Employees are suspended from duty for different reasons that may include a temporary lay-off due to operational circumstances.
That is, during retrenchment consultations, either party may suggest temporary lay-offs as an alternative to retrenchment.
This might be implemented where the employees agree to the lay-offs and there is some hope of more work and revenue being acquired in the future. In such circumstances the employees would not be paid, but would still be employees of the employer.
Employers must be careful not to hire new employees in place of employees who have been laid off as this would indicate that there had been no good reason for the lay- offs and the employer could well be forced to pay the employees for the lay-off period.
Where there is a large number of workers or where the lay-off period is a long one this payment could come to an extremely high amount.
The employer's intention behind a suspension may be to make the employee's working circumstances so uncomfortable that he/she resigns.
This motive is both illegitimate and dangerous. Employees sometimes resign on being suspended and charge the employer at CCMA with constructive dismissal.
However, the employee will not easily succeed with such a charge because such an employee is obliged to go through the disciplinary process rather than resign.
Should the employee claim at arbitration that the suspension was a sham on the employer's part the employer must be given the opportunity to show that it had good reason to suspend the employee and that there was some basis for the suspicion of misconduct.
The employer may need to investigate serious allegations made against the employee.
Where the employee is in a position of official or unofficial power, the suspension may be necessary in order to ensure that her/his presence at the workplace will not interfere with the investigation.
This is a legitimate reason for suspension, but the employee must be on full pay during the suspension period.
The employer must be sure that the suspension does not have the effect of breaching a contractual right of the employee, otherwise a civil suit could result.
The employer may have a need to avert the danger of the employee repeating the alleged offence.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment