Legal updates and opinions
News / News
Red Carded For Playing The Race Card
By Bradley Workman-Davies, Director
The issue of race and racial discrimination is well-recognised in South Africa as a problem area for the various interactions, which take place societally on a daily basis. In the context of employment, there is by now little doubt that any conduct in the workplace that demonstrates racism, or discrimination on the basis of race, is a material factor in leading to the breakdown of the employment relationship. Taking into account the historical injustices perpetrated in South African society, adopting a zero tolerance approach to racism is recognised as not only fair, but a requirement for transitioning to a more egalitarian society. Any employee who uses racial epithets in the workplace is well deserving of being dismissed. However, since the race issue is so sensitive, it is less well-known that being accused of being racist, when this is not true, is equally deserving of sanction. Taking into account the damage that can be done to a person’s reputation, particularly given the ease of publication by means of social media platforms, and the inevitable public ire that results from being accused of racism, our courts have started to develop a line of jurisprudence, which deals with false allegations of racism, and the consequences of making such a false allegation, for the person who spreads this falsehood.
In the recent case of Legal Aid SA v Mayisela & others (2019) 40 ILJ 1526 (LAC), in which judgement was handed down on February 2019 and released in July 2019, the court had to deal with a situation in which Mayisela had alleged that his supervisor had exhibited racist conduct, by having given him a negative performance rating. Although the Labour Court originally found that any employee is entitled to bring an allegation of racist conduct, and that it then becomes the duty of the employer to investigate these allegations. The mere accusation could not, the Labour Court found, amount to misconduct. On appeal however, the Labour Appeal Court agreed with the Labour Court’s position, but held that when it was demonstrated to the employer that the allegations were in fact false, Mayisela was guilty of misconduct.
The Labour Appeal Court found that an employee’s subjective feelings of being subjected to racist conduct are not sufficient to warrant making a claim of racism; instead, there must be “persuasive objective information leading to a compelling and legitimate inference” that racism has taken place. Especially taking into account the fact that Mayisela’s allegations were levelled against his superior, the Labour Appeal Court found that:
“Unfounded allegations of racism against a superior by a subordinate subjected to disciplinary action or performance assessment, referred to colloquially as ‘playing the race card’, can illegitimately undermine the authority of the superior and damage harmonious relations in the workplace. Moreover, false accusations of racism are demeaning, insulting and an attack on dignity, more so when the person attacked, by reason of a previously disadvantaged background, probably has suffered personally the pernicious effects of institutional and systemic racism.”
This case brings a much needed balance to the race issue in the workplace; as much as employees must be protected from racism, it is equally unacceptable for allegations of racism to be levelled against innocent parties. Playing the race card in this case, can lead to dismissal.
Latest News
Out with the Old: South Africa’s Proposed Overhaul of Exchange Controls and the Inclusion of Crypto Assets
by Janice Geel, Associate and Azraa Sidat, Candidate Attorney, reviewed by Natalie Scott, Director and Head of Sustainability On 17 [...]
Do not call me I’ll call you …… South Africa’s 2026 CPA Amendment Regulations: operationalising the national opt‑out regime for direct marketing and shifting day‑to‑day anti‑spam responsibility to the National Consumer Commission
by Ahmore Burger-Smidt, Director and Head of Regulatory The Consumer Protection Act Amendment Regulations, 2026 deliver the long‑awaited operational framework [...]
Business Rescue Applications Under Scrutiny: business rescue orders are not there for the taking!
by Eric Levenstein, Director and Head Insolvency & Business Rescue and Amy Mackechnie, Senior Associate This article considers the recent decision in [...]
The AI Arms Race and what it means for Competition Law: A new era or new focus
by Ahmore Burger-Smidt, Director and Head of Regulatory We are not in the habit of writing breathless technology briefings. That [...]
The AI Governance Stack and South Africa’s Draft National AI Policy: An Operational Gap in Search of a Framework
by Ahmore Burger-Smidt, Director and Head of Regulatory Author's Note I am presently reading Noah M Kenney's Governing Intelligence: Law, [...]
Speak now or forever hold your peace. The draft AI policy has been published and parties have 60 days to comment
by Ahmore Burger-Smidt, Director and Head of Regulatory On 10 April 2026, South Africa's Department of Communications and Digital Technologies [...]
