
![]() |
The writes and wrongs of disciplinary hearingsIn the modern workplace, disciplinary hearings are a common tool for addressing employee misconduct. But must these hearings always be held in person, with oral testimony and cross-examination? Or can they be conducted through written submissions? ![]() Image source: DC Studio from Freepik The answer depends on a few key legal principles, and South African labour law provides helpful guidance. What the law saysIf an employee’s employment contract or the employer’s disciplinary code specifically requires a traditional, in-person hearing, then the employer must follow that process. Deviating from it, such as by using written submissions instead, could amount to a breach of contract. However, if there is no contractual obligation to hold a formal hearing, the employer has discretion to choose the process, as long as it is procedurally fair. What is procedural fairness?Procedural fairness is rooted in the principle of audi alteram partem – the right to be heard. According to the Code of Good Practice: Dismissal (Schedule 8 of the Labour Relations Act), fairness requires:
Importantly, the Code does not require a formal, in-person hearing. It simply requires that the employee be given a fair chance to respond. Key case lawSeveral court cases have clarified this issue:
When written submissions are acceptableA disciplinary hearing can proceed by written submissions if:
When written submissions may not be enoughWritten submissions may not be appropriate if:
Final thoughtsSouth African labour law encourages flexibility in disciplinary processes. The focus is not on formality, but on fairness. If the employee is properly informed of the charges and given a fair chance to respond – whether in writing or in person, the process is likely to be upheld. Employers should, however, be cautious: if they have adopted a more formal process in their policies or contracts, they must follow it. Otherwise, they can opt for a more streamlined approach, including written submissions, provided it meets the standards of procedural fairness. About the authorRiona Kalua, Head of Labour and Employment at LnP Beyond Legal |