Alexio Mugwede v Roadport (Pvt) Ltd

### Preamble
IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/608/14
HELD AT HARARE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2014
CASE
JUDGMENT NO LC/H/608/14
---------




IN THE LABOUR COURT OF ZIMBABWE	         JUDGMENT NO LC/H/608/14

HELD AT HARARE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2014	 	     CASE NO LC/H/168/14

& 26TH SEPTEMBER 2014

In the matter between:-

ALEXIO MUGWEDE				Appellant

And

ROADPORT (PVT) LTD				Respondent

Before The Honourable B.S. Chidziva, Judge

For Appellant		Mr I Mataka (Legal practitioner)

For Respondent		Mr K Karoka (Human Resources Officer)

CHIDZIVA, J:

This is an appeal against an appeal of the National Employment Council for the Commercial Sectors dated  5 February 2014.  The Negotiating Committee in its findings stated that

“From the above observations a decision was made that the appellant indeed unlawfully took the US$30.00 belonging to the respondent with the intention to permanently deprive the company the use of such property.  On those grounds the Negotiating Committee upheld the decision of the Mashonaland Local Joint Committee and dismissed the employee’s appeal.”

The brief facts of the matter is that on 16 June 2013 the appellant

received USD30.00 on behalf of the respondent from Mr Mazire.  The money was not handed over to management.  The appellant only informed Mr Cosmas Mafundikwa who had given him the money.  He also informed Mr Nyarumwe the cash employee at the office who faked a reconciliation.  The appellant was eventually suspended and went through a disciplinary hearing.  He was then dismissed.  He appealed to the National Employment Council Commercial Sectors which also upheld the dismissal.  The appellant is now appealing to this Court against this decision.

The appellant’s grounds of appeal are that

There was a gross misdirection of facts that amount to misdirection as to law in that the appellant committed an act of Theft or Fraud or Dishonesty in terms of Part IV Group IV paragraph 5 of the NECCS Code of Conduct.

Failure to report to the police does not amount to theft or fraud.

The cashier is the one who was suppose to inform management.

On these grounds the appellant prayed for reinstatement to his position

without loss of salary and benefits from the date of suspension to the date of judgment.  The appellant also prayed that he should be given a Final Written Warning for failure to report an incident.

The respondent in response submitted that appellant exhibited a high degree of dishonesty by failing to report to his superiors and the Police Post which was just 40 metres from the scene.  The respondent has also submitted to this court that during the hearing appellant admitted to the charges.  He asked for his terminal benefits which were duly given to him.

The theft was only discovered after a fake reconciliation.  If the money was stolen why did he agree to a fake reconciliation if the money had been stolen.  A report to the police and management would have protected him.  The fact that he also asked for terminal benefits shows that he was guilt of the offence.

In the light of the foregoing therefore this Court finds that the appeal lacks merit.

Accordingly it is hereby ordered that the appeal be and is hereby dismissed with costs.

Chambati & Mataka, appellant’s legal practitioners