What are the opening hours?

Monday 09:00 - 16:00 Tuesday 09:00 - 16:00 Wednesday 09:00 - 16:00 Thursday 09:00 - 16:00 Friday 09:00 - 16:00

Engage Human Capital Solutions - Pty Ltd, Edenvale (2026)

09/09/2026

𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗡 𝗟𝗔𝗦𝗧 𝗪𝗘𝗥𝗘 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗛𝗥 𝗣𝗢𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗜𝗘𝗦 𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗨𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗨𝗣𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗗?

Not renamed.

Not moved onto a new letterhead.

Not copied from an old template.

𝗔𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝘂𝗽𝗱𝗮𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝗳𝗹𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝗮𝘀 𝗶𝘁 𝘀𝘁𝗮𝗻𝗱𝘀 𝘁𝗼𝗱𝗮𝘆?

Because South African employment law has changed significantly over the past few years — and many employers are still relying on policies, procedures and employment contracts that were drafted long before those changes happened.

𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗔𝗟 𝗟𝗘𝗔𝗩𝗘 𝗛𝗔𝗦 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗘𝗗.

The Constitutional Court has found that the previous statutory framework unfairly discriminated between different categories of parents.

That has major implications for policies that still distinguish simplistically between “maternity leave” for mothers and a much shorter period of “parental leave” for fathers.

Employers now need to ensure that their parental-leave wording reflects the current Constitutional Court position and does not discriminate unfairly between parents.

𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗔𝗦𝗦𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗟𝗔𝗪 𝗛𝗔𝗦 𝗘𝗩𝗢𝗟𝗩𝗘𝗗.

The 2022 Code of Good Practice on the Prevention and Elimination of Harassment in the Workplace significantly expanded the way employers must understand and address workplace harassment.

The “workplace” is no longer simply the office, factory or shop floor.

Work-related travel, training, functions, electronic communication, remote working, employer-provided transport and other situations connected to work may all fall within its scope.

Your harassment policy needs to reflect that reality.

𝗣𝗢𝗣𝗜𝗔 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗘𝗗 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗪𝗔𝗬 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗗𝗟𝗘 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗘 𝗜𝗡𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗠𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡.

Recruitment records.

Medical information.

Disciplinary records.

CCTV footage.

Biometric information.

Background checks.

Employee files.

Personal information shared with third parties.

Employers have legal responsibilities around how that information is collected, processed, stored, protected and ultimately disposed of.

Old employment contracts and policies drafted before POPIA became fully enforceable may simply not deal adequately with these obligations.

𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗘𝗤𝗨𝗜𝗧𝗬 𝗛𝗔𝗦 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗘𝗗.

The amended Employment Equity framework came into operation in 2025, together with new regulations and sectoral numerical targets for designated employers.

For affected businesses, compliance obligations today are not the same as they were a few years ago.

𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗟𝗔𝗕𝗢𝗨𝗥-𝗟𝗔𝗪 𝗟𝗔𝗡𝗗𝗦𝗖𝗔𝗣𝗘 𝗜𝗦 𝗦𝗧𝗜𝗟𝗟 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗡𝗚𝗜𝗡𝗚.

Further proposed amendments to South African labour legislation are now on the table, affecting issues such as dismissal, probation, retrenchment, parental leave, working arrangements and non-standard employment.

Not all of those proposed amendments are law yet.

But they reinforce something every employer should be thinking about:

𝗬𝗢𝗨 𝗖𝗔𝗡𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗥𝗨𝗡 𝗔 𝗠𝗢𝗗𝗘𝗥𝗡 𝗪𝗢𝗥𝗞𝗣𝗟𝗔𝗖𝗘 𝗢𝗡 𝗢𝗨𝗧𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗛𝗥 𝗗𝗢𝗖𝗨𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗦.

And this becomes very important when something goes wrong.

When an employee refers a dispute to the CCMA, your own policies may become evidence.

When you discipline an employee, your disciplinary code matters.

When you manage poor performance, your procedure matters.

When an employee raises a grievance, your grievance procedure matters.

When someone alleges harassment, your harassment policy matters.

When an employee becomes unable to perform their duties because of ill health or injury, your incapacity procedure matters.

