Securitas Specialised Services (Pty) Ltd v Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration and Others

The appellant, a private security company, dismissed an employee, Mr Peheme Edward, who had been employed as a Contracts Manager for sixteen years. He was charged with multiple acts of misconduct, including alleged threats involving a firearm, bringing the company’s name into disrepute, gross negligence, unauthorised absenteeism, and failure to follow instructions. After a disciplinary hearing at which he represented himself (his union official was refused permission to represent him), he was found guilty and dismissed. He referred an unfair dismissal dispute to the CCMA. The arbitrator found the dismissal to be both procedurally and substantively unfair and ordered retrospective reinstatement with a written warning. The employer unsuccessfully reviewed the award in the Labour Court and then appealed to the Labour Appeal Court.

The appeal was dismissed with costs, and the CCMA arbitration award ordering retrospective reinstatement with a written warning remained in force.

The case reaffirms the strict distinction between review and appeal in labour matters and restates the Sidumo/Gold Fields reasonableness test. It underscores that procedural errors by an arbitrator will not justify setting aside an award if the outcome remains substantively reasonable, and that courts must avoid piecemeal interference with CCMA awards.