- Kolisa Kongo accused her manager of victimisation, harassment and unfair work allocation after years of workplace tension.
- An internal investigator dismissed her grievance and recommended that both women apologise, but SARU said an exchange of apologies would not repair their relationship.
- The Labour Court upheld Kongo’s dismissal on grounds of ill-health incapacity, finding that her prolonged absence and uncertain recovery made the arbitrator’s decision reasonable.
A dispute between a senior human resources manager and her boss at the South African Rugby Union (SARU) escalated from allegations of victimisation and harassment to a failed reconciliation attempt before the manager’s eventual dismissal on grounds of ill-health incapacity.
In a judgment delivered on 22 October 2026, Judge R Lagrange of the Labour Court in Cape Town dismissed Kolisa Kongo’s application to review an arbitration award that had found her dismissal substantively and procedurally fair.
Kongo had worked for SARU since December 2009 and occupied the position of Human Resources Business Partner Operations, earning R76 022.42 a month. She reported directly to I Mangcu, the organisation’s general manager of human resources.
The conflict between the two women had a history. In late 2019, Mangcu initiated disciplinary proceedings against Kongo and a colleague concerning the resignation of an employee. Although an independent chairperson found Kongo not guilty of the misconduct charges, he concluded that she shared responsibility for the breakdown in trust.
Between 2018 and May 2022, Kongo repeatedly sought help from SARU’s wellness service provider, ICAS, citing acute work-related stress, interpersonal conflict with management and difficulty coping with Mangcu’s management style.
On 20 May 2022, Kongo lodged a formal grievance against Mangcu, alleging ongoing victimisation, unfair allocation of work and harassment. An informal attempt to resolve the dispute failed. SARU’s chief executive officer, J Roux, then appointed attorney Z Mcaciso to preside over a formal grievance hearing on 27 and 29 June 2022.
In late July, Mcaciso dismissed Kongo’s grievance in its entirety. He found that her allegations of victimisation and harassment were unfounded and amounted to an attempt to take revenge on Mangcu.
However, he recommended that the two women exchange formal apologies at a meeting facilitated by Roux in an effort to restore workplace harmony. Mcaciso warned that if Kongo refused to apologise and commit to improving the relationship, SARU should consider disciplinary action against her for making false allegations against her superior.
SARU rejected apology plan
On 8 August 2022, Roux informed Kongo that SARU did not believe an exchange of apologies would restore the relationship, given the seriousness of the unsubstantiated allegations.
Two days later, SARU placed Kongo on precautionary suspension with full pay and notified her of disciplinary proceedings. The charges included making unfounded allegations of victimisation and acting contrary to SARU’s interests concerning its mandatory vaccination policy.
Kongo referred an unfair labour practice dispute to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) on 15 August 2022, challenging the grievance outcome and her suspension. Her health deteriorated during this period. On 19 August 2022, a general practitioner booked her off work because of illness. Subsequent medical reports linked her depression and anxiety to workplace stressors.
A psychiatrist later diagnosed a major depressive episode with anxious distress. Kongo was admitted to the psychiatric ward at West Beach Clinic from 29 September to 6 October 2022. In October, she sent a lengthy email to colleagues and senior management expressing anger about her treatment.
She accused Mangcu and her colleague Paul Amoomo of dishonesty and alleged that Roux discriminated against black women. She also attributed her illness to what she described as the negative and unprofessional handling of her issues. The email reflected the depth of the breakdown in her relationships with colleagues and management.
Medical incapacity led to dismissal
SARU initiated a formal medical incapacity investigation in October 2022 after Kongo had been booked off work for an extended period.
An occupational therapist found that Kongo had severe impairments in planning, problem-solving and judgment, leaving her unable to perform the inherent demands of her human resources position. Her psychiatrist supported the assessment and recommended a period of recovery.
Kongo proposed working from home on light duties and suggested appointing an independent life coach to help resolve the conflict with Mangcu. SARU considered these proposals unworkable because of the extent of her cognitive impairment and the pending disciplinary proceedings.
In written representations submitted on 14 November 2022, Kongo acknowledged that it would be irresponsible for SARU to allow her to continue working as a human resources business partner while she remained temporarily incapacitated.
She asked the organisation to postpone the incapacity process until her disability claim had been decided or her medical certificate expired on 27 January 2023. She indicated that she would probably accept dismissal if she remained unfit after reassessment.
An independent chairperson, Advocate C Zietsman, recommended termination on grounds of ill-health incapacity. SARU implemented the recommendation, issuing a termination notice on 1 December 2022, with the dismissal taking effect on 31 December.
Labour Court upholds dismissal
The CCMA arbitrator subsequently found the dismissal substantively and procedurally fair. Kongo challenged that finding, arguing that SARU should have waited for her medical reassessment and that the process had been procedurally unfair.
Judge Lagrange found that the medical evidence established severe cognitive impairment and did not provide a reliable return-to-work date. The proposed reassessment in January 2023 was not a confirmed date for her return.
The judge also accepted that the workplace circumstances contributing to Kongo’s illness remained unresolved. Mangcu continued to head the department, and SARU was entitled to proceed with the pending disciplinary inquiry.
The court rejected Kongo’s argument that the arbitrator had speculated about her future recovery, finding that the conclusion was a rational assessment of the available medical evidence and workplace realities.
It also dismissed her challenge to the procedural fairness of the incapacity inquiry, finding that she had been given an opportunity to submit written representations with legal assistance.
Judge Lagrange concluded that the arbitrator’s finding that the dismissal was fair was reasonable and supported by the evidence. 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.
