The Labour Court in Gqeberha has upheld the dismissal of a Northern Cape correctional officer who sexually harassed a female colleague while driving her home after a night shift.

According to IOL, Judge Edwin Tlhotlhalemaje dismissed former Department of Correctional Services employee S Louw’s bid to overturn an arbitration award that had confirmed his dismissal.

Court says apology did not end misconduct case

Louw worked as a Grade 2 correctional officer at De Aar Correctional Centre from 2008. He was dismissed in March 2022 after a colleague accused him of sexual harassment linked to an incident on 15 February 2021.

The colleague had finished a night shift and found that other staff had already left. A supervisor then instructed Louw to drive her home, IOL reported.

During the trip, Louw allegedly drove away from the route to her home. He then stopped on a dark gravel road in a secluded area behind a local high school.

The woman told the court that Louw said he intended to have sexual intercourse with her. She refused. He allegedly tried to touch her, pull her towards him and kiss her.

The court heard that she repeatedly told him to stop. Louw later drove her home, but he continued sending WhatsApp messages late that night.

Labour Court sexual harassment dismissal backed

The complainant reported the incident the next day. At first, she accepted an apology during a meeting arranged by management.

However, she later pursued a formal complaint after deciding the apology was not genuine. Evidence before the court showed that she later received psychological treatment, including a two-week admission and further sick leave.

At arbitration, Louw did not dispute that the misconduct happened. Instead, he argued that the apology had settled the matter and that later discipline amounted to double jeopardy.

The arbitrator rejected that argument. The Labour Court agreed that the informal apology meeting was not a disciplinary hearing and could not stop formal action by the employer.

Judge Tlhotlhalemaje found that Louw abused the trust placed in him when he was expected to ensure his colleague’s safe transport. The court also found that his conduct violated her dignity, bodily integrity and sense of security.

Workplace harassment rules place duties on employers

South Africa’s Code of Good Practice on the Prevention and Elimination of Harassment in the Workplace states that harassment must be prevented, eliminated and managed in the workplace. The code also links harassment to unfair discrimination.

That context is important because the court found that sexual harassment cannot simply be resolved through a private apology between employees. Employers must act when serious allegations arise.

The Labour Court sexual harassment dismissal ruling also rejected the argument that Louw’s 14 years of service and clean record made dismissal too harsh. The judge found that long service does not excuse gross misconduct when trust has broken down.

Responses and court criticism

The court criticised the Department of Correctional Services for the delay in finalising the disciplinary process. Judge Tlhotlhalemaje questioned why it took about a year and raised concern that Louw remained at work with female employees after admitting misconduct.

Still, the court found that the department’s delay did not reduce the seriousness of Louw’s actions. It dismissed his review application and ordered each party to pay its own legal costs.

In one strong passage cited by IOL, the court described Louw as having acted “like a predator” by exploiting the complainant’s vulnerability while she relied on him for transport.