Sun International Limited v SACCAWU obo Rebecca Ramerafe and Others

The employee, Ms Rebecca Ramerafe, was employed by Sun International Limited from 2008 and appointed as a surveillance auditor in 2014 following a restructuring, receiving a salary within the applicable band. In June 2016, Sun International appointed Mr Botha as a surveillance auditor on a substantially higher remuneration package. It was common cause that Ms Ramerafe and Mr Botha performed identical work, held the same job title, were graded at the same level, and reported to the same manager. Ms Ramerafe earned approximately R143 445 per annum, while Mr Botha earned approximately R271 440. She alleged that the disparity constituted unfair discrimination on the grounds of race and gender under section 6 of the Employment Equity Act (EEA). The employer justified the disparity on the basis of market-related recruitment considerations, as well as Mr Botha’s greater experience and superior qualifications in the security industry. The CCMA arbitrator upheld the discrimination claim and ordered compensation, salary adjustment, and a broad directive to eliminate all salary disparities. Sun International brought a review application to the Labour Court.

The arbitration award issued on 3 July 2017 was reviewed and set aside. The dispute was remitted to the CCMA for a rehearing before a commissioner other than the original arbitrator. No order as to costs was made.

This case is significant for clarifying the correct approach to equal pay disputes under the Employment Equity Act, particularly where employees perform the same work. It emphasises the structured enquiry mandated by sections 6 and 11 of the EEA and the Employment Equity Regulations, the proper allocation of the onus of proof, and the limits of an arbitrator’s remedial powers. The judgment reinforces that salary disparities are not per se unfair and must be assessed against recognised justifiability factors.