When an employee takes parental leave, your leave policy matters.

When you recruit, process employee information or conduct background checks, your privacy provisions matter.

And when employment ends, the wording of the employment contract can become extremely important.

𝗦𝗢 𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗡 𝗟𝗔𝗦𝗧 𝗗𝗜𝗗 𝗬𝗢𝗨 𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗗 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥𝗦?

This is exactly why we developed the 𝗘𝗻𝗴𝗮𝗴𝗲 𝗘𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗿 𝗦𝘁𝗮𝗿𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗣𝗮𝗰𝗸.

The Starter Pack contains 𝟯𝟰 professionally drafted HR policies, procedures and employment documents developed for South African employers.

Among the most frequently requested are:

✅ Disciplinary Code and Procedure
✅ Grievance Procedure
✅ Probation & Performance Management Policy
✅ Incapacity due to Ill Health or Injury Procedure
✅ Recruitment & Hiring Policy and Procedure
✅ Harassment Policy
✅ Social Media Policy
✅ Remote & Hybrid Working Policy
✅ Whistleblowing & Protected Disclosures Policy
✅ Leave and Attendance Policies

…and another 24 documents covering the everyday HR and labour-relations issues employers need to manage.

These are not simply documents to keep in a file.

They are the framework your managers rely on when real workplace problems arise.

And then there are your 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗦.

Those need reviewing too.

A contract drafted years ago and repeatedly handed to new employees without being updated may no longer reflect current legislation, current case law, the realities of the modern workplace or the protections your business actually needs.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀.

𝗖𝗮𝘀𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝘄 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲𝘀.

𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲𝘀 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲.

𝗬𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗛𝗥 𝗱𝗼𝗰𝘂𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁𝘀 𝗻𝗲𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗼 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗻𝗴𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗺.

So there is one important question every employer should be asking:

𝗛𝗔𝗩𝗘 𝗪𝗘 𝗨𝗣𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗘𝗗 𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗣𝗢𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗜𝗘𝗦, 𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗖𝗘𝗗𝗨𝗥𝗘𝗦 𝗔𝗡𝗗 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗠𝗘𝗡𝗧 𝗖𝗢𝗡𝗧𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗦?

If you cannot confidently answer yes, it may be time.

⭐ 𝗦𝗣𝗘𝗖𝗜𝗔𝗟 𝗥𝗔𝗧𝗘 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗘𝗡𝗚𝗔𝗚𝗘 𝗥𝗘𝗧𝗔𝗜𝗡𝗘𝗥 𝗖𝗟𝗜𝗘𝗡𝗧𝗦

Our existing Engage retainer clients receive a 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗹 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁 on the Employer Starter Pack.

Because keeping your HR framework legally current should be part of protecting the business — not something you only think about when the dispute has already started.

𝗘𝗡𝗚𝗔𝗚𝗘 𝗛𝗨𝗠𝗔𝗡 𝗖𝗔𝗣𝗜𝗧𝗔𝗟 𝗦𝗢𝗟𝗨𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡𝗦

𝗣𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗰𝗮𝗹 𝗛𝗥. 𝗦𝗼𝘂𝗻𝗱 𝗟𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗥𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀. 𝗕𝗲𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿 𝗣𝗿𝗼𝘁𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗘𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀.

01/09/2026

𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗧𝗜𝗧𝗟𝗘 𝗜𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗔 𝗦𝗛𝗜𝗘𝗟𝗗
𝗪𝗵𝘆 𝘀𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗰𝗼𝘂𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀𝘁 𝗮 𝗺𝗮𝗻𝗮𝗴𝗲𝗿 𝗳𝗮𝗰𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗰𝗶𝗽𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗮𝗿𝘆 𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻

Some managers believe that their seniority, experience or value to the business will protect them when they cross the line.

The Labour Court has delivered a very different message:

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗵𝗼𝗹𝗱, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗯𝗲 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗲𝗰𝘁𝗲𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝘆𝗼𝘂.

In 𝗟𝗲𝗯𝗶 𝘃 𝗖𝗖𝗠𝗔 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗢𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀, an Operations Manager became involved in a heated workplace argument with a subordinate over overtime.

