Department fails in bid to get clerk fired

THE Department of Defence turned to the Labour Court to review its decision to give one of its financial clerks a final warning following a cash deficit of R40 000.

In this somewhat unusual move, the department wanted her fired.

In turning down the review, a judge said “a new thinking” had developed where state departments asked courts to reverse decisions that they were not happy with.

Judge Graham Moshoana said the Labour Court could not interfere with the disciplinary sanction.

Metse Patricia Masombuka was, and still is, employed by the department as a senior accounting clerk in the finance department.

She is stationed at Dunnottar. One of her functions was to render cash payment services to the department’s clients in the area where she was stationed.

In February 2018, the chief accounting clerk performed a weekly inspection on a sub-account and discovered that there was a shortage of about R40 000.

This shortage arose from cash that was collected or kept by Masombuka.

An investigation into the shortage was launched, which culminated in a disciplinary process being launched against Masombuka.

She faced allegations of mismanaging state finances, to which she pleaded guilty.

The chairperson of the disciplinary process accepted the plea of guilt and imposed a sanction of a final written warning, and ordered Masombuka to repay the lost R40 081.80.

The department was unhappy with the sanction imposed by its own appointed chairperson as it felt that Masombuka should have been fired.

It was argued on behalf of the department that a final written warning was inappropriate.

It was said that the chairperson ignored the aggravating circumstances and gave undue regard to the fact that Masombuka pleaded guilty and showed remorse.

Judge Moshoana was told that the trust relationship was broken beyond repair as a result of Masombuka’s dishonesty.

The judge questioned whether the state and its organs, in their capacities as employers, should enjoy what appeared to be a special privilege to approach this court to act as a disciplinary appeal body and to impose an appropriate sanction on their behalf.

The judge concluded on this point that public sector employers were better suited to internally deal with their own matters, rather than turning to this court in a bid for it to dismiss its employees on its behalf.

Judge Moshoana also could not find that the chairperson of the disciplinary hearing was wrong in giving Masumbuka a final warning, as he said the disciplinary code and procedures for the public service made provision for this in cases like this.

“The sting in the charge Masombuka was found guilty of is that of negligent mismanagement by failing to balance an account.

“It was never alleged, and/or proven, that she stole the money in question, nor did she act fraudulently and/or dishonestly.

“The loss arose because of her negligent mismanagement, and not her dishonesty that was never alleged or proven,” the judge said in turning down the application.