make the outcome unreasonable.
Sikhakhane had spent that morning selling MyMo accounts, and was immediately afterwards given money and account numbers by the same Universal Banker who asked her to make the deposits. She had also recently received the bank’s warning.
Judge Harvey found that she could reasonably have been expected to realise what the deposits were for, or at the very least, to ask questions before making them.
Her clean record, long service, and remorse counted in her favour, but did not make dismissal unreasonable. The judge also noted the importance of following customer account rules in banking, as well as the regulatory and reputational risks that led the bank to act.
Judge Harvey said that another commissioner might have imposed a lesser sanction, but that was not enough to overturn the decision. The review application was dismissed, with no order as to costs.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
