{"issue_text":"Does clause 18(d)(5)(d) of the Collective Bargaining Agreement create automatic entitlement to substantive appointment after acting for more than twelve months?","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"yes","related_facts":"Appellants acted for over five years; clause limits acting to twelve months maximum"}
{"issue_text":"Should acting allowance for Zimbabwe dollar era be paid in US dollars?","issue_type":"law","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Acting allowance accrued during 2006-2009 Zimbabwe dollar era"}
{"issue_text":"Are appellants entitled to acting allowance for period after termination of acting appointments?","issue_type":"fact","dispositive":"no","related_facts":"Acting appointments terminated 31 January 2012"}
This summary was generated by AI. Use Zalari to read the full judgment.
background
Facts of the Case
Background
Seven employees of City of Harare acted in higher grade positions from 2005-2010. They claimed unpaid acting allowances and substantive appointment to the positions. After conciliation settled the allowance issue, arbitration ruled they weren't entitled to automatic substantive appointment. Both parties appealed aspects of the decision.
Read the full judgment, get AI analysis, and find related cases