Both parties used strong language. During the confrontation, the manager swore at the employee. When she attempted to walk away, he approached her, placed his hand or hands on her shoulders and physically turned her around.

Other employees witnessed the incident.

The manager was charged with using abusive and offensive language and with assault. He was dismissed and challenged the substantive fairness of his dismissal at the CCMA.

The commissioner found the dismissal fair.

The manager then approached the Labour Court, arguing, among other things, that he had been provoked and that dismissal was too harsh.

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗨𝗥𝗧 𝗪𝗔𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗣𝗘𝗥𝗦𝗨𝗔𝗗𝗘𝗗

The Court held that physically turning the employee around constituted assault.

Whether the manager used one hand or two did not change the nature of the conduct. Similarly, whether he swore once or several times was not decisive.

The misconduct had occurred.

The Court also considered the manager’s seniority, the fact that his conduct was directed at a subordinate and that it took place in front of other employees.

As a manager, he was expected to exercise restraint, judgment and professionalism — particularly during conflict.

His managerial status did not provide protection. It increased the significance of his conduct.

𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗩𝗢𝗖𝗔𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 𝗜𝗦 𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗔 𝗙𝗥𝗘𝗘 𝗣𝗔𝗦𝗦

Provocation can be relevant when deciding whether misconduct occurred or whether dismissal was an appropriate sanction.

However, saying “I was provoked” does not automatically excuse an aggressive response.

The question is not simply whether the other employee said or did something provocative. The response must still be considered objectively and in context.

In this case, the manager’s response was aggressive rather than defensive. His reliance on provocation therefore did not save him.

𝗠𝗔𝗡𝗔𝗚𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗔𝗥𝗘 𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗢𝗥𝗗𝗜𝗡𝗔𝗥𝗬 𝗕𝗬𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗗𝗘𝗥𝗦

Managers exercise authority on behalf of the employer.

They give instructions, manage conflict, enforce workplace rules and are expected to model the conduct required from employees.

When a manager becomes abusive, threatening or physically aggressive, the consequences extend beyond the immediate incident.

The conduct can:

• undermine the manager’s authority;
• damage employees’ trust in management;
• create fear or hostility in the workplace;
• weaken the employer’s ability to enforce discipline consistently; and
• expose the employer to further workplace conflict and legal risk.

Seniority is therefore not automatically a mitigating factor.

Depending on the misconduct, it may be an aggravating factor.

𝗡𝗢 𝗭𝗘𝗥𝗢-𝗧𝗢𝗟𝗘𝗥𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘 𝗣𝗢𝗟𝗜𝗖𝗬? 𝗧𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗠𝗔𝗬 𝗡𝗢𝗧 𝗦𝗔𝗩𝗘 𝗬𝗢𝗨 𝗘𝗜𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗥

The Court also rejected the suggestion that dismissal could not be fair without proof of a formal zero-tolerance policy.

Serious misconduct does not become acceptable simply because the disciplinary code does not label it “zero tolerance.”

The seriousness of the conduct, the surrounding circumstances, the employee’s position and the effect on the employment relationship must all be considered.

The Court further confirmed that, in appropriate cases, a breakdown of trust may be inferred from the nature and seriousness of the misconduct. Direct evidence about the destruction of trust is not required in every case.

𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗦𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗟𝗗 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗗𝗢?

Employers should not protect senior employees merely because they are experienced, valuable or difficult to replace.

At the same time, dismissal should never be automatic. Every case must still be investigated and assessed on its own facts.

Employers should consider:

• the seriousness and circumstances of the misconduct;
• the employee’s position and level of responsibility;
• whether there was genuine provocation;
• whether the response was defensive or aggressive;
• the employee’s disciplinary record, remorse and insight;
• consistency with comparable cases; and
• the effect of the misconduct on the employment relationship.

Managers should also receive proper training on workplace conflict, discipline, emotional control and the responsibilities that accompany their authority.

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗕𝗢𝗧𝗧𝗢𝗠 𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗘

A management title does not create immunity from discipline.

It does not give a manager permission to swear at, intimidate, threaten or physically confront an employee.

Managers may be held to a higher standard precisely because of the authority entrusted to them.

