By Ivan Israelstam, Chief Executive of Labour Law Management Consulting. He may be contacted on (011) 888-7944 or 0828522973 or on e-mail address: ivan@labourlawadvice.co.za. Go to: www.labourlawvideos.co.za
Employers too often assume that employees who have alcohol in their systems at the workplace automatically deserve to be fired. While alcohol related offences can sometimes merit dismissal this is not always the case. For example, where the employee has clinically been shown to be an alcoholic, treatment rather than punishment should be implemented due to the employee’s incapacity.
In the case of Black Mountain vs CCMA and others (2005 1 BLLR 0001) the employee was dismissed for causing damage while drunk driving. The CCMA arbitrator overturned the dismissal. The employer applied to the Labour Court for the arbitrator’s decision to be reviewed. However, the Labour Court, after looking at the employer’s policy in regard to alcohol related infringements, decided that, as the employer should have allowed the employee to go for rehabilitation the dismissal had been unfair. The employer was required to reinstate the employee and to give him back pay for a period of 18 months plus interest.
Incapacity is not the only factor that could render unfair the dismissal of an employee with alcohol in his system. Even where no addiction exists employers are required to ensure that a dismissal is merited in the specific circumstances of each case. This applies even in a workplace where zero tolerance of alcohol is merited. In the case of Chill Beverages vs AMCU (Lex Info 14 July 2025. Labour Cort case number C 160/2024) a forklift driver working in a zero-tolerance warehouse environment, failed to dispute that he had alcohol in his bloodstream. He was fired for this offence.
The Labour Court found that the employee had shown no signs whatsoever of intoxication and that he had an excellent 6-year employment record. The employee had explained that he had taken cough mixture that morning and had not been aware that it had contained alcohol.
The Court therefore upheld both the arbitrator’s finding that the dismissal had been unfair and the remedy of reinstatement with backpay.
Therefore, all employers are advised not to assume that zero tolerance is a licence to fire. Since it is management that makes costly decisions such as wrongly firing apparent offenders it is crucial that the employer trains all managers on how the law views zero-tolerance circumstances and on how to decide on a fair response to each unique case involving alcohol at the workplace.
The innovative video series WALKING THE LABOUR LAW TIGHTROPE assists employers to provide their managers with very inexpensive training that allows the managers to achieve labour law knowhow at times suitable to their very busy schedules. Its 48 chapters, averaging 10 minutes in length each, can easily be watched at junctures when the manager has time. This greatly informative yet very engaging and practical video series provides crucial and user-friendly learning through the use of a stimulating, animated case study that runs throughout the 48-chapter series. Each chapter contains clear and important advice needed by workplace management on the basics of labour law over a very wide range of topics.
A further advantage is that the manager can, for a full year, easily go back to any of the 48 videos for purposes of refresher training or in order to access information on how to deal with a current workplace issue. This solves the problem of managers forgetting what they have learned.
This video series helps management to walk the shaky labour law tightrope and to run the workplace productively without falling into the labour law abyss.
To access our groundbreaking video series: WALKING THE NEW LABOUR LAW TIGHTROPE please go to www.labourlawvideos.co.za or contact Ivan on ivan@labourlawadvice.co.za
