A judge overturns a CCMA exoneration to say a post office employee’s behaviour was “sexual”.
|||A post office employee accused of sexually harassing two female colleagues was exonerated by a commissioner at the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), who ruled that he just had “touchy mannerisms” and was unaware of his wandering hands.
But the man had now been fired after a Durban Labour Court judge set aside the CCMA ruling, saying the commissioner’s conclusions were “so improbable so as to border on the ridiculous”.
In her judgment, acting Judge Shanta Reddy criticised the commissioner for “improperly suggesting” to the employee that he had “touchy mannerisms”.
She said the impropriety went further when, in spite of the “unambiguous denials” by the employee that this was not so, the commissioner ruled that he was “touchy by nature and lacked the necessary state of mind to be found guilty”.
The case was brought to the court by the post office, which was aggrieved by the CCMA’s ruling, which overturned his dismissal. The man’s name was being withheld to protect the identity of his victims.
Evidence before the court was that, while both employees testified that he had touched them improperly on several occasions over the years, neither had formally reported the matter.
One, who worked with him for eight to 10 years, said she was afraid of being victimised.
She regarded all the touching – the most serious of which him was placing his hand in her pants – as a personal invasion.
The other woman complained of three instances that the man had touched her inappropriately.
She had chosen not to report it, but to deal with it discreetly, ensuring that the opportunity never arose again by “barricading herself” between other colleagues in his presence.
Probability
The man denied the allegations – and specifically rejected the suggestion by the commissioner that he was a touchy person.
The commissioner said it was only the way in which he had touched them which was in dispute, and whether it was with sexual intent.
The commissioner found that the overall probability was that the man had touchy mannerisms, “even though he probably did not realise it”, and that the touching was not purposeful and sexually orientated.
However, the judge said the evidence did not sustain this conclusion.
“Not only did the commissioner conclude that the employee was not aware of his own mannerisms, but that he was also unaware of the immediate reactions of other people to his actions.
“The evidence required for a commissioner to arrive at this conclusion would be that the employee was completely inept at a social level… a social buffoon with a low intellect. The evidence was quite the contrary,” the judge said.
“His (the post office employee’s) alleged ignorance of his mannerisms is not probable and ignorance of what he was doing is also rejected.
“The commissioner’s conclusion implies that the employee had no control over his arms when speaking. This is so highly improbable so as to border on the ridiculous.
“The most probable version is that he intended these actions to be sexual, and not platonic or fraternal.”
The judge ruled that the only appropriate sanction for his behaviour was dismissal from his job.
She said the man had persisted in his denial of misconduct and had not shown, even at a principled level, that he felt such conduct to be abhorrent.
“He is unreformed and, to my mind, has the propensity to continue with this conduct should he be re-instated,” she said. - The Mercury