Thabang Mampane NO and Others v National Union of Public Service and Allied Workers and Another

The National Lotteries Commission (NLC), an organ of state, undertook a nationwide restructuring following amendments to the Lotteries Act requiring provincial offices. As part of this process, employees were consulted and assessed for relocation. Ms Mokgatlha, an assistant manager based in Pretoria, was assessed and ultimately deployed to KwaZulu-Natal after failing to secure placement in other preferred provinces. She objected and sought reconsideration, citing personal and financial circumstances. Her request was discussed by the Commissioner and Human Capital Manager (HCM) and rejected. Further correspondence followed, and the decision was reaffirmed. Acting through her union, NUPSAW, Mokgatlha brought a review application in the Labour Court under section 158(1)(h) of the LRA, arguing that the refusal to deviate from her relocation was ultra vires because the Commissioner had allegedly unlawfully delegated decision-making authority to the HCM. The Labour Court upheld this ground and set aside the decision. The NLC and its officials appealed to the Labour Appeal Court.

The appeal was upheld. The Labour Court’s judgment was set aside and substituted with an order dismissing the review application. NUPSAW was ordered to pay the costs in the Labour Court and on appeal.

The case clarifies that relocation decisions arising from restructuring in public employment do not automatically give rise to internal appeal rights unless expressly provided. It affirms the breadth of statutory delegation powers under section 2D of the Lotteries Act and limits the scope of legality reviews under section 158(1)(h) of the LRA. Importantly, it confirms that binding collective agreements regulating restructuring outcomes are not reviewable administrative decisions when the employee is a party bound by the agreement.