Thesis (MEcon)--Stellenboschniversity, 2002. / ENGLISH ABSTRACT: The application of discipline is crucial for the South African Police Service. The new political dispensation in South Africa resulted in the amalgamation of different police departments and the use of the Discipline Regulations of 1995 as the new standard of discipline. The magnitude of the police service makes the application of discipline difficult and results in lengthy disciplinary procedures that cause high levels of frustration and stress amongst police officials. The high suicide rate amongst police officials raises questions regarding the factors that cause undue pressure. This led to the interest for this study and the following research questions: Firstly, how do police officials perceive the fairness of the disciplinary procedures of the SAPS. Secondly, what guidelines can be developed to enhance the police official's perception regarding the fairness of the disciplinary procedure. The theoretical perspective focused on discipline in organisations and procedural justice to describe fairness perceptions. The present study was divided into two phases. Firstly, to identify and describe the police official's experience of the disciplinary procedures of the SAPS and secondly, to develop guidelines that would enhance the fairness experience of the disciplinary procedures by police officials. The study was qualitative, exploratory, descriptive and contextual in design, The data was obtained by means of phenomenological interviews with respondents of two different populations, namely police officials that were exposed to a departmental tribunal, and experts of the disciplinary procedures of the SAPS. Once saturation level of the data was obtained, interviews were transcribed verbatim. Data was analyzed by utilizing the steps described by Tesch (Cresswell, 1994). The services of an independent decoder were also called in during the data analysis. Various themes were identified, as having an influence on the police official's experience of the disciplinary procedures of the SAPS. These are as follows: Police officials experience discrimination amongst members; that the process is emotionally exhausting; that the process becomes needlessly complex due to many petty or unnecessary charges; that there is a lack of consistent actions between the different role players in the process. The expert respondent group identified the following themes: There is a lack of consistent actions in the application of the process; cases are unique in nature and are assessed on merit; cases are often delayed; police officials experience the process as traumatic; station commissioners do not investigate cases properly; there is either a lack of emotional support or it is been wrongly applied. Throughout the process, steps were maintained to ensure trustworthiness. A literature control was also conducted to verify themes. Themes of the expert group were also used to verify themes of the police officials' group. Guidelines intended for use by supervisors and commanders were drawn up. These were based on the data obtained. The guidelines are supported by the existing Discipline Regulations (RSA, 1996), as well as the Discipline Guidelines (SAPS, 1996). It should therefore be of great value and use to supervisors and commanders. Recommendations for the application of the results in discipline practices, discipline education and further research concerning the discipline paradigm are discussed. In conclusion, findings indicated that police officials experience the disciplinary procedures of the SAPS as stressful and frustrating, and often as traumatic and emotionally exhausting. Supervisors and commanders should therefore endeavor towards the effective application of discipline in order to allow for a more fair perception of the process by their subordinates. It could also be advantageous towards the change of undesirable behaviour and to enhance moral and organisational climate at the station or unit. / AFRIKAANSE OPSOMMING: Die toepassing van dissipline is onontbeerlik vir die Suid-Afrikaanse Polisiediens. Die nuwe politieke bestel in