On 29 August 2025, the Labour Court in Johannesburg delivered a judgment in JDG (Pty) Ltd t/a Hi-Fi Corporation v Shear & Others (JR1014/18), setting aside an arbitration award and upholding the dismissal of a senior sales manager who used company petty cash to purchase chocolates for personal consumption
The Facts
The employee, a branch sales manager, withdrew petty cash on two occasions to buy stationery for a store promotion. Along with the stationery, she purchased two chocolates for herself. She did not disclose this to her employer at the time and only admitted to it when confronted by the branch manager during a petty cash reconciliation a week later
The Arbitration Award
The commissioner reasoned that because the employee had submitted till slips reflecting the chocolates, she had not attempted to conceal the purchase. He accepted her explanation that she had been hungry, noted her clean disciplinary record, and concluded that dismissal was too harsh a sanction.
The Labour Court’s Reasoning
The Labour Court strongly disagreed with the commissioner’s findings:
- Dishonesty established: The Court held that using company petty cash for personal use without authorisation was inherently dishonest, regardless of the small value involved.
- Submission of till slips no defence: Handing in receipts without expressly disclosing the chocolates did not amount to transparency—it was a weak attempt at concealment.
- Excuse of hunger rejected: Accepting hunger as justification for misusing company funds was deemed unreasonable and untenable in an employment context.
- Trust relationship destroyed: The Court emphasised that honesty is fundamental to the employment relationship, particularly for a senior manager. The employee’s conduct, though involving low-value items, irreparably broke the trust placed in her by the employer.
The Court found that the commissioner’s reasoning was illogical and unreasonable, applying the Sidumo and Herholdt tests for review. It ruled that the dismissal was substantively fair.
The Outcome
The arbitration award was reviewed and set aside. The Labour Court upheld the dismissal as fair, with no order as to costs1757143324044.
Key Takeaways for Employers and Employees
- Dishonesty is dishonesty: The monetary value is irrelevant. Even minor acts of misusing company resources can justify dismissal.
- Trust is central: Once an employer’s trust is destroyed, particularly for senior employees, continued employment becomes untenable.
- Commissioners’ reasoning must be logical: Courts will intervene where arbitration awards rest on illogical or unreasonable conclusions.
- Mitigating factors have limits: Long service or a clean disciplinary record may not outweigh dishonesty in the workplace.
This case reinforces the principle that workplace discipline is not only about the misconduct itself but also about the trust relationship underpinning employment. Employers are entitled to expect integrity, and employees risk dismissal if they breach that expectation, even over something as small as chocolates.