Silenced for speaking up: Whistleblower’s fight for justice ends in victory

The High Court ruled in favour of Ms Chantel Sharlene Pillay, a former finance and administration superintendent at Samancor Chrome Limited. The court found that Ms Pillay was subjected to occupational detriment after making protected disclosures concerning financial irregularities within the company.

Background

Ms Pillay, a qualified accountant and member of the South African Institute of Professional Accountants, joined Samancor in 2015. Her performance was consistently praised, culminating in a company award in 2018. However, her career took a turn when she raised concerns about irregular payments to a company called Phabema, which had not rendered services to Samancor. These concerns were communicated via internal emails to her supervisor, Mr Sanele Msani.

Shortly after raising these issues, Ms Pillay was charged with breaching company confidentiality policies. The disciplinary action, which she argued was retaliatory, led to her dismissal.

The court’s findings

Ms Pillay’s disclosures were made in good faith and qualified as “protected disclosures” under the Protected Disclosures Act 26 of 2000.

The disciplinary charges brought against her were a direct consequence of her whistleblowing.

The conduct of Mr Msani, who was also a finance manager at Phabema, was inconsistent and self-serving. He acknowledged the irregularities but failed to act against other employees involved.

Ms Pillay’s dismissal caused significant psychological and financial harm, although the court rejected claims of severe depression, finding instead that she suffered from mild depression.

Legal implications

This case reinforces the legal protections afforded to whistleblowers under the Protected Disclosures Act. The court affirmed that:

• Employees who report wrongdoing in good faith, even if not through formal whistleblowing channels, are protected from retaliation.
• Employers must ensure that internal policies do not override statutory protections.
• Disciplinary action taken in retaliation for protected disclosures constitutes an occupational detriment and may result in liability for damages.

Key takeaways

For employers

• Ensure that whistleblowing policies are clear, accessible, and aligned with the Protected Disclosures Act.
• Avoid retaliatory actions against employees who raise legitimate concerns.
• Investigate disclosures objectively and take corrective action where necessary.

For employees

• Understand your rights under the Protected Disclosures Act.
• Keep records of disclosures and communications.
• Seek legal advice if you believe you are being victimised for whistleblowing.

Outcome

The court ordered Samancor to compensate Ms Pillay for proven damages, including loss of income and impairment of dignity and reputation. Costs were awarded against Samancor and Mr Msani, while the third defendant, Mr Pieter Brits, was cleared of wrongdoing and awarded costs.

This judgment serves as a critical reminder of the importance of ethical conduct, transparency, and the protection of whistleblowers in the workplace.

For advice or more information, please contact Riona Kalua, head of our Labour and Employment team.