Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Dismissal for misrepresentation when applying for a position
Falsely misrepresented credentials during the job application process
An employee may be found guilty of misconduct if an employer can prove that the employee falsely misrepresented his/her credentials during the job application process. The employer need not prove that the misrepresentation induced the employer to appoint the particular employee over all other candidates. A subsequent admission to the misrepresentation by the employee does not negate the employee’s guilt for misconduct but may mitigate the sanction imposed for the charge.
Misrepresentation
In the case of the Department of Home Affairs, the Minister of Home Affairs and Simphiwe Emanuela Ndlovu and Others (DA11/2012) [2014] ZALAC 11, the Labour Appeal Court determined the fairness of an employee’s dismissal for misrepresenting his qualifications in his curriculum vitae (“CV”). The employee had stated in his CV, among others, that he held a particular degree; the employer subsequently discovered that he had neither qualified for the degree nor had the degree been conferred upon him at the time of his appointment.
The Court held that the fact that he had falsely misrepresented his qualifications was enough to charge him with misconduct and sufficient to warrant dismissal. In this regard, the Court noted that ‘the dishonesty as contained in the CV is ultimately what underpins the substantive fairness of the first respondent’s dismissal.’ The Court added that it was, therefore, unnecessary for the employer to establish a nexus between the misrepresentation and the employee’s appointment over other candidates.
The employee argued that he had subsequently disclosed to the employer that the degree had not yet been conferred upon him and therefore the charge of gross misconduct (and his subsequent dismissal) was not warranted in light of this disclosure. The Court dismissed this argument and held that even if he had indeed made such a disclosure, the employee would still be guilty of misconduct for the initial misrepresentation.
The disclosure would however be a factor weighed up against other factors which the Court would use to determine the substantive fairness of a dismissal in the circumstances. The rationale of the Court’s finding was the egregious nature of dishonesty in the employment context given the high level of trust required in the employment relationship. On this basis, the Court held that the employee’s charge for misconduct and dismissal on this basis was fair in the circumstances.
Importance of the case
Applicants should ensure that all the information they present to a potential employer in the job application is true and correct and should be aware that they may be justifiably dismissed if the employer later discovers that they made a misrepresentation at any stage of the process. Employers should investigate the content of applicants’ CVs and not simply accept the same at face value.
Latest News
The LAC rules on the TES deeming provision
THE CLIENT BECOMES THE SOLE EMPLOYER WHEN THE DEEMING PROVISION KICKS IN INTRODUCTION In NUMSA v Assign Services [...]
The validity of automatic termination clauses in contracts of employment
ISSUE(S) Whether the employee was unfairly dismissed after his appointment letter was automatically terminated because of a provision stating [...]
Holding onto land: the regulation of Agricultural Land Holdings Bill
INTRODUCTION During the 2016 State of the Nation Address, the president of the Republic of South Africa first announced [...]
And now for something completely different (or not?)
INTRODUCTION With effect from 1 June 2017 the Medicines and Related Substances Amendment Act No. 72 of 2008 ("the [...]
Director, Nastascha Harduth, becomes the first female fellow of INSOL international in SA
The on-going global financial crisis, recent confirmation by STATSSA that South Africa is in a technical recession and the globalization [...]
It’s not me, it’s you: incompatibility as a ground for dismissal
"An employer has the prerogative to set reasonable standards pertaining to the harmonious interpersonal relationships in the workplace" – words [...]
