Employment Law - Written Final Warning

[jacksonc]

Can an employer issue a final written warning the first time without the first or second. The employers argument is that the offence is serious that it warrants a final warning without need for a first and second, what are the options of the employee ?

 

[Other Pineapple Smurf]

Yes

But it you need to refer to your company policy about that - the list with written warning / verbal warning per offence. If no such list exists or the transgression is not listed, then you can go straight to final written warning. We did it with our small business and it was upheld in a CCMA hearing.

Important thing is this needs to be consistent, in other words one cannot give a verbal warning today to one employee and then a final written to another employee the next day. Also all warnings (verbal and written) first require a hearing before they may be issued, they cannot just be issued. The hearing can take place as an informal one at the moment. Example is where a staff member is late and the manager ask why and gives the staff member an opportunity to give a reason. But if the manager just walked up to the staff member and handed a verbal/written warning without saying a word, then CCMA might not uphold it.

Also previous warnings for other transgressions can be used as a reason for the final written one.

(We did a lot of research on this topic a while back when we had a problem staff member. The law is there to protect both parties. Ultimately one needs to speak to a professional if this will lead to a CCMA hearing or dismissal).

EDIT: We also always contact our labour consultant for each and every warning - both written & verbal - to make sure we are within the law and within the rights of both parties.

 

[Skandalis]

As far as I recall it also can't be given without a disciplinary hearing either...

 

[Kosmik]

Can an employer issue a final written warning the first time without the first or second. The employers argument is that the offence is serious that it warrants a final warning without need for a first and second, what are the options of the employee ?

Depending on the severity of the offense yes.

 

[R13...]

Yes an employer can do that, but he must hold a formal hearing.

 

[Other Pineapple Smurf]

As far as I recall it also can't be given without a disciplinary hearing either...

The hearing can be either formal or informal - my wording in my post was not clear

 

[Alton Turner Blackwood]

Dafuq did you do, OP? :wtf:

 

[Fng]

http://www.ccma.org.za/UploadedMedia/InfoSheets_DISCIPLINARY PROCEDURES - MAR 2002.pdf

 

[mike6870]

Can an employer issue a final written warning the first time without the first or second. The employers argument is that the offence is serious that it warrants a final warning without need for a first and second, what are the options of the employee ?[/QUOTE
...good luck looking for a new job...

 

[Jab]

Yes an employer can do that, but he must hold a formal hearing.

You don't need formal hearings for written warnings final or other.

Edit. Although a hearings outcome may be a final written warning.

 

[Bar0n]

Dafuq did you do, OP? :wtf:

I'd also like to know.

For the record, you can be summarily dismissed without a hearing as well.

 

[Jab]

I'd also like to know.

For the record, you can be summarily dismissed without a hearing as well.

You may be suspended immediately but for a dismissal you need a hearing, which may be in the employee's absence

 

[Bar0n]

which may be in the employee's absence

Cool, didn't know that. :erm:

 

[Kosmik]

You may be suspended immediately but for a dismissal you need a hearing, which may be in the employee's absence

Agreed. The person has the right to defend their actions and must be given a platform to do so.

 

[R13...]

You don't need formal hearings for written warnings final or other.

Edit. Although a hearings outcome may be a final written warning.

How does one define an informal hearing? I had a formal hearing for a traffic violation at work that had the potential for a final written warning. It was me, my boss, department boss and hr chap. That's formal for us.

And no I didn't get a final written warning in the end, i got just a regular written one.

 

[Roselia119]

A few days ago there was theft in my workplace a cashier stole more than R4000 the supervisor on duty followed the correct procedures but the theft is being pinned on her due to " gross negligence". The supervisor had a "meeting" with the boss who gave her a final written warning for gross negligeng and telling her that she has to pay the money back. She went to appeal and they told her either she chooses to pay or the will dismiss her. Mind you this is her first offense and she didn't participate in the theft nor the she know they where planning on theft. Both suspects where caught but the still want her to pay. Can they do that to her?

 

[Geoff.D]

A few days ago there was theft in my workplace a cashier stole more than R4000 the supervisor on duty followed the correct procedures but the theft is being pinned on her due to " gross negligence". The supervisor had a "meeting" with the boss who gave her a final written warning for gross negligeng and telling her that she has to pay the money back. She went to appeal and they told her either she chooses to pay or the will dismiss her. Mind you this is her first offense and she didn't participate in the theft nor the she know they where planning on theft. Both suspects where caught but the still want her to pay. Can they do that to her?

Probably not. But will end up in a protracted battle. What action has been taken against the perpetrators? She should not take this lying down.

 

[Roselia119]

Apparently they have been taken into custody and a case have been opened against the crime. The boss said he will fully refund her if they are convicted and he receives the full amount back that has been stolen, in the trail.

 

[f2wohf]

A thing to check, I think only 25% of a salary can be deducted as per the BCEA.

If 4000 is above 25%, it is illegal.

 

[Werfetter]

By that logic the boss should be responsible since he was responsible for her, or maybe whoever hired any of the three people mentioned so far, or whoever hired the HR person, **** it just give everyone final warnings and fine them all for the missing money.

If she did not willingly participate in the theft or hold knowledge of it beforehand how can she be held liable? Sounds like they are taking a chance...