Crop Hoodie Dobermann • White ARt Boutique
HomeShopHoodiesWomen's HoodiesCrop Hoodie Dobermann
Print on hoodie: dobermann by Mariya Kuzema.
Categories: Dogs, Women's Hoodies Tags: dobermann, Mariya Kuzema SKU:0005CrHoodie
Be the first to review “Crop Hoodie Dobermann” Cancel reply
RUB: 1,841 руб.
Hooded Sweatshirt Dobermann48.16$
Tote bag Boxer33.35$ Onbillike ontslag en heraanstelling - Jy en die RegJy en die Reg
Tuis › Artikels › Onbillike ontslag en heraanstelling
Onbillike ontslag en heraanstelling
Donderdag, April 19th, 2018
Deur Mynie Kriek
Vraag: My werkgewer het my afgedank sonder om enige prosedures vir ontslag te volg. Toe ek ʼn geskil van onbillike ontslag by die KVBA aanhangig maak, het my werkgewer aangebied om weer aan te stel ten einde die ontslagproses reg te stel. Is dit wettig, en hoe sal dit my saak van onbillike ontslag beïnvloed?
Die feitestel in hierdie scenario stem ooreen met saak Heath v A & N Paneelkloppers (2015) 36 ILJ 1301 (LC). In hierdie spesifieke saak is ʼn werknemer ontslaan, klaarblyklik as gevolg van haar swangerskap. Die werknemer het op grond van diskriminasie weens swangerskap ʼn geskil van onbillike ontslag na die arbeidshof verwys. Kort daarna het die werkgewer aangebied om die werknemer weer in haar pos aan te stel. Die werknemer het die aanbod geweier en met haar geskil voortgegaan.
By oorweging van watter uitwerking die aanbod van herindiensstelling op enige vergoeding vir die outomatiese onbillike ontslag gehad het, het die arbeidshof soos volg beslis:
Where an employer has committed a wrong, as the current respondent clearly has, the employer still has a right to remedy this wrong committed. This is especially the case where the employer unconditionally offers to restore the employment relationship. The fact is that an employer that appreciates and embraces the error of its ways, must be given the opportunity to restore matters to the way they were before it strayed from the right path. Where an employer thus acknowledges wrongdoing and offers fully retrospective reinstatement to a dismissed employee, this should not readily be refuted by a dismissed employee. In such a case, the duty would be on the employee to provide a plausible and reasonable motivation for not accepting the proposal of the employer. Whilst this issue naturally does not detract from the determination that the original dismissal would be unfair, it certainly would have a direct and material impact on compensation to be awarded to the employee for such unfair dismissal. Whilst each such case of course must be considered on its own merits, I venture to suggest the following considerations which would be pertinent in the Court exercising its discretion as to the awarding of compensation in such instances:
74.1 The elapse of time between when the dismissal took place and the offer of reinstatement was made must be considered. The longer the delay, the more likely it would be that it can reasonably be contended that the employment relationship had eroded away. In other words, time is of the essence;
74.2 The offer should not be subject to conditions, and should be fully retrospective. In simple terms, it should constitute a proposal of the complete restoration of the status quo ante prior to dismissal;
74.3 The offer should also contain an assurance to the employee that the employee shall not be subjected to any form of harm or prejudice for having taken issue with his or her dismissal;
74.4 Preferably, the offer should provide a date and time the employee is to return to work; and
74.5 The Court should ultimately decide if the offer was made bona fide, and constituted a genuine attempt to remedy the wrong committed.
Die hof het bogenoemde besonderhede in ag geneem, en dit het uiteindelik ʼn impak gehad op die vergoedingsbedrag wat weens die outomatiese onbillike ontslag aan die werknemer toegeken is – die hof het slegs vergoeding toegestaan vir diskriminasie weens haar swangerskap. Nadat die bogenoemde beginsels toegepas is, het die hof opgemerk dat indien dit nie was vir die feit dat die applikant se ontslag outomaties onbillik was omdat dit met haar swangerskap verband gehou het nie, die aansoeker moontlik in die situasie kon wees dat sy geen vergoeding sou ontvang het nie weens haar weiering om die aanbod vir herindiensneming te aanvaar.
Wat hierdie saak illustreer, is dat ʼn werkgewer wat ʼn werknemer om welke rede ook al ontslaan het, daarop geregtig is om herindiensstelling aan sodanige werknemer aan te bied ten einde gebreke in die ontslagproses reg te stel.
ʼn Werknemer wat ontslaan is, sal wysheid aan die dag lê om nie ʼn aanbod van herindiensstelling ligtelik op te neem nie, aangesien hierdie aanbod die meriete van enige verdere onbillike ontslaggeskil nadelig kan beïnvloed.