Johannesburg’s Labour Court dismissed Woolworths’ bid to overturn an arbitration ruling reinstating a 16-year employee fired for alleged suspicious behavior in a stockroom.
Acting Judge W.N. Sidzumo ruled the retailer failed to prove misconduct on the balance of probabilities, affirming the CCMA’s order for Jane Makhubela’s return with six months’ back pay (R54,464).
Case Details
Makhubela, a departmental coordinator dismissed in October 2023, was caught on CCTV placing her hands between her thighs in a high-risk area. Woolworths alleged concealment breached shrinkage policies, citing inconsistent explanations as dishonest.
No stolen items or stock loss were found. She testified adjusting tights and sanitary pad due to time constraints and upstairs bathrooms, plus cultural discomfort discussing menstruation with male managers.
Court Reasoning
The March 2024 CCMA arbitrator deemed dismissal unfair—suspicion alone is insufficient without proof of concealment or loss. Makhubela’s account rang “probable and trustworthy.”
Labour Court, reviewing under Section 145, upheld the “band of reasonableness”: CCTV showed no items hidden, charges lacked dishonesty claims, and the trust breakdown was unproven. Reinstatement remains the primary remedy absent intolerable relations.
Woolworths’ late affidavit condoned, but review denied—no costs ordered.