South African Rugby Union v Watson and Others

Andre Watson was employed by the South African Rugby Union (SARU) as General Manager: Executive Head of Referees since 1998. In 2014–2015 a series of complaints arose concerning his management style and conduct, including the repeated use of abusive, vulgar and threatening language towards referees, coaches and selectors, and a specific incident where he threatened referee Rasta Rashivenge during contract negotiations. His conduct at a High Performance Referees Camp and meetings surrounding the Varsity Cup was alleged to be unprofessional, intimidating and damaging to SARU’s reputation. Numerous referees lodged a formal grievance. Following an investigation and arbitration under s188A of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, the arbitrator found Watson guilty of gross misconduct and imposed dismissal. The Labour Court on review agreed with the findings of misconduct but substituted dismissal with a final written warning and reinstatement, holding that progressive discipline should have been applied. SARU appealed to the Labour Appeal Court.

The appeal was upheld. The Labour Court’s judgment was set aside and replaced with an order dismissing the review application. The arbitrator’s award of dismissal was reinstated.

The case reinforces the distinction between review and appeal in South African labour law and affirms the Sidumo/Heroldt reasonableness test under section 145 of the LRA. It confirms that Labour Courts may not interfere with an arbitrator’s decision on sanction merely because they would have imposed a different outcome, particularly where serious misconduct justifies dismissal.