Suid-Afrika het die amalgamering van onderskeie polisiedepartemente tot gevolg gehad, en Dissipline-Regulasies wat gedurende 1995 uitgevaardig is dien nou as maatstaf vir dissipline-toepassing. Die omvang van die polisiediens maak die toepassing van dissipline moeilik en veroorsaak dat die dissiplinêre prosedure dikwels uitgerek word en dat dit baie spanning en frustrasie onder polisielede veroorsaak. Die hoë selfmoordsyfer onder polisiebeamptes veroorsaak baie vrae ten opsigte van die faktore wat onnodige druk op hulle mag plaas. Dit het aanleiding gegee tot hierdie studie en die stel van die volgende navorsingsvrae: Eerstens, hoe billik polisiebeamptes die SAPD se dissiplinêre prosedure beleef. Tweedens, watter riglyne ontwikkel kan word sodat werknemers die SAPD se dissiplinêre prosedure as meer regverdig en billik beleef. Vanuit 'n teoretiese perspektief is gekonsentreer op die toepassing van dissipline in organisasies, asook prosessuele geregtigheid wat poog om die billikheidservaring van werknemers te beskryf Die studie was in twee fases ingedeeL Eerstens, om die polisiebeampte se belewenis van die SAPD se dissiplinêre prosedure te identifiseer en te beskryf en tweedens, om riglyne op te stel sodat die toepassing van dissipline as meer billik en regverdig beleef kan word. Die studie was kwalitatief, verkennend, beskrywend en kontekstueel van aard. Die data was ingesamel deur fenomenologiese onderhoudvoering met deelnemers van twee populasies, naamlik polisiebeamptes wat self 'n departementele tribunaal beleef het, asook kenners van die SAPD se dissiplinêre prosedure. Nadat alle data versadig was, is die onderhoude verbatim getranskribeer. Data-analise wat gebaseer is op die stappe soos beskryf deur Tesch (Cresswell, 1994), het hierna gevolg. Tydens die proses van data-analise is daar vir kontroledoeleindes, ook gebruik gemaak van die dienste van 'n onafhanklike kodeerder. Op hierdie wyse is verskillende temas, kategorieë en sub-kategorieë geïdentifiseer ten opsigte van die polisiebeampte se belewenis van die SAPD se dissiplinêre prosedure. Dit kan soos volg beskryf word: Polisielede is van mening dat daar tussen polisiebeamptes gediskrimineer word; dat die proses emosioneel uitputtend is; dat die proses onnodig ingewikkeld gemaak word met baie geringe of onnodige aanklagte; en dat daar nie konsekwente optrede tussen die verskillende rolspelers in die proses bestaan nie. Die temas, kategorieë en sub-kategorieë van die kennergroep kan soos volg vermeld word: Daar bestaan 'n gebrek aan konsekwentheid in die toepassing van die proses; sake bly uniek en word op eie meriete beoordeel; sake sloer dikwels te lank; polisiebeamptes ervaar die proses as traumaties; stasiekommissarisse ondersoek nie altyd sake behoorlik nie; en dat emosionele ondersteuning dikwels ontbreek ofverkeerd toegepas word. Daar is deurgaans aandag geskenk aan aspekte om geloofwaardigheid te verseker. 'n Literatuurkontrole is uitgevoer om die temas te bevestig. Die kennergroep se temas is ook gebruik om die polisiebeamptegroep se temas te verifieër. Riglyne vir dissiplinetoepassing, is vir bevelvoerders en toesighouers opgestel. Die riglyne is gebaseer op die data wat verkry is. Die riglyne word ondersteun deur die bestaande Dissipline- Regulasies (RSA, 1996), sowel as die Dissipline-Riglyne (SAPS, 1996) en behoort daarom met groot vrug gebruik te kan word. Aanbevelings vir die toepassing van die resultate in dissiplinepraktyke en dissipline-opleiding, asook die bevordering van navorsing gemoeid met die dissiplineparadigma is ook bespreek. Dit gevolgtrekking is gemaak dat polisiebeamptes baie spanning en frustrasie met die toepassing van die SAPD se dissiplinêre prosedure beleef, en dat dit meestalook as traumaties en emosioneel uitputtend ervaar word. Toesighouers en bevelvoerders behoort daarop ingestel te wees om dissipline meer effektief toe te pas, sodat hul werknemers die proses as meer billik en regverdig ervaar. Verder mag dit moontlik die voordeel inhou dat groter suksesse behaal word in die verandering van ongewensde gedrag en kan dit ook die moraal en organisasieklimaat van die stasie of eenheid verbeter.

