FORMER head of operations at Oprah Winfrey Leadership Academy for Girls (OWLAG) has suffered a blow after the Labour Court dismissed his case.
This was after the Johannesburg Labour Court ruled against Simon Matiko’s attempt to review and set aside a private arbitration that favoured OWLAG last year.
He also wanted the labour court to declare his dismissal unfair and be reinstated to his position.
Matiko, who was appointed on probation between July 2021 and June 2022, was dismissed for failing to possess leadership values and display the necessary executive leadership expected at the level of the head of operations.
However, Matiko said he was fired without a clear reason.
He said this was after he lodged a complaint about abuse of power, intimidation and victimisation, as well as the mistreatment of learners.
He also argued that only during private arbitration that the school said he was fired for non-performance but failed to follow the presented code in the prescribed code in the Labour Relations Act schedule 8.8, which talks about steps for managing performance during probation.
OWLAG, through Decode Communications, said it was pleased with the result and the judgment confirmed that Matiko was dismissed for good reasons and in accordance with a fair procedure which was the school’s position all along.
Meanwhile, Matiko said his legal team was studying the judgment and would advise on the way forward.
Matiko quoted the 1999 inaugural speech of former President Thabo Mbeki, saying it was essential to bear in mind that: “Those who complete the course will do so only because, they do not, as fatigue sets in, convince themselves that the road ahead is still too long, the inclines too steep, the loneliness impossible to bear and the prize itself of doubtful value.”
In his founding affidavit, Matiko stated that the arbitrator arrived at conclusions and made findings that no reasonable commissioner could have arrived at. He said the arbitrator’s conclusions constituted gross irregularities in the proceedings.
He also added that the arbitrator committed a gross irregularity by making determinations on facts that should be considered in misconduct proceedings and then using such irrelevant material for purposes of bringing it within the ambit of the probationary inquiry and drawing conclusions from it, based on speculation.
The third ground for review related to the arbitrator’s “incorrect application of the legal principles pertaining to cost orders” in employment-related disputes when he arrived at a punitive cost order against Matiko, which failed to exercise his discretion judicially.
However, Judge Connie Prinsloo said Matiko did make a single averment to the effect that the arbitrator acted capriciously or with bias. Prinsloo said the only possible complaint was that the arbitrator adopted an incorrect approach when he deviated from the rule that cost does not follow the result in a labour matter.
Prinsloo said this ground for review, except in respect of the order that Matiko must pay the administrative costs, must fail, adding that she was not convinced that the arbitrator did not exercise his discretion judicially.
Prinsloo said the arbitration award would be reviewed and set aside only in respect of the arbitrator’s order that Matiko would pay the administrative costs. She added that the remainder of the arbitration award would not be reviewed.