Labour Court reinstates man fired after using company car to assist motorist with a flat tyre

The Labour Court in Johannesburg has dismissed a review application filed by Europcar South Africa against the reinstatement of an employee wrongfully dismissed for using a company vehicle without permission.

The ruling came in support of Pumeza Glenn Poswa who had worked for Europcar since 2010 and achieved a promotion to supervisor.

Europcar, a division of Motors Group Limited, operates a fleet of revenue-generating vehicles essential to its rental business.

Poswa was occasionally required to use company vehicles as part of his duties. A key condition of this use was the prompt return of the vehicle following its utilisation.

He was ultimately dismissed due to misconduct, specifically the unauthorised personal use of a company vehicle without securing his manager's prior approval.

According to the evidence, in June 2021 while Poswa was working a night shift, a car in the vicinity of his residence had broken down with a flat tyre, and he took a company car to assist. The next day, being an off day for the branch, the same company car required tyre repairs.

The employer maintained the vehicle should have remained available for rental use, as it was a revenue-generating vehicle.

He was dismissed following the incident and the matter was referred to the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) where the commissioner concluded that the dismissal was substantively unfair.

Furthermore, reliance was placed by the commissioner on Poswa's previously unblemished disciplinary record. 

The commissioner held that it was inconceivable that the vehicle could have been used for revenue purposes and concluded that the employer had not suffered actual prejudice.

Unhappy with the commissioner's ruling, the employer sought a review in the Labour Court and maintained that there was a clear link between dishonesty and unauthorised use of company property, which ordinarily warrants dismissal where the rule is clear, consistently applied, and goes to the heart of the employment relationship. 

Acting Judge Suhayl Rajah presided over the matter and agreed that the rule prohibiting unauthorised use of company vehicles is important, given the nature of the employer’s core business and the revenue-generating purpose of its fleet.

However, he said Poswa's conduct does not justify the conclusion that the employment relationship had become intolerable.

The judge said the main issue was whether the company rule was sufficiently clear and consistently applied to prohibit the employee’s conduct in an unequivocal manner.

In his findings, the judge said in theory, the rule may have been clearly documented, but in reality, the actions of both the employer and the employee had eroded the distinction between what was allowed and what was forbidden.

"This court is of the view that the commissioner’s finding, namely that the dismissal was substantively unfair, is reasonable and justified on the evidence properly before him. There is accordingly no basis for this court to interfere with the award, and the review sought must fail," said judge Rajah.

[email protected]

IOL

Get your news on the go. Download the latest IOL App for Android and IOS now.