In a landmark ruling reaffirming the importance of integrity in the workplace, the Labour Court of South Africa has held that dishonesty even when committed under instruction, constitutes valid grounds for dismissal. The decision came in the case of Mbuyane v Dekker NO and Others (JR1173/2020) [2025] ZALCJHB 224, where the court rejected a former Standard Bank employee’s appeal against his dismissal for misrepresenting financial records.
Banele Innocent Mbuyane, formerly a treasury custodian at Standard Bank, was dismissed after it was found that he submitted inaccurate balance sheets following instructions from his supervisor, Ms Nkosi. The duo was jointly responsible for receiving cash deliveries from the security company SBV, and in October 2019, Mbuyane discovered a coinage shortfall in one such delivery. While the two initially agreed to return the bag, Nkosi later instructed him to record the full ordered amount instead of the actual cash received.
Mbuyane complied, effectively falsifying the bank’s cash position. The discrepancy was later uncovered during a surprise inspection by Standard Bank’s risk mitigation team, which also revealed two other cash shortfalls. Both employees were dismissed. Mbuyane contested his dismissal at the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), arguing that he was merely following orders from a superior.
However, the CCMA found that Mbuyane’s actions amounted to serious misconduct. Despite the hierarchical instruction, the arbitrator ruled that he had an ethical and professional obligation to report the misrepresentation to higher management. The CCMA emphasized that no informal practice, such as overlooking shortfalls could override formal bank policy or justify unethical conduct.
When Mbuyane later approached the Labour Court to challenge the arbitration ruling, the court upheld the CCMA’s decision, reiterating that “compliance with an unlawful instruction does not excuse misconduct.” It found that he had deliberately submitted incorrect financial records over two consecutive days and that he had a duty to act lawfully and ethically regardless of who gave the directive.
The court further dismissed Mbuyane’s defense that he lacked fraudulent intent and was inadequately trained for the role. Testimony from the branch manager revealed that while there was no formal training program for treasury custodians, the expectations were clear and non-negotiable. The court noted that the issue at hand was dishonesty, not fraud an important distinction in employment law.
Legal experts, including Amandla Makhongwana, senior associate at Bowmans, say the ruling sends a clear message: ethical conduct in the workplace is non-negotiable, and employees must take personal responsibility for upholding institutional standards even under pressure from superiors.
This ruling aligns with broader legal trends in South African employment law where misconduct involving dishonesty is treated with zero tolerance, especially in financial institutions. It also reinforces the importance of workplace integrity in maintaining trust and credibility, and serves as a warning to employees that obedience to unlawful instructions can carry severe personal consequences.
The case underscores that trust is the foundation of the employment relationship and once breached, dismissal may well be justified.
Leave a comment