Labour Court upholds SAHRA dismissal after CFO paid himself R389,742.79 in acting pay

The Labour Court has dismissed a review application by the former chief financial officer of the South African Heritage Resources Agency (SAHRA), upholding his 2022 dismissal after finding he paid himself acting allowances beyond the agency’s policy and was grossly negligent in key financial duties.

Who, what and when

Kgomotso Sekhabisa was appointed SAHRA’s chief financial officer in August 2017 on a five-year fixed-term contract. While retaining his CFO responsibilities he was later appointed to act as Executive: Corporate Services. He sought to overturn a 2022 CCMA ruling that had found his dismissal to be both procedurally and substantively fair and asked the Labour Court to award him compensation for the balance of his fixed-term contract.

Acting allowances outside policy

The court found Sekhabisa authorised acting allowance payments to himself from June 2019 until October 2020, totalling R389,742.79, without the required approval for a deviation from SAHRA’s remuneration policy. The policy allows acting allowances for a maximum of six consecutive months.

“The policy is clear and unambiguous in this regard,”

Acting Judge MacRobert rejected Sekhabisa’s argument that the six-month limit did not apply, noting Sekhabisa had approved documentation relating to those allowances while serving in his senior financial role and that he had initiated the process that resulted in the payments. The court also said Sekhabisa failed to produce convincing evidence that other employees had been treated differently.

Gross negligence on procurement responsibilities

In addition to the acting allowance findings, the court upheld that Sekhabisa was guilty of gross negligence for repeatedly failing to submit procurement plans to the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture within required deadlines. The judgment records repeated reminders from departmental officials and SAHRA’s chief executive officer went unanswered, and that the chief executive ultimately submitted the procurement plans herself.

MacRobert said the failures amounted to gross negligence and emphasised that the standards expected of a senior executive entrusted with public finances were particularly high.

Procedural fairness and final order

The Labour Court dismissed Sekhabisa’s claims that the disciplinary process had been procedurally unfair, finding he had not been prejudiced by the issues he raised. The court found the CCMA commissioner had properly considered the evidence and reached a reasonable conclusion.

“The applicant’s application for review is dismissed,”

The court made no order as to costs.

Additional note

The source records that Sekhabisa’s LinkedIn profile still lists his position as CFO of SAHRA.