Transport and Public Works
With regard to allegations of sexual harassment against the Traffic Chief, whose name has been furnished to his Department for the purpose of his reply, and his Department’s decision not to suspend him pending the investigation:
(1) (a) What applicable legal prescripts guide the work of the provincial government to suspend senior employees for allegations of sexual misconduct and (b) how were they applied in this case;
(2) whether this person has been charged by a court of law in 2020; if so, (a) what are the relevant details and (b) what remedial action did his Department take;
With regard to the Department’s commitment to appoint an independent panel to investigate the allegations:
(3) (a) what is the status of that investigation and (b) how much has been spent on it to date;
(4) whether the victim has not been to work since September 2020 due to health reasons; if so, (a) what are the relevant details, (b) when last did she report for duty, (c) what is her state of health and mind, (d) what support has been given to her and (e) what protection has been given to her and with regard to her job security?
(1) (a) Chapter 7, paragraph 2.7(2) of the Senior Management Service (SMS), Public Service Handbook (2003), governs the suspension of Senior Employees for any alleged transgression and not specifically allegations of sexual misconduct.
(b) The decision not to suspend the official was based on the applicable legal prescripts which, in terms of s 2.7(2) the SMS Handbook provides as follows:
“The employer may suspend an employee on full pay or transfer a member on full pay if –
the member is alleged to have committed a serious offence; and (my emphasis) the employer believes that the presence of a member at the workplace might jeopardise any investigation into the alleged misconduct, or endanger the well being or safety of any person or state property.“
Whilst it is accepted that the claims made by the complainant are serious, this is not the only factor that needs to be considered. Not all allegations of serious misconduct have resulted in the precautionary suspension of employees. The concerns raised that the official may endanger the complainant’s wellbeing have been addressed directly by the HOD who has from the inception of this matter instructed the official not to interfere with this investigation and to refrain from making any contact with the complainant.
The decision not to suspend the official was based on a fair and objective assessment of all the relevant factors that need to be considered before an employee is suspended as a precautionary measure.
(2) The Department is aware that a criminal complaint has been lodged by the complainant against the official with SAPS.
(a) The further information requested falls within the exclusive jurisdiction of the National Prosecuting authority.
(b) The department has not taken any remedial action against the official since there is no legal basis on which to do so without first following due process. The official has not been charged in a disciplinary hearing.
(3) (a) The investigation report with recommendations was submitted to the Head of Department (HoD) by the Investigative unit for consideration. However, the HoD has remitted the report back to the Investigating Unit in order for a number of queries to be addressed.
(b) A monetary value cannot be allocated in this regard, as the Investigators are employed as Public Servants and undertook this work as part of their normal duties.
(4) (a) The employee has submitted contiguous Temporary Incapacity Leave applications (commonly referred to as PILIR applications) from 5 October 2020.
(b) Given that the PILIR applications commenced from 5 October 2020, the employee last reported for duty on Friday 2 October 2020.
(c) It would be inappropriate to comment on an employee’s state of health and mind.
(d) The Department has offered the complainant assistance to access the Employee Health and Wellness programme and information to contact the programme has been provided.
(e) As previously indicated, the official under investigation has been instructed to have no contact with the complainant. In relation to job security, the employee is a permanently appointed staff member. She has the same job security as any other permanently appointed staff member.