𝗦𝗲𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 𝗺𝗮𝘆 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝘂𝘁𝗵𝗼𝗿𝗶𝘁𝘆 — 𝗯𝘂𝘁 𝗶𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝘀𝗼 𝗴𝗶𝘃𝗲𝘀 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝗿𝗲𝘀𝗽𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗶𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗶𝘁𝘆.

Lebi v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others (C574/2023) [2026] ZALCCT 145 (28 August 2026)

© Engage Human Capital Solutions
Practical labour relations guidance for employers and managers.

24/08/2026

𝐓𝐇𝐄 𝐌𝐈𝐒𝐒𝐈𝐍𝐆 𝐌𝐈𝐃𝐃𝐋𝐄
𝑾𝒉𝒆𝒏 𝒈𝒐𝒐𝒅 𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒐𝒚𝒆𝒆𝒔 𝒃𝒆𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒆 𝒖𝒏𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒑𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒅 𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒂𝒈𝒆𝒓𝒔

They were reliable, knowledgeable and excellent at their jobs.

They understood the systems, knew the customers and solved problems. When a management position became available, promoting them seemed like the obvious choice.

There was just one problem.

𝐍𝐨𝐛𝐨𝐝𝐲 𝐭𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐡𝐨𝐰 𝐭𝐨 𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐨𝐩𝐥𝐞.

𝐀 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐠𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐣𝐨𝐛

Being good at the work does not automatically make someone good at managing the people who perform it.

Technical competence may earn the promotion, but management requires an entirely different set of skills.

The new manager must suddenly know how to:

▪️ Communicate expectations clearly
▪️ Delegate and hold people accountable
▪️ Manage conflict and difficult personalities
▪️ Address misconduct and poor performance
▪️ Give constructive feedback
▪️ Apply workplace rules fairly and consistently
▪️ Lead former colleagues without becoming aggressive—or trying to remain everyone’s friend

These skills do not arrive with the new title.

Yet many businesses promote an employee, increase their salary and expect them to work out the rest as they go.

𝐖𝐞𝐥𝐜𝐨𝐦𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐦𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐦𝐢𝐝𝐝𝐥𝐞

Middle managers are caught between the expectations of senior management and the needs of employees.

They are expected to achieve targets, maintain standards, manage performance and resolve workplace problems—often without having been taught how.

Some avoid difficult conversations because they do not know what to say or do.

Others become overly authoritarian, micromanage their teams or try to discipline every irritation.

Some still want to be “one of the team,” so they overlook misconduct, apply rules inconsistently and avoid holding former colleagues accountable.

The consequences quickly spread through the department.

Poor performance continues. Strong employees become frustrated. Conflict increases. Grievances arise. Productivity declines and valuable employees begin looking for somewhere else to work.

𝐃𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐞 𝐲𝐨𝐮 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐦𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐝

When the manager struggles, the business may decide that the employee was simply the wrong person for the position.

The employee who was once confident and capable may now be overwhelmed, defensive and demoralised. The business may consider demotion, another role or even termination.

In the process, it risks losing the excellent technical employee it originally valued enough to promote.

That employee may have years of practical experience, institutional knowledge, specialised skills and customer relationships that cannot easily be replaced.

Losing them because they were promoted without being properly equipped is an expensive and avoidable outcome.

The answer is not to choose between technical expertise and management ability.

It is to give technically capable employees the additional skills they need to lead people effectively.

𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐜𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐞𝐧𝐨𝐮𝐠𝐡

A once-off course may provide useful information, but it rarely changes how someone manages over the long term.

A manager may attend training on discipline today but only encounter a serious disciplinary problem six months later.

New challenges will also continue to arise as their responsibilities, teams and workplace circumstances change.

Managers need regular opportunities to learn, apply new skills, ask questions and develop as they progress.

Management development is not a box to be ticked after promotion. It must be ongoing, practical and relevant to what is happening in the workplace.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐲

This is precisely why we created the 𝐄𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐠𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐀𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐲.

Businesses pay a fixed monthly retainer for access to between two and four training sessions per month, depending on the programme selected.

You can include as many relevant employees as you choose, with no additional cost for each person who attends.

