Minister of Justice and Correctional Services and Others v Ramaila and Others

Mr Sekhoshe Days Ramaila was appointed on 2 March 2015 as a State Law Adviser in the Department of Justice and Constitutional Development. He was a first-time entrant into the public service, having previously worked in private practice. He and several colleagues were appointed on the same salary notch, performed similar duties, and achieved identical performance ratings of 100% for the 2015/2016 financial year. However, unlike some comparators who had prior public service experience, Mr Ramaila was denied annual pay progression because, under PSCBC Resolution 1 of 2012, the Incentive Policy Framework, and the Department’s Performance Management Policy, first-time participants in the public service only qualified for pay progression after 24 months’ service. Mr Ramaila challenged this differentiation as irrational, arbitrary, and unfairly discriminatory, and further sought review of the collective agreement and policies under PAJA.

The appeal was upheld. The judgment and order of the Labour Court were set aside, and Mr Ramaila’s claims of unfair discrimination and PAJA review were dismissed.

The case clarifies the interpretation of “any other arbitrary ground” under section 6(1) of the Employment Equity Act, affirming a narrow, dignity-based approach. It reinforces the autonomy and binding nature of collective agreements in the public service and limits the circumstances under which such agreements and related policies may be subjected to judicial review.