- The Labour Court dismissed a review application by a University of Limpopo lecturer who refused to teach.
- The court found that abandoning teaching duties justified disciplinary action and punishment.
- The arbitration award was upheld as reasonable, with no order for costs.
The Labour Court has firmly addressed a lecturer’s refusal to carry out teaching duties, dismissing a review application from Phindile Raymond Msaule and confirming that his actions warranted discipline.
Acting Judge N Tshisevhe stated that withdrawing teaching services, especially in an academic environment, has serious consequences and cannot be justified by workplace disputes.
Msaule sought the court's intervention to review and overturn an arbitration award from the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration, which ruled that the University of Limpopo had not engaged in unfair labour practices. The court upheld this decision, finding no reason to intervene.
Refusal to teach triggers disciplinary action
The conflict began when Professor SL Rapulana, the head of the department, decided to share a criminal law module with Msaule as co-lecturers. This change was prompted by concerns about students' poor performance.
Msaule disagreed with this arrangement and took the issue to senior university management, including Advocate Rapatsa and Professor O Sibanda. Despite these efforts, the university stood by its decision. Consequently, Msaule refused to teach the module, did not prepare assessments, and neglected his academic responsibilities for about three months.
This refusal led to the misconduct charges against him. He was found guilty of insubordination and neglect of duties, resulting in a three-month suspension without pay and a final written warning.
Court condemns refusal to perform duties
The court clearly criticised Msaule's behaviour. Judge Tshisevhe said, "I find it unacceptable that a lecturer can refuse to fulfil his teaching duties to the detriment of students."
The judgment emphasised that employees must follow lawful instructions while seeking internal remedies. Judge Tshisevhe noted that, “even if the Applicant could have filed a grievance, which he did not do, he should have fulfilled his duties and sought to address his concerns while continuing to work.”
The court also pointed out the negative impact of the refusal to teach. “This court does not want to imagine the frustration caused to students because of the applicant's withdrawal of his services,” the judgment read.
Judge Tshisevhe dismissed Msaule’s justification. “The Applicant’s conduct is inexcusable in this situation, even if it were found that he had filed a grievance.”
Arbitration award upheld
The arbitrator concluded that Msaule did not follow a reasonable and lawful instruction and that the punishment given was suitable. It was also found that he had not correctly filed a grievance according to the university’s procedures.
Using the test from Sidumo and Another v Rustenburg Platinum Mines Ltd and Others, the court evaluated whether the arbitrator's decision was one that a reasonable decision-maker could reach. Acting Judge Tshisevhe confirmed this view, stating, “I am convinced that the arbitrator's finding is a reasonable one based on the evidence presented.”
The court rejected Msaule’s claims that the arbitrator mischaracterised the dispute or overlooked important facts, concluding that none of the alleged errors was enough to make the award unreasonable.
No interference and no costs
The court found no reviewable irregularity and determined that the arbitrator’s decision fell within the range of reasonable outcomes. Judge Tshisevhe concluded, “There are no grounds for me to interfere with the arbitrator's decision, as it remains within the range of reasonableness.”
Regarding costs, the court referenced Zungu v Premier of the Province of KwaZulu-Natal and Others, emphasising that labour matters need a balanced approach. Acting Judge Tshisevhe decided that fairness justified not making any order about costs.
The application for review was dismissed, and no costs order was issued.
Get your news on the go. Click here to follow the Conviction WhatsApp channel.