The Academy offers:

✔️ More than 90 practical training topics
✔️ Ongoing development throughout the year
✔️ Training for different employment levels
✔️ Customised topics based on your business’s specific challenges
✔️ Retainer options tailored to the size and needs of your organisation

𝐃𝐨 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐢𝐭 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐠𝐨𝐨𝐝 𝐞𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐨𝐲𝐞𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐚𝐢𝐥.

Contact Engage today to book a 𝐅𝐑𝐄𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐍𝐒𝐔𝐋𝐓𝐀𝐓𝐈𝐎𝐍 to discuss your training and development needs for middle management 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒐𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓 𝒆𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒐𝒚𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒍𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒍𝒔 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒏 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒐𝒓𝒈𝒂𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏.

𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐩𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥. 𝐍𝐨𝐰 𝐠𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐦 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐤𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐟𝐢𝐥 𝐢𝐭.

24/08/2026

🔎 𝐂𝐒𝐈: 𝐇𝐔𝐌𝐀𝐍 𝐑𝐄𝐒𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐂𝐄𝐒
𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐎𝐟𝐟𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐖𝐡𝐨𝐝𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭

Suspicious employees, strange evidence and cases completely botched! 🕵️‍♀️

Join Dees and Nolene as they investigate CCTV clues, deleted WhatsApps, missing stock and some wildly creative workplace excuses.

Employers will learn what must be investigated before charging an employee, how to preserve and present evidence properly, and how a genuine incident can become an unwinnable disciplinary case when the investigation is badly handled.

📻 Monday | 18:00–19:00
Eden Radio 104.8 FM
Listen via the Eden Radio app, www.edenradio.co.za or TuneIn.

18/08/2026

𝗖𝗔𝗡 𝗔 𝗕𝗔𝗗𝗟𝗬 𝗪𝗢𝗥𝗗𝗘𝗗 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗘 𝗥𝗘𝗔𝗟𝗟𝗬 𝗦𝗜𝗡𝗞 𝗬𝗢𝗨𝗥 𝗪𝗛𝗢𝗟𝗘 𝗖𝗔𝗦𝗘?

Here’s a disciplinary hearing nightmare employers know all too well:

You charge an employee with misconduct.

You prove that something serious happened.

But you don’t quite prove it 𝗲𝘅𝗮𝗰𝘁𝗹𝘆 the way you described it in the charge sheet.

Does that automatically mean the dismissal is unfair?

𝗡𝗼𝘁 𝗻𝗲𝗰𝗲𝘀𝘀𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗹𝘆.

A recent Labour Court judgment, 𝗔𝘀𝘀𝗼𝗰𝗶𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗼𝗳 𝗠𝗶𝗻𝗲𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗖𝗼𝗻𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗨𝗻𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗔𝗻𝗼𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝘃 𝗨𝗖𝗟 𝗖𝗼𝗺𝗽𝗮𝗻𝘆 (𝗣𝘁𝘆) 𝗟𝘁𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗢𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀 (𝗗𝟭𝟭𝟴/𝟮𝟰) [𝟮𝟬𝟮𝟲] 𝗭𝗔𝗟𝗖𝗗 𝟯𝟳, is an important reminder that disciplinary proceedings are not criminal trials and charges do not have to be drafted with the precision of a criminal indictment.

𝗦𝗼, 𝘄𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝗵𝗮𝗽𝗽𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗱?

An employee was charged with assault after allegedly slapping a canteen employee during an altercation over food.

The employee was dismissed, and the dismissal was later upheld at arbitration.

On review, however, the Labour Court accepted that the physical layout of the serving counter made it improbable that the employee had actually slapped the canteen employee in the manner alleged.

At first glance, that sounds like a serious problem for the employer.

𝗕𝘂𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗮𝘁 𝘄𝗮𝘀𝗻’𝘁 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗻𝗱 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗺𝗮𝘁𝘁𝗲𝗿.

The evidence still showed aggressive and threatening conduct during the very same incident.

The employee had reached through the serving counter in a swinging motion towards the canteen employee, attempted to grab her, insulted another employee and told the canteen owner to “shut up”.

The Court found that the misconduct actually established by the evidence was sufficiently connected to the misconduct originally alleged.

Crucially, the employee also knew what incident and conduct he was required to defend and had not been prejudiced in presenting his case.

