The applicant, Mr Wayne Pratten, was employed by the respondent for a cumulative period exceeding 28 years, ultimately holding the position of Deputy Tables Manager at Sibaya Casino. In early 2014, the respondent embarked on a large-scale restructuring process due to operational requirements and issued notices in terms of sections 189 and 189A of the Labour Relations Act. As part of the restructuring, certain existing positions became redundant and new positions were created, including Gaming Floor Manager roles. Employees whose posts were affected were required to apply for the new positions and were assessed using minimum criteria, psychometric testing, and ranking against peers. The applicant applied for Gaming Floor Manager: Tables positions but was unsuccessful due to his psychometric test rankings. He declined alternative positions offered at distant casinos for personal and family reasons. He was retrenched in December 2014 and challenged the substantive fairness of his dismissal, particularly the use of psychometric testing as a selection criterion and the alleged failure to consider reasonable alternatives.
The applicant’s claim of substantively unfair dismissal was dismissed. The retrenchment was found to be fair and justified by the respondent’s operational requirements.
This case clarifies the permissibility of using psychometric testing as part of selection criteria during a section 189A retrenchment process. It confirms that requiring employees to compete for newly created posts does not, without more, constitute an unfair dismissal and that psychometric assessments may be fair and objective if properly validated, administered, and applied. The judgment reinforces employer discretion in large-scale restructurings, provided statutory requirements of substantive fairness are met.