Recent Feedback
Good Morning. The lady in question has been working for me for the last 16 months - one day a week.When I payed her at the end of Nov, she then informed me that she is going on holiday and that she will only see me the middle of Jan. AWOL.In May she unlawfully took a brand new shirt and matching socks out of my closet.When I confronted her about this, she insinuated that I took it, or hiding it, or that I took other people up to my bedroom and they could have taken it. - She and myself are the only two people who come into this house.Untill today she has never return the shirt and socks and I therefore deducted the money from her June wage to replenish it.She refused to come to work yesterday. She said she can't work under such circumstances because she is a Christian and she doesn't lie.The fact that I deducted the money from her wage, she took it up with the CCMA.She is the SOURCE of this matter... and I guess that I am the criminal.Does the law in this country encourage steeling to a certain point or at least a FIRST, SECOND and maybe a THIRD time and then a Golden handshake? And does the law encourage us to 'just turn a blind eye' towards people who 'does wrong'?No wonder that the unemployment rate in SA is soaring.I am looking forward to your advise please.
Optional Information: Province: Gauteng Already Tried: I have written in my initial writing what I have tried/done so far.
Good day. This is an info request to assist you better. Please continue on this thread.Does she work more than 24 hours per month for you?
She works 7 hours a day once a week.
Does she take a lunch break?
Sorry to keep you waiting but I'm teaching at the same time.
Did she resign or did you dismiss her? I will answer after this.
I did not dismiss her. I expected her to continue working for me. It was when I said to her on Monday (when I confronted her {she is also working for somebody in the complex}) that I will see her Tuesday (yesterday) at 8h00 that she told me she isn't coming back.
In my opinion, she would be an employee in terms of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act because she (has to) work more than 24 hours per month (whether she actually does or not)1. I think the first thing that you need to do is to confirm with her whether she has now resigned or not. If she has, try and get it in writing, because the Basic Conditions of Employment Act require you to have it in writing. This will also protect you from further vexatious applications at the CCMA.2. If you cannot get it in writing, to protect yourself, you need to hold a disciplinary hearing for misconduct. Even if she does not show up for the hearing, you still need to hold the hearing, how stupid that may be.The South Africa Labour Legislation require that, before you can dismiss an employee, it must be for a fair reason, following a fair procedure. The Department of Labour has issued a Code of Good Practice which stipulate the minimum requirements for fair procedure and a list of fair reasons. This can be accessed at http://www.workinsolutions.co.za/downloads/Code%20of%20Good%20Practice%20-%20Dismissal.pdfBasically, with regard to fair procedure, it normally entails a disciplinary hearing. In order to conduct a disciplinary hearing, you would have to give the employee notice of such a hearing. The notice must contain the following information:1. The date, place and time of the hearing.2. The charge against the employee3. The employees rights, which would include:• The right to present evidence.• The right to present witnesses• The right to cross examine the witnesses of the employer and the evidence of the employer• The right to be represented by a co-worker or a union representativeAt the hearing itself, the best practice would be to get an expert in to assist you, preferably someone impartial, however, if the cost of this is an issue to you, then you can ask someone to chair your disciplinary hearing, however, it is imperative that such a person exercises his judgment impartially.A hearing will normally follow the same procedure as a trial at court, just a lot more formal. The employer will be given an opportunity to prove the charge and the employee will be given an opportunity to state his/her side of the story. Both employer and employee are allowed to cross-examine each other's versions as well as the versions of each of the witnesses. Once the presiding officer has come to a decision, the employer and employee has to be informed of the decision in writing.It is imperative that the employer as well as the chairperson take detailed notes of the proceedings and to store this for at least a year.Note that this is not the only procedure, but this is the most appropriate procedure in most instances. The Act does allow for an even more informal procedure, where the employer both chair the hearing and act as prosecutor, however, this should only be employed where the issues are not complex. 3. The Basic Conditions of Employment Act allows you to hold back monies from an employee in three instances:a) Where there is a court order that requires you to do so.b) Where there is a law that requires you to do soc) Where the employee agrees that you can do so.What you did, unfortunately, is not covered here. In the eyes of the law, you took the law into your own hands, which is not allowed. If you wanted to claim for the sock and the shirt, you will have to do so through a civil court, which can be the Small Claims Court.
This is the cheapest and quickest way to collect a sum of under R 12 000. Nobody is allowed to use lawyers and the whole process will cost you about R 100.
The Small Claims Court is usually located at your local Magistrates Court and you should ask to speak to the Clerk of the Small Claims Court. They will assist you in issuing a letter of demand and then later a summons.
You will have to represent yourself on a date that will be given to you by the Clerk of the Court, however, this is normally after hours, which means that you do not need to take off work.
If you are satisfied with the quality of my service, please rate me between okay service and excellent service in order for me to get paid for my work. If not, please choose to reply to expert and put your further questions for my consideration.
Thank you for your mail.
1. No one is criminalizing what you did. There certainly is not crime committed on your part. It is just that you did not follow the correct procedure in order to enforce your rights.2. Stealing is a crime in this country, but that is a job for the SAPD and the courts to handle and punish. People certainly go to jail because of theft, but it has to proved and someone needs to be convicted by a court to be punished for it. So, in order for you to get the thing into the criminal justice system, you need to report the crime. The law does not allow us to accuse, prosecute, judge and punish ourselves and there is the mistake. 3. No one is saying you must turn a blind eye. Only that, if you want this to be investigated and prosecuted, you need to follow the correct legal procedures. It is not illegal what you did, just irregular.4. You are not in trouble for using the word steal. You have a right to report a theft of your property to the correct authorities and to inform them of your suspicions.
Experience: L.LB, Civil and criminal litigation, contracts, labour and family law