The Labour Court therefore dismissed the review application.

𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 𝗖𝗔𝗡 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗟𝗘𝗔𝗥𝗡 𝗙𝗥𝗢𝗠 𝗧𝗛𝗜𝗦?

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗲𝗹 𝗼𝗻 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗰𝗵𝗮𝗿𝗴𝗲 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗹𝘄𝗮𝘆𝘀 𝗱𝗲𝗰𝗶𝘀𝗶𝘃𝗲.

What matters far more is whether:

▪️ the employee knew what conduct was being alleged;

▪️ the evidence proved misconduct arising from that conduct or incident;

▪️ the finding was sufficiently closely connected to the original allegation; and

▪️ the employee suffered no prejudice in presenting a defence.

This is consistent with earlier Labour Appeal Court authority, including 𝗘𝗢𝗛 𝗔𝗯𝗮𝗻𝘁𝘂 (𝗣𝘁𝘆) 𝗟𝘁𝗱 𝘃 𝗖𝗖𝗠𝗔 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗢𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀, where the Court recognised that employers sometimes formulate misconduct too narrowly or incorrectly and that a competent verdict may still be permissible, provided the employee is not prejudiced.

𝗕𝗨𝗧 𝗧𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗘 𝗜𝗦 𝗔 𝗩𝗘𝗥𝗬 𝗜𝗠𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗧 𝗟𝗜𝗠𝗜𝗧.

This judgment does 𝗻𝗼𝘁 give employers permission to draft vague charges and then hope something sticks.

It does not mean a chairperson may suddenly convict an employee of completely unrelated misconduct that was never put to them.

And it certainly does not mean that an employer may ambush an employee with an entirely different factual case after the hearing has started.

The employee must still know the case they are required to meet and must be given a fair opportunity to answer it.

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗣𝗥𝗔𝗖𝗧𝗜𝗖𝗔𝗟 𝗟𝗘𝗦𝗦𝗢𝗡

Draft charges carefully — but don’t become so obsessed with technical legal labels that the charge loses sight of the actual conduct.

Describe 𝗪𝗛𝗔𝗧 the employee allegedly did.

Identify 𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗡 and 𝗪𝗛𝗘𝗥𝗘 it happened where relevant.

Explain enough of the circumstances for the employee to understand the allegation.

And where the facts may support more than one characterisation of the misconduct, consider whether an appropriate alternative charge or formulation should be included.

Because in workplace discipline, 𝗳𝗮𝗶𝗿𝗻𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗮𝗯𝗼𝘂𝘁 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗲𝗺𝗽𝗹𝗼𝘆𝗲𝗿 𝘂𝘀𝗲𝗱 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝗲𝗿𝗳𝗲𝗰𝘁 𝗹𝗲𝗴𝗮𝗹 𝗹𝗮𝗯𝗲𝗹.

It is about whether the employee understood the allegation, had a proper opportunity to defend it, and whether the misconduct ultimately found is fairly and sufficiently connected to the case they were called upon to answer.

Sometimes, 𝗦𝗨𝗕𝗦𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗖𝗘 really does matter more than 𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗠.

17/08/2026

🤖 𝗔𝗜 𝗜𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗪𝗢𝗥𝗞𝗣𝗟𝗔𝗖𝗘: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗚𝗢𝗢𝗗, 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗕𝗔𝗗 & 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗨𝗚𝗟𝗬
👩‍💻 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗘 𝗘𝗗𝗜𝗧𝗜𝗢𝗡 • 𝗣𝗔𝗥𝗧 𝟮

AI can help you write the grievance, prepare your disciplinary defence and sharpen your argument… but it can also make your case longer, messier, less credible — and sometimes downright disastrous. 😳

Tonight we look at real cases, real employee AI mistakes, and practical tips on how to use AI at work without shooting yourself in the foot.

📻 𝗧𝗢𝗡𝗜𝗚𝗛𝗧 𝗔𝗧 𝟲𝗣𝗠
🎙️ 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗡𝗼𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗲
📡 𝗘𝗱𝗲𝗻 𝗥𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼 𝟭𝟬𝟰.𝟴 𝗙𝗠

🌍 Not in the broadcast area? Listen online through the Eden Radio app or stream Eden Radio 104.8 on TuneIn.

