MRL3702 Assignment 2
(COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 2 2025 - DUE 11
September 2025
For assistance contact
Email:
, Statement on Leave and Dismissal
Yes, #23&24 (Pty) Ltd has the right to issue the statement prohibiting leave during the last week
of December. Employers have a right to manage their business operations, and a crucial aspect of
this is operational requirements. This is a valid commercial rationale to ensure the business
can meet its demands during a busy period. However, this right is not absolute and must be
balanced against employees' rights, including their right to freedom of religion.
Ground for Dismissal
If #23&24 dismisses Tselani under these circumstances, the company would likely rely on the
operational requirements of the business. This is because Tselani's absence would directly
impact the company's ability to operate efficiently during its busiest period. The other possible
ground is a fair reason based on Tselani's conduct if his refusal to come to work is seen as
insubordination, but this is less likely to succeed given the circumstances.
Defining the Ground of Dismissal
The ground of dismissal, in this case, would be dismissal for a fair reason related to the
employer's operational requirements. This is defined as a dismissal based on the economic,
technological, structural, or similar needs of the employer. In Tselani's situation, the
dismissal would be based on the economic needs of #23&24, as his absence during the busiest
time of the year would directly impact sales and profitability. The employer would need to
demonstrate that his presence is essential for the company to function effectively and that his
absence would have a significant negative financial impact.
Handling the Situation Without Disciplinary Action
To handle this situation without disciplinary action, both Tselani and #23&24 should engage in a
process of consultation and reasonable accommodation.
Tselani's action: Tselani should formally approach his senior manager, Phiri, to request
reasonable accommodation for his religious obligations. He should propose alternative
solutions, such as arranging for another manager to cover his shifts, working longer hours
before and after the last week of December, or using a portion of his annual leave for the
time he is away. He should explain the importance of his religious duty to his employer.
#23&24's action: The company should engage in good faith consultation with Tselani.
The law requires employers to explore all reasonable alternatives before resorting to
dismissal on the grounds of operational requirements. The company must consider
Tselani's proposed alternatives and determine if a reasonable accommodation can be
made without causing the business undue hardship. The company should also be
mindful of its obligation under the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998, which prohibits
unfair discrimination on the basis of religion. The company must show that Tselani's
dismissal would be a last resort and not an act of unfair discrimination.
(COMPLETE ANSWERS)
Semester 2 2025 - DUE 11
September 2025
For assistance contact
Email:
, Statement on Leave and Dismissal
Yes, #23&24 (Pty) Ltd has the right to issue the statement prohibiting leave during the last week
of December. Employers have a right to manage their business operations, and a crucial aspect of
this is operational requirements. This is a valid commercial rationale to ensure the business
can meet its demands during a busy period. However, this right is not absolute and must be
balanced against employees' rights, including their right to freedom of religion.
Ground for Dismissal
If #23&24 dismisses Tselani under these circumstances, the company would likely rely on the
operational requirements of the business. This is because Tselani's absence would directly
impact the company's ability to operate efficiently during its busiest period. The other possible
ground is a fair reason based on Tselani's conduct if his refusal to come to work is seen as
insubordination, but this is less likely to succeed given the circumstances.
Defining the Ground of Dismissal
The ground of dismissal, in this case, would be dismissal for a fair reason related to the
employer's operational requirements. This is defined as a dismissal based on the economic,
technological, structural, or similar needs of the employer. In Tselani's situation, the
dismissal would be based on the economic needs of #23&24, as his absence during the busiest
time of the year would directly impact sales and profitability. The employer would need to
demonstrate that his presence is essential for the company to function effectively and that his
absence would have a significant negative financial impact.
Handling the Situation Without Disciplinary Action
To handle this situation without disciplinary action, both Tselani and #23&24 should engage in a
process of consultation and reasonable accommodation.
Tselani's action: Tselani should formally approach his senior manager, Phiri, to request
reasonable accommodation for his religious obligations. He should propose alternative
solutions, such as arranging for another manager to cover his shifts, working longer hours
before and after the last week of December, or using a portion of his annual leave for the
time he is away. He should explain the importance of his religious duty to his employer.
#23&24's action: The company should engage in good faith consultation with Tselani.
The law requires employers to explore all reasonable alternatives before resorting to
dismissal on the grounds of operational requirements. The company must consider
Tselani's proposed alternatives and determine if a reasonable accommodation can be
made without causing the business undue hardship. The company should also be
mindful of its obligation under the Employment Equity Act 55 of 1998, which prohibits
unfair discrimination on the basis of religion. The company must show that Tselani's
dismissal would be a last resort and not an act of unfair discrimination.
