respondent for 36 years) and manager for 9 years and employed by …………..(HR the respondent for 31 years); and The applicant himself gave evidence and called leader for 11 years ……………. (team and with the respondent for 12 years) in support of his case. The following was either agreed to, common cause, admitted or conceded in the pre-arb or during the arbitration proper: The applicant worked in a team as a welder in the ……………Chassis Plant; Depending on the prevailing circumstances the team could either be applicant’s constituted as a team of 4 or 3 members. The normal constitution is 4 members. If constituted as a team of 4 then it was called a and if constituted as “4-man process” a team of 3 then it was called the If constituted as a 3-man process, “3-man process.” then the team members would perform the functions that would normally be performed by the team of 4. In other words the duties of team members were adjusted; The circumstances that led to the adoption of the 3-man process from time to time were as follows: when production volumes were low or when there was high absenteeism during any particular shift. (The 4-man process was adopted when production volumes were high.); The applicant was capable of working in either a 3 or 4-man process and had done so in the past; The immediate superior was the team leader. At all relevant times that applicant’s was The hierarchy was as follows: ………………(Mbhele). immediate superior is a group leader who at all relevant times was Mbhele’s Pillay; immediate superior was the manager who at all relevant times was Pillay’s Henry; immediate superior was the senior manager who at all relevant times Henry’s was Moonsamy; The applicant was under a general duty to comply with all lawful and reasonable instructions issued to him by a superior. The respondent maintains a grievance process. It is also referred to as the and In other “comply complain” procedure. words, production must be maintained as far as possible and where an employee is unhappy about a production related instruction, he must comply with the instruction and thereafter lodge a grievance or complaint. The applicant was aware of this procedure. The instruction in this case was production related; The applicant had attended induction;
respondent for 36 years) and …………..(HR manager for 9 years and employed by the respondent for 31 years); and The applicant himself gave evidence and called ……………. (team leader for 11 years and with the respondent for 12 years) in support of his case. The following was either agreed to, common cause, admitted or conceded in the pre-arb or during the arbitration proper: The applicant worked in a team as a welder in the ……………Chassis Plant; Depending on the prevailing circumstances the applicant’s team could either be constituted as a team of 4 or 3 members. The normal constitution is 4 members. If constituted as a team of 4 then it was called a “4-man process” and if constituted as a team of 3 then it was called the “3-man process.” If constituted as a 3-man process, then the team members would perform the functions that would normally be performed by the team of 4. In other words the duties of team members were adjusted; The circumstances that led to the adoption of the 3-man process from time to time were as follows: when production volumes were low or when there was high absenteeism during any particular shift. (The 4-man process was adopted when production volumes were high.); The applicant was capable of working in either a 3 or 4-man process and had done so in the past; The applicant’s immediate superior was the team leader. At all relevant times that was ………………(Mbhele). The hierarchy was as follows: Mbhele’s immediate superior is a group leader who at all relevant times was Pillay; Pillay’s immediate superior was the manager who at all relevant times was Henry; Henry’s immediate superior was the senior manager who at all relevant times was Moonsamy; The applicant was under a general duty to comply with all lawful and reasonable instructions issued to him by a superior. The respondent maintains a grievance process. It is also referred to as the “comply and complain” procedure. In other words, production must be maintained as far as possible and where an employee is unhappy about a production related instruction, he must comply with the instruction and thereafter lodge a grievance or complaint. The applicant was aware of this procedure. The instruction in this case was production related; The applicant had attended induction;
GROSS%20INSUBORDINATION.docx