Thesis (MPA.) -- University of Limpopo, 2007 / Refer to the document

It is the right of every employee in South Africa not to be unfairly dismissed. According to the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 an employer may fairly dismiss an employee on the grounds of conduct, capacity or operational requirements. In addition, the employer is required to also comply with a fair procedure before effecting a dismissal. The requirement of procedural fairness is, however, not as stringent as it was under the previous dispensation established by the former Industrial Courts in terms of the earlier Labour Relations Act. The question as to whether or not a reason for dismissal is fair, is to be established by the facts of each individual case, and the suitability of dismissal as an appropriate remedy. It remains a challenge to establish if dismissal would be an appropriate sanction in a particular case of misconduct. The test is whether the award is one that a reasonable decision-maker could arrive at taking into account the evidence to be considered. It is no longer the employer’s view that is dominant, but “[u]ltimately, the commissioner’s sense of fairness is what must prevail”. The notion of fairness however applies equally to employer an employee and it involves balancing the competing and, every so often, inconsistent, interests of the employer on the one side, and the employee on the other side. The relative weight afforded to the particular interests creates very specific challenges, but nonetheless depends essentially on the overall circumstances of each individual case. Whether dismissal for misconduct is for a fair reason would established by the facts of the case, coupled with the appropriateness of dismissal as a sanction. Dismissal as a penalty should be reserved for cases involving serious misconduct and repeated disciplinary infractions. A crucial question would be whether the misconduct is of such a serious nature that it goes to the core of the employment relationship and makes any possible continued employment relationship intolerable. Additionally, apart from aspects like the importance of the rule breached and the harm caused by the employee’s breach, certain considerations should also be accounted, like length of service disciplinary history, and the employee’s personal circumstances, as well as the particular circumstances surrounding the infringement. Dishonest conduct by an employee that destroys the goodwill, trust and confidence an employer holds towards an employee, would normally be deemed as a significant breach which may justify a sanction of dismissal. The test is whether or not the misconduct was of such serious nature that it would make a continued employment relationship intolerable; “whether or not respondent’s actions had the effect of rendering the continuation of the relationship of employer and employee intolerable”. It still remains for the employer to present evidence that a continued relationship would be intolerable and not to merely liken serious misconduct with such a finding. Relatively recent case law seems to suggest that employers are entitled to a strict attitude towards dishonesty as a ground for dismissal. The objective of the CCMA Guidelines on Misconduct Arbitrations, effective from 1 January 2012, is to ensure that arbitrators issue consistent awards on dismissals involving misconduct. The questions that the guidelines seek to address are, inter alia, (i) how an arbitrator should conduct the proceedings; (ii) the valuation of evidence for the purpose of making an award; (iii) assessing the procedural fairness of a dismissal; (iv) assessing the substantive fairness of a dismissal; and (v) determining the remedy for an unfair dismissal. The Guidelines are peremptory in that arbitrators will have to take them into account and will have to provide an explanation if they deviate. It is undoubtedly a useful tool in guiding employers on what they need to present to commissioners at arbitration.

Discipline is crucial in the provision of quality public service work. This is because most citizens are serviced through the public service work. Adhering to rules and orders, exercise of self control and the ability to put needs of others over one’s own needs are fundamental aspects of discipline. Every workplace has its own pieces of legislation that are used as a guide on expected conduct as well as a tool to deal with failure to adhere to the outlined pieces of legislation governing the conduct in the workplace. There are institutions in place that deal with the crafting of the pieces of legislation which clearly outline the manner in which both the employer and employee should conduct themselves as well as rights of both parties as they interact in the employment relationship. The existing pieces of legislation as well as their implementation and relevance in this era needs to be closely scrutinised and critique with proposals within the prescripts of legislation is necessary as some pieces of legislation seem to be conclusive, thereby undermining procedures followed when dealing with cases of misconduct. In any disciplinary process, the sanction should be in line with the process as it has unfolded and not be influenced by how a piece of legislation is crafted. The Public Service Act, Employment of Educators’ Act and the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 are key statutes in dealing with discipline in public education. Sanctions for misconduct are dependent on the gravity of the misconduct. In order to discipline educators, sections 17 and 18 of the Employment of Educators Act are used as guides on processes and procedures to be followed.

Thesis (M.Law) -- University of Limpopo, 2007 / Refer to document