Arbitrator: Macjon Maarman
Case number: ELRC826-24/ 25 EC
Date of Award: 04 February 2025

SAOU on behalf of Pieter Geyser Applicant
and
Department of Education, Eastern Cape Respondent

DETAILS OF HEARING AND REPRESENTATION

1. The arbitration under ELRC826-24/25 EC concluded on 31 January 2025 virtually. The applicant, Mr. Pieter Geyser, was present and represented by Ms. Debbie Harvey, an official from the South-African Teachers Union (Suid-Afrikaans Onderwys Unie). The respondent, Department of Education, Eastern Cape, was present and represented by Ms. Lindelwa Sidzamba, its acting Deputy Chief Education Specialist of Employee Relations. The proceedings were manually and digitally recorded. Parties submitted bundles of documents which was accepted for what it purported to be.
   ISSUE TO BE DECIDED
2. I am required to determine whether the respondent committed an unfair labour practice in relation to the payment of benefits to the applicant. The applicant seeks compensation in the amount of R63 000, 00.

SURVEY OF EVIDENCE AND ARGUMENT

3. This award does not contain everything that was said that the arbitration or in the arguments of the parties. It only records the evidence and arguments material to the subject matter and the finalization of the dispute. This is in line with section 18.6.1 of the ELRC constitution as well as section 138 (7) of the LRA. The applicant’s case
4. Mr. Pieter Geyser (herein after “the applicant”) testified that he started working for the respondent on 01 February 1997, retired on 31 May 2024. He further said that that he moved to the town of Jeffreys Bay from Cradock where he was stationed.
5. The applicant said that he is entitled to the payment of his transport fees from Cradock to Jeffreys Bay. He said that this was confirmed in a letter that he received on 11 February 2024 that was signed by the District Director of Chris Hani West Education District in the Eastern Cape. That letter said “Resettlement benefits to a different station [town] within the Republic of South-Africa may be granted on condition that such a resettlement takes place within 90 days after your retirement”.
6. The applicant said that he moved within 90 days as per the letter he received after his retirement. The applicant further said that in terms of the Eastern Cape Department of Education Resettlement Policy and section 10.1 (a) in particular says that “if an employee retires the Department may as a once-off provision and at the request of an employee and or his or her family, meet his or her and his/ her family’s reasonable actual costs in respect of resettlement as well as storage costs to a maximum period of one month”. The applicant said that he met Mr. Mabuya at the Cradock office prior to his resettlement whereby Mr. Mabuya said that the applicant needs to supply the department with 3 quotations and he duly supplied the department with the 3 quotations of which he was told to use the lowest one and the department will refund him.
7. The applicant continued to testify and said that the lowest quotation was for R63 000, 00 which he used and duly supplied the respondent with all the required documentation after moving of which the respondent confirmed receipt. The applicant said that he seeks his R63 000, 00 resettlement benefits as per the relevant policy and letter he received from the respondent.
8. The respondent did not have any cross examination questions to the applicant nor disputed anything that the applicant testified. The respondent’s case
9. Ms. Lindelwa Sidzamba said that the respondent does not dispute the applicant’s claim for the resettlement benefits of R63 000, 00 as per his discussions with Mr. Mabuya.

ANALYIS OF ARGUMENT:

10. Section 186 (2) of the LRA holds that “Unfair Labour Practice” means any unfair act or omission that arises between an employer and an employee involving (a) unfair conduct by the employer relating to…. the provision of benefits to an employee”.
11. In this case the provisions of the Eastern Cape Department of Education Resettlement policy was not disputed. The letter that the applicant received from the respondent in February 2024 was also not disputed. There were furthermore no jurisdictional issues in this case.
12. The policy and letter provides that the resettlement benefits are due to the applicant. The payment of a resettlement amount was part of the conditions of service of the applicant as an educator in the Eastern Cape. The respondent, in this arbitration further, agreed that the resettlement benefit is due to the applicant and not paid. The amount of R63 000, 00 is thus due to the applicant. The applicant must pay the applicant R63 000, 00.

AWARD

The respondent, Department of Education, Eastern Cape, must pay the applicant, Mr. Pieter Geyser, R63 000, 00 (Sixty three thousand rands) by no later than 28 February 2025. Panelist: Macjon Maarman

The respondent, Department of Education, Eastern Cape, committed an unfair labour practice in relation to benefits against the applicant, Mr. Pieter Geyser.

ELRC826-24/ 25 EC
Senior ELRC Panelist