Sex-pest fired for good after school cover-up

THE termination of employment of a sex-pest teacher who fraudulently went back to work some months after he was found guilty of sexual misconduct over dating a learner has been upheld.

Richard Themba Ndlovu, who has been a maths teacher since February 1995, remained in the employment of the Education Department for four years before he was fired again.

He resigned in April 2014 after being found guilty of sexual misconduct and was re-employed at the same school in Zululand in August 2014.

KZN Education Department again dismissed him in May 2018 after discovering he was back in service.

Testifying in arbitration at the Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC), a department representative blamed a “cover-up”, which allegedly involved officials, for Ndlovu’s undetected return to teaching.

Ndlovu returned as a temporary teacher, apparently appointed by the school governing body. He was subsequently made permanent in December 2017.

Ndlovu’s salary wasn’t paid in June 2018 and on making enquiries, he discovered this was because the department’s system showed he was dismissed.

The ELRC arbitration was held at Ndlovu’s behest. He sought to have the department’s decision to re-dismiss him in 2018 set aside.

Ndlovu maintained before arbitrator Vuyokazi Ngwenya that his return to the school was by the book.

He stressed that he did not bribe anyone to secure re-employment, but the school’s retired principal head-hunted him as there was a dire need for a maths teacher.

Conceding that he was charged for sexual misconduct, Ndlovu told Ngwenya he had appealed in 2014. He said he only learnt of the appeal outcome, which went against him, in November last year.

Ndlovu maintained it was wrong of the department’s official to label him a paedophile and sexual predator.

According to him, a “paedophile is person who has sexual relations with children under the age of 13 and he has never had any sexual relations with girls under the age of 13”, said arbitrator Ngwenya of her decision.

“The applicant knew that his actions were grossly improper,” said Ngwenya.

“I say so because in his testimony he boldly said a sexual predator/paedophile is a person who has sexual relations with girls under the age of 13 and that he has never been accused of raping or molesting a girl child under the age of 13.

“The applicant missed the point. Section 17 of the Employment of Educators Act refers to a learner and not to girls under a certain age,” she said.

“The (department) was correct in terminating the services of the applicant in the first instance. To then take back such an offender into the employment fold… is to defeat the very essence of the objectives of the applicable legislation.” |