[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-502529-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-502529-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","arbitration-award-general-public-service-sector-bargaining-council-gpssbc-08-august-2025","ARBITRATION AWARD - General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council (GPSSBC) - 08 August 2025","","Arbitration award concerning an alleged unfair labour practice under section 186(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, as amended, linked to a once-off performance bonus for the 2020/2021 financial year performance assessment. The hearing details record proceedings held between September 2024 and July 2025, with representation from PSA and the Department of Transport & Community Safety. Only 16 of 44 applicants attended, their claims dismissed for non-attendance, while the remaining matter focuses on whether moderation reduced ratings from 4 to 3 and denied the bonus.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/arbitration-award-general-public-service-sector-bargaining-council-gpssbc-08-august-2025/502529/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/arbitration-award-general-public-service-sector-bargaining-council-gpssbc-08-august-2025/502529.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Aran","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-21","2026-10-03",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",8,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What dispute was arbitrated in this award?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"The matter concerned whether the Respondent committed an unfair labour practice relating to a performance bonus benefit under section 186(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"When were the arbitration hearings held?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"The hearings were held on 10–11 September 2024, 7–8 April 2025, 8 July 2025, and were finalised on 9 July 2025.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"Why were only some applicants considered during the arbitration?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Although the dispute was initially referred on behalf of 44 applicants, only 16 were in attendance until the last date; the claims of non-attending applicants were dismissed.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},502529,1791056617,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,92,96,101,106,111,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":89,"show_sort_weight":90,"slug":91},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":97,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":98,"show_sort_weight":99,"slug":100},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":102,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":103,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":105},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":107,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":108,"show_sort_weight":109,"slug":110},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":97,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":55,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},137455076865,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_29158cc5080c5b710cf443261637dec0","ARBITRATION AWARD  \nPanellist: Grace Mafa-Chali  \nCase No.: GPBC1162/2022  \nDate of Award: 08 August 2025  \nIn the ARBITRATION between:  \nPSA OBO S M MAPHOTO & 29 OTHERS APPLICANT  \nAND  \nDEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT & COMMUNITY SAFETY RESPONDENT  \nTHE DETAILS OF THE HEARING AND REPRESENTATION  \n1. The arbitration hearings were held on 10 and 11 September 2024, 07 and 08 April 2025, 08 July 2025 and finalised on 09 July 2025 at Respondent’s offices, 40 Church Street, Polokwane, Limpopo Province.  \n2. The Applicants were represented by PSA official, Ms Deidre Reyneke. The Respondent was represented by Mr Lucas Munyai, the Director Legal and Labour Relations.  \n3. The arbitration was held under the auspices of the General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council (GPSSBC) in terms of section 186(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995, as amended (the (LRA) and the award is issued in terms of Section 138(7) of the LRA.  \n4. At the end of the proceedings, both parties requested to present their closing arguments in writing and they were directed to do so by 18 July 2025. Both parties have obliged and I have taken into account their arguments in my analysis of evidence and arguments hereunder without necessarily quoting them verbatim.  \n5. Parties have agreed to use common bundle of documents packed for each Applicant’s performance assessment documents marked Bundles A, C, D, E, H, I, F, G, K, L, and N; and Limpopo Provincial Administration Policy on Performance Management and Development System effective 1st April 2018, marked Bundle B (PMDS Policy) .  \n6. Originally, the dispute was referred on behalf of 44 Applicants. However, as at the commencement of the proceedings, not all Applicants pursued the matter and only 16 were in attendance until the last date of the arbitration hearing.  \n7. I then exercised my discretion and dismissed the claims of the Applicants who were not in attendance.  \n8. The matter proceeded only in respect of the 16 Applicants who testified below. The claim for the rest of the other Applicants has been dismissed due to their non-attendance during the arbitration proceedings until the matter was finalised.  \n9. The proceedings were digitally and manually recorded.  \nISSUES TO BE DECIDED  \n10. I must determine whether or not the Respondent committed unfair labour practice against the Applicants in terms of Section 186 (2)(a) of the LRA relating to a benefit of a performance bonus.  \n11. If so, determine the appropriate relief.  \nBACKGROUND TO THE ISSUES  \n12. The Applicants were employed in various positions by the Respondent, in the Chief Corporate Services Directorate except only one (1) who falls within the Transport Directorate.  \n13. The Applicants alleged that they qualified for payment of once-off performance bonus for the financial year performance assessment of 2020/2021 . It is common cause that the performance assessment review processes and rewarding of individual performance in relation to performance bonus are regulated by the PMDS Policy to qualifying employees. The policy or instruments governing performance management and rewards are not in dispute.  \n14. It is also common cause that the Applicants submitted their annual performance assessments for the  \n12 months’ financial performance cycle year of 2020/2021 which were moderated by the Branch Moderation Committee (the BMS) with rating of 4 as agreed with their supervisors.  \n15. In November 2021, the BMS conducted moderation and captured the performance assessments outcomes of the Applicants on the form titled: Standard Form for returning PMDS documents when deviations are identified during Moderation or When There Are Disagreements with The Provisional Assessment Ratings (PAR) indicating that they should either reduce the score or put in additional motivations for the 4 rating in some KRAs.  \n16. Some Applicants submitted additional motivations and others did not. In March 2022, the Department Moderating Committee (DMC) finally moderated","cbCaiq8aqPQl3UQS","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaiq8aqPQl3UQS","pdf",409291,22,"English","# The Details of the Hearing and Representation\n## Issues to be Decided\n## Background to the Issues\n## Survey of Parties’ Evidence and Arguments","[{\"question\":\"What dispute was arbitrated in this award?\",\"answer\":\"The matter concerned whether the Respondent committed an unfair labour practice relating to a performance bonus benefit under section 186(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act.\"},{\"question\":\"When were the arbitration hearings held?\",\"answer\":\"The hearings were held on 10–11 September 2024, 7–8 April 2025, 8 July 2025, and were finalised on 9 July 2025.\"},{\"question\":\"Why were only some applicants considered during the arbitration?\",\"answer\":\"Although the dispute was initially referred on behalf of 44 applicants, only 16 were in attendance until the last date; the claims of non-attending applicants were dismissed.\"}]","ARBITRATION AWARD - General Public Service Sector Bargaining Council (GPSSBC) - 08 August 2025 | PDF",1791035806,55]