Boundaries breached: The thin line between personal and professional in the workplace

A consideration of Mediclinic Nelspruit (Pty) Ltd v Shiba [2025] JR1899/21.

Background

This case centres around the dismissal of Shiba, a human resources business partner at Mediclinic Nelspruit, following a breakdown in a workplace romance with a colleague, Ms Nyakane. After the relationship ended, Shiba allegedly continued to pursue contact with Nyakane, despite clear instructions from management and a protection order issued by a local court. Shiba persisted in his behaviour and he was dismissed for misconduct, including unacceptable and unprofessional behaviour and using his position to intimidate Nyakane.

Labour court findings

Shiba denied that he had acted inappropriately or unprofessionally towards Nyakane. He asserted that his interactions were professional, but there was no reason for Shiba to interact with Nyakane on any work-related matters, as she did not report to him directly or indirectly. Further, Shiba was instructed to stop interactions with Nyakane. Based on this, the Court found that Shiba’s interactions with Nyakane were personal and not work-related.

It is trite law that the charge sheet, at the minimum, should be in a language which an employee understands. Shiba was also provided with 48 hours to prepare for the hearing. Shiba fully participated in the hearing and understood the charges against him. The Court found that this met the test for procedural fairness.

The Court found that Shiba’s dismissal was both procedurally and substantively fair.

The Code of Good Practice on the Prevention and Elimination of Harassment in the Workplace (“the Code”)

The Court did not consider the Code, but it is important to remember that:

Employers are legally obligated to:

• Create a harassment-free workplace.
• Take proactive steps to prevent harassment.
• Respond effectively to any reported incidents.

Employees have several key duties aimed at fostering a respectful and safe working environment. These include the duty to:

• Treat colleagues, clients, and others in the workplace with dignity and respect.
• Avoid any behaviour or refrain from any behaviour that could be considered harassing, discriminatory, or abusive.
• Support efforts to create a harassment-free workplace.

Legal Implications

Misconduct and personal conduct in the workplace

• The case reinforces that personal relationships that spill into the workplace can become a legitimate basis for disciplinary action.
• Employers are entitled to act when personal conduct disrupts workplace harmony, especially where it involves harassment or intimidation.

Procedural fairness in disciplinary hearings

• Procedural fairness does not require perfection, but rather that the employee understands the charges and has a fair opportunity to respond.

Jurisdiction of the CCMA

Workplace misconduct, even if rooted in personal relationships, falls within the CCMA’s jurisdiction if it affects the employment relationship.

Impact on HR and workplace policy

Employers should:

• Clearly document instructions given to employees in sensitive situations.
• Ensure disciplinary processes are procedurally sound.
• Be aware that personal conduct can become workplace misconduct if it affects operations or employee well-being.

For advice or more information contact Riona Kalua, Head of our Labour and Employment Team.