The Labour Appeal Court upheld the legality of the dismissal of a SASSA employee who was accused of assaulting his supervisor. The court found that the employee had attacked his boss and displayed gross insubordination.
NN, who held the position of Senior Grants Administrator and worked at the South African Social Security Agency (SASSA) since June 2006, was dismissed for misconduct in November 2020. The Durban Appeal Court rejected his appeal in September 2026, confirming that his dismissal was both substantively and procedurally fair.
Dispute over social assistance application
The conflict arose in August 2019 at the local SASSA office in Vulindela, Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal. NN was assisting a woman with applying for social assistance for her grandson. The application was rejected for several reasons, including the fact that the child's father was alive and living with him.
The next day, the woman returned to the office with her niece to complain about the treatment she received. NN's manager, Mr M, called him into his office to explain what had happened. According to the court's ruling, NN refused to discuss the matter in front of two women and asked them to be removed so he could present his version privately. Mr M refused and insisted that NN explain the situation in their presence.
Following this, NN accused his manager of disrespect, stating that he was 'also a man in his own home.'
Scuffle at the office door
The situation escalated when Mr M decided to ask the women to leave the office so he could speak with NN privately. The women testified that NN suddenly stood up and hit the manager. One of them intervened to prevent a fight between the two men. Mr M reported to the disciplinary hearing that NN pushed or hit him in the chest before leaving the office.
NN denied assaulting his manager, although he admitted there was a 'struggle at the door' when he tried to leave. Later, during the disciplinary hearing, he stated that he pulled the door while Mr M was blocking it, and that Mr M was pulled along with the door. After the incident, Mr M and the two women went to the police station and filed a report of assault. NN was subsequently suspended and subjected to a disciplinary hearing.
The first disciplinary hearing resulted in the withdrawal of six charges. He was later charged with three counts related to the August 2019 incident. He was accused of insubordination, manifested by assaulting Mr M with intent to cause bodily harm. He was also accused of violating the SASSA code of conduct and ethics and damaging the agency's reputation. NN did not plead guilty. He was found guilty on two of the charges and dismissed in November 2020. His internal appeal was rejected.
Appeal to CCMA and Labour Court
NN took the unfair dismissal dispute to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA). The Commissioner ruled that the dismissal was both substantively and procedurally fair. The Commissioner rejected NN's version of events, noting that he changed his account and made no concessions regarding facts supported by evidence. She concluded that SASSA proved on a balance of probabilities that NN assaulted Mr M. The Commissioner also found that NN's behaviour constituted gross insubordination because he challenged the authority of a manager several levels above him in front of clients, using violence in the process. NN approached the Labour Court seeking a review and setting aside of the arbitration award. The Labour Court dismissed his application, finding that the commissioner's assessment of evidence and reasoning could not be challenged.
Appeal Court upholds dismissal
The matter ultimately reached the Labour Appeal Court. The Appeal Court found that the witnesses' testimonies largely corroborated each other, and the alleged contradictions concerned minor details of how the assault occurred. The court noted that NN himself provided a statement to the police in which he said he 'pulled' Mr M. The court also considered it an accepted fact that NN refused to explain the complaint to the applicant, got into a struggle over the door, and failed to comply with his manager's instruction to go to his office after the women left. The Appeal Court rejected NN's argument that the evidence did not establish an assault. It found that its own evidence indicated that he pulled Mr M while trying to open the door. The court ruled: 'From this evidence it is clear, therefore, that the witnesses were correct in saying that he pulled Mr M by his clothes.'
The court further ruled that Mr M's belief that he was being assaulted was substantiated by the evidence. The Labour Appeal Court concluded that the commissioner made no error in finding that NN assaulted his manager. It agreed that his behaviour constituted gross insubordination and that his dismissal was justified. The court also found that the commissioner's decision was within the range of decisions that a reasonable decision-maker could have made. Thus, the appeal was dismissed. The court ordered no costs.