Commissioner loses court bid

Mamodupi Mohlala-Mulaudzi has all but lost her job as the national consumer commissioner.

Yesterday, a visibly distraught Mohlala-Mulaudzi trudged out of the Johannesburg Labour Court after her application to interdict the Trade and Industry Minister Rob Davies from terminating her contract, was dismissed with costs.

She had approached the court after Davies sent her a letter on May 21 notifying her of his intention not to renew her contract when it expires on September 3.

“I can’t believe (Judge HS) Cele failed to see that letter. He (Davies) states clearly (that he won’t renew my contract,” said Mohlala-Mulaudzi.

Davies had, in his letter, cited the fact that Mohlala-Muldaudzi’s appointment was not preceeded by an open recruitment process.

“I consider it appropriate to embark on an open, transparent and fair recruitment process in the spirit of good governance to attract a broader pool of potential applicants, inclusive of yourself,” Davies said.

Mohlala-Mulaudzi was given 10 days to reply.

“… Upon the expiry of the time period, l proceeded to make my decision on the renewal or non renewal of your contract of employment.”

But Mohlala-Mulaudzi, who maintained that she was entitled to a five-year contract took the minister to the Labour Court.

She said Davies had violated the terms of their employment agreement, which gave her the right to be consulted about her performance before the vacancy was advertised.

She argued, through her attorney Graham Moshoana that the decision to advertise was “unlawful and premature” as the government – and not the minister – was her employer.

“… the letter is defective and ought to be withdrawn. The minister was a (mere) representative of the employer,” she said.

Moshoana said the government or Parliament, through its relevant portfolio committees, should be responsible for this (employment) process.

The government, he said, should have consulted her in writing before the decision to advertise her post was taken.

He added that Davies’ criteria of “an open and transparent recruitment process” were merely ostensible reasons for advertising her post. Instead, matters such as performance, conduct and qualification should be the determinant factors.

“The minister must appoint a person with suitable qualification and experience…” Moshoana said.

Further dismissing Davies contention of transparency, Moshoana said: “Our client negotiated for herself a right to be considered individually within the terms of her contract…

“At the time of her contract, there was a protocol that stated that the period of five years had to be taken into cognisance during renewal.”

Davies’ defence counsel advocate Terry Motau hit back, saying the minister was entitled to act. He dismissed Mohlala-Mulaudzi’s contention that she was not consulted in writing, arguing that she had always understood that the word “confer” had a similar meaning to “consult”.

He dismissed Moshoana’s argument that Davies should not have advertised the post more than two months before the contract lapsed.

“It (the contract) said on or before July 3. So it was clear he (Davies) was entitled to act,” he said, adding that it was appropriate for Mohlala-Mulaudzi to take the minister to court before he had made an appointment.

“She can’t challenge an open public process… which hasn’t been elevated into a decision,” Motau said.

Dismissing Mohlala-Mulaudzi’s application, Judge HS Cele said the minister had acted in compliance with the government’s employment procedures. He said it was inappropriate for Mohlala-Mulaudzi to complain before Davies had appointed a new candidate.

Mohlala-Mulaudzi said she would appeal and apply for the job.

“I am the best candidate because I feel I have performed exceptionally well. And because I am a black and female, I am supposed to be given preference in terms of the law.” - Saturday Star