Member of Hawks in Kimberley rewarded with more than half a million rand

The South African Police Service (SAPS) was hauled over the coals for the umpteenth time for unfair labour practice involving a candidate whose application for promotion was unfairly rejected.

This was the case with Lt. Col. Ralda Breedt who, despite her years of service in the Directorate for Priority Crime Investigation (DPCI), also called the Hawks, was not promoted so that a less suitable candidate could be promoted.

This matter was heard by the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA), where the commissioner found that the SAPS had failed to provide a rational or just reason why Breedt had not been promoted.

The decision to appoint a less suitable candidate was also confirmed to be an unfair labour practice in terms of section 186(2)(a) of the Labour Relations Act.

During the application process, Lt. Col. Breedt applied for the position of Colonel in the DPCI Serious Corruption Investigation Unit in Kimberley. She has served as Lieutenant Colonel in this unit since 2019 and also has years of specialised experience in corruption investigations – including within the Department of Public Works and at Eskom.

The interview panel consequently identified her as the best candidate and recommended her for appointment in this position. However, the recommendation was rejected by the Moderation Committee and the position was allocated to a candidate who, according to the arbitration order, did not meet the job requirements and should never have been on the shortlist.

In the judgment, the commissioner ruled that Breedt had been unfairly disadvantaged, and the following strict order was issued:

• • the SAPS must promote Lt. Col. Breedt to the position of Unit Commander: Serious Corruption Investigations (with the rank of Colonel);

• • the amount must be paid by 31 July 2025.

• • the promotion must take effect retroactively from 1 May 2023;

• • the SAPS must pay her the full remuneration and benefits relating to the position, namely a total of R664 300, less any legal deductions; and