Yvonne Page v PRASA (Labour Court)

Nicole Lewis and Luxolo Kewana acted for Ms Yvonne Page

Yvonne Page, represented by Nicole Lewis and Luxolo Kewana, successfully applied to review and set aside an award by an arbitrator of the CCMA dismissing her claim for constructive dismissal against PRASA.

Ms Page was the acting CFO of PRASA from 2017 until 31 March 2018. From November 2017 to January 2018, PRASA’s Acting Group Chief Executive Officer and the Chairperson of the Board placed inordinate pressure on Ms Page to make unlawful payments to three corrupt entities, including R1 billion to VBS Bank. She refused to do so but was unable to tolerate her working conditions. On 16 January 2018, she resigned. On 8 February 2018, she was booked off ill for the remainder of her notice period, after she suffered a break-down due to her intolerable working conditions.  

She subsequently brought a claim against PRASA for constructive dismissal. The CCMA arbitrator dismissed her claim. He found that although PRASA conceded that Ms Page’s working conditions were objectively intolerable, she had reasonable alternatives to resignation, in that she could have reported her working conditions to various authorities, including the Minister of Transport, the Auditor-General and the Chairperson of the Portfolio Committee on Transport. In `addition, the arbitrator found that during her notice period, “the winds of change” were starting to blow at PRASA. This finding was based on PRASA’s argument that in February 2018, Mr Ramaphosa had been appointed as the President (on a corruption busting ticket) and Dr Blade Nzimande had been appointed as the new Minister of Transport and, in March 2018, the Acting CGEO and the Chairperson of the Board had resigned. Ms Page should therefore have had faith that her intolerable working conditions were not going to continue.

Van Niekerk J, handing down judgment on 17 October 2023, found for Ms Page. He held that in order to constitute a reasonable alternative to resignation, the remedy had to exist at the time of the employee’s resignation. In addition, it had to be effective, in that it had to be capable of remedying the employee’s intolerable working conditions. The purported avenues of recourse  that PRASA alleged to constitute reasonable alternatives to resignation failed to meet these requirements. He awarded her the maximum of twelve months’ compensation and costs, including the costs of one counsel.

Read the judgment here

More articles, news, seminars, events and judgements