FROM THE HIGH COURT, Suspended ESRIC officer earns over
MBABANE – Eswatini Royal Insurance Corporation (ESRIC) has accused its group life and pension officer, who was suspended in October 2019, and SUFIAW of frustrating the former’s disciplinary hearing, resulting in her being paid over E1 million to date.
7he Human 5esources and Administration 0anager of the corporation Carol 0uir said as a result of the alleged frustration of Irene Nxumalo¶s hearing purportedly by the Swa]iland Union of Fi nancial Institutions and Allied WorNers (SUFIAW) and herself she has been paid ( while sitting at home. Nxumalo is said to earn a monthly salary of ( . She has been on suspension with pay for almost three and a half years.
0uir said the matter involving Nxumalo¶s disciplinary hearing had a long protracted and cheTuered history and she reTuested the High Court to carefully looN into it with a view of assessing whether she (Nxumalo) and SUFIAW were litigating in good or bad faith.
She said the court should also looN into whether their intention was stultifying the internal dis ciplinary hearing which had been instituted by the employer reasonably and in exercise of its prerogative to discipline its employee.
0uir stated that Nxumalo who was charged with fraud had been found by the Industrial Court previously to be abusing the court processes and deliberately delaying the of the disciplinary hearing by employing a systematic method of endless litigation.
Nxumalo according to 0uir was suspended from employment sometime in 2ctober on full pay. She said she was charged and invited to the first sitting of her disciplinary hearing in November three years and five months ago. 7he disciplinary hearing has still not been finalised according to 0uir solely because Nxumalo worNing together with the trade union were allegedly continuously and systematically frustrating its finalisation.
“Nxumalo and SUFIAW have filed and litigat ed more than six times by now and this present application is another stratagem of trying to stop a sitting of the disciplinary hearing which was scheduled to start last 7hursday at am ´ said 0uir.
She was responding to an urgent application that was filed by Nxumalo at the High Court last Wednesday. Nxumalo wants the court to interdict her disciplinary hearing pending finalisation of her application to review and set aside the order that was issued by the Industrial Court on February .
Alternatively she wants the chairman of the hearing to be removed from the matter. 7he Mudgment she seeNs to review was issued by -udge %anele Ngcamphalala.
Nxumalo told the court that she was still employed and her rights and obligations as an employee were still intact and warranted that she immediately sought protection from the court in the event of any unlawful violation of her rights at the hearing.
She alleged that her hearing was unlawful and unfair hence her decision to approach the court on an urgent basis to seeN protection of her employment and to seeN further protection against being through µan obviously sham and fait accompli of a disciplinary process¶.
Nxumalo also alleged that the human resources and administration manager had unilaterally deviated from the code and implementing same while negotiations were still ongoing between SUFIAW and the insurance corporation.
She argued that the court was enMoined to intervene in the hearing on the basis that the purported unilateral deviation from a binding collective agreement was tainted with gross unfairness and unfair labour practices constitut ing exceptional circumstances which warranted intervention by the court.
“7he denial of my basic procedural rights at the hearing through appointing an external chairperson is the cause of action herein. It is unlawful and if allowed to prevail it will continue to affect my guaranteed rights to a fair disciplinary hearing as an employee whose employment with first respondent (corporation) still subsists hence I am enMoined to approach the court on an urgent basis to seeN the reliefs herein.
“7he subMect matter for this application is still very much alive and its nature is simply to promote unfairness preMudicial against me in the form deviating from the disciplinary code and unilaterally implementing or appointing sixth respondent as chairperson failure misdirection of the law or facts in that the first applicant (SUFI AW) sought the recusal of the chairperson whereas it was an obMection on the appointment of an external chairperson which was a deviation from the binding collective and disciplinary code which promotes negotiations and reaching a consensus prior to implementing a rule that deviates from the disciplinary code ´ said Nxumalo.
Disciplinary
She submitted that the hearing as it stood was unlawful and initiated a disciplinary action which was irregular a sham and a fait accompli presided over by a chairperson who was tainted and external as such was against the disciplinary code.
She said the correction of the alleged unlawful ness of the hearing could only be made by the court not C0AC as the latter did not have Murisdiction to issue orders for stay.
“I humbly seeN to protect my employment now prior to being unfairly and unlawfully dismissed by the respondents already acting in concert in frustrating my rights at the hearing. I submit that I will not be afforded any substantial redress in due