𝗦𝗺𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝘁𝗼𝗼𝗹. 𝗕𝗮𝗱 𝗮𝗱𝘃𝗶𝗰𝗲. 𝗥𝗲𝗮𝗹 𝘄𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗲𝗾𝘂𝗲𝗻𝗰𝗲𝘀. 🤖⚖️

14/08/2026

Doing what I love most about my job - TRAINING! 😃😃😃
Today is Group 2 of 17 managers attending The Managers Masterclass presented at a big Catering Company.

10/08/2026

🤖 𝗔𝗜 𝗜𝗡 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗪𝗢𝗥𝗞𝗣𝗟𝗔𝗖𝗘: 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗚𝗢𝗢𝗗, 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗕𝗔𝗗 & 𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗨𝗚𝗟𝗬

AI can write your emails, boost productivity, screen CVs… and confidently invent court cases that don’t exist. 😳

So where does AI genuinely help — and where can it create serious workplace problems?

Tonight on 𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗪𝗼𝗿𝗸𝗽𝗹𝗮𝗰𝗲 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝗡𝗼𝗹𝗲𝗻𝗲, we unpack the smart shortcuts, spectacular slip-ups, workplace risks and very real questions around AI at work.

📻 𝗧𝗢𝗡𝗜𝗚𝗛𝗧 𝗔𝗧 𝟲𝗣𝗠
🎙️ Eden Radio 104.8 FM

📱 Outside the area? Tune in via:
• The 𝗘𝗱𝗲𝗻 𝗥𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼 𝗔𝗽𝗽
• 𝘄𝘄𝘄.𝗲𝗱𝗲𝗻𝗿𝗮𝗱𝗶𝗼.𝗰𝗼.𝘇𝗮
• The 𝗧𝘂𝗻𝗲𝗜𝗻 𝗔𝗽𝗽

🤖 Smart tools. Costly mistakes. Big workplace questions.

06/08/2026

𝗪𝗘𝗗𝗗𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗥𝗘𝗛𝗘𝗔𝗥𝗦𝗔𝗟 𝗢𝗥 𝗜𝗟𝗟𝗘𝗚𝗔𝗟 𝗣𝗜𝗖𝗞𝗘𝗧?
𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗖𝗢𝗦𝗧 𝗢𝗙 𝗗𝗜𝗦𝗠𝗜𝗦𝗦𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗪𝗜𝗧𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗧 𝗣𝗥𝗢𝗢𝗙

Ten employees. One lunch break. A collection of placards. And two completely different explanations.

The employer believed that the employees were participating in an unlawful picket about overtime payments.

The employees said they were practising songs and dance movements for a colleague’s wedding.

Yes, really.

The placards apparently made the situation even more confusing.

According to the employer, one of them said:

“𝗪𝗲 𝘄𝗮𝗻𝘁 𝗼𝘂𝗿 𝗺𝗼𝗻𝗲𝘆 𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸.”

According to the employees, it referred to a person’s “life destiny”, with an arrow showing the transition from “boy” to “man”.

So, were they protesting — or preparing for a wedding?

That was the question the Labour Court had to consider in 𝗔𝗠𝗖𝗨 𝗼𝗯𝗼 𝗦𝗲𝗯𝗮𝗹𝗲𝗹𝗮 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗢𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝘃 𝗙𝗿𝗮𝘀𝗲𝗿 𝗔𝗹𝗲𝘅𝗮𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿.

Unfortunately for the employer, the evidence that could potentially have settled the dispute was no longer available.

The CCTV footage was apparently stored in a vehicle — and the vehicle was hijacked.

Other objective evidence was also not produced, and certain material witnesses were not called.

The employees were dismissed, but the matter eventually resulted in reinstatement with full retrospective back pay, almost seven years later.

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗜𝗠𝗣𝗢𝗥𝗧𝗔𝗡𝗧 𝗟𝗘𝗦𝗦𝗢𝗡 𝗙𝗢𝗥 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗥𝗦

An employee’s explanation may sound strange, unlikely or even ridiculous.

But that does not automatically prove the employer’s version.

In a disciplinary matter, the employer still carries the responsibility of proving that the misconduct probably occurred and that the employee was responsible for it.

𝗦𝘂𝘀𝗽𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗼𝗻 𝗶𝘀 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗳.

A genuine belief that employees were protesting is not enough if the available evidence does not reliably establish what they were doing, what they were saying and what each employee’s involvement was.

𝗕𝗘𝗙𝗢𝗥𝗘 𝗖𝗛𝗔𝗥𝗚𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗢𝗥 𝗗𝗜𝗦𝗠𝗜𝗦𝗦𝗜𝗡𝗚 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗘𝗦, 𝗘𝗠𝗣𝗟𝗢𝗬𝗘𝗥𝗦 𝗦𝗛𝗢𝗨𝗟𝗗:

▪️ Preserve CCTV footage, photographs, recordings and relevant documents.

▪️ Interview all important witnesses while events are still fresh.

▪️ Establish exactly what each employee allegedly did.

▪️ Ensure that the charges accurately reflect the conduct that can be proved.

▪️ Avoid treating a group of employees as collectively guilty without evidence linking each employee to the misconduct.

▪️ Consider whether a clear instruction or ultimatum should first be issued.

▪️ Assess whether dismissal is proportionate to the seriousness and consequences of the conduct.

Dismissal remains a sanction of last resort.

This is particularly important where the alleged conduct was brief, peaceful, took place during a lunch break, caused no proven operational loss and stopped without further incident.

𝗧𝗛𝗘 𝗕𝗢𝗧𝗧𝗢𝗠 𝗟𝗜𝗡𝗘

Employers are not required to accept every unbelievable explanation offered by an employee.

But they cannot dismiss merely because the employee’s explanation sounds unbelievable.

The employer’s case must still be supported by reliable evidence.

Because when the evidence disappears, the witnesses are not called and the employer cannot prove what happened, the cost may be far greater than a failed disciplinary hearing.

It may mean reinstatement, years of back pay and a very expensive lesson in the difference between 𝘀𝘂𝘀𝗽𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗼𝗻 and 𝗽𝗿𝗼𝗼𝗳.

03/08/2026

🎬 𝐑𝐞𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐡 𝐌𝐞 𝐈𝐟 𝐘𝐨𝐮 𝐂𝐚𝐧

𝑭𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒎𝒂𝒌𝒆𝒓𝒔 𝒐𝒇
“𝑯𝒐𝒏𝒆𝒚, 𝑰 𝑹𝒆𝒕𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒉𝒆𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑺𝒕𝒂𝒇𝒇”
“𝑫𝒖𝒅𝒆, 𝑾𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆’𝒔 𝑴𝒚 𝑱𝒐𝒃?”
𝒂𝒏𝒅
“𝑯𝒐𝒘 𝒕𝒐 𝑳𝒐𝒔𝒆 𝒂 𝑱𝒐𝒃 𝒊𝒏 10 𝑫𝒂𝒚𝒔”

Tonight on 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐖𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐜𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐍𝐨𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐞, we’re unpacking retrenchments, consultation, severance pay, selection criteria and the myths employers and employees often get wrong.

📻 𝐓𝐮𝐧𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐨𝐧𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐚𝐭 𝟔𝐩𝐦
on 𝐄𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐑𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐨 𝟏𝟎𝟒.𝟖 𝐅𝐌

If you’re outside the area, listen via the 𝐄𝐝𝐞𝐧 𝐑𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐨 𝐚𝐩𝐩, www.edenradio.co.za or the 𝐓𝐮𝐧𝐞𝐈𝐧 𝐚𝐩𝐩.

Engage Human Capital Solutions - Pty Ltd

09/09/2026

01/09/2026

24/08/2026

24/08/2026

18/08/2026

17/08/2026

14/08/2026

10/08/2026

06/08/2026

03/08/2026

Address

Opening Hours

Telephone

Website

Alerts

Contact The Business

Shortcuts

Share

Listing takedown request

Monday	09:00 - 16:00
Tuesday	09:00 - 16:00
Wednesday	09:00 - 16:00
Thursday	09:00 - 16:00
Friday	09:00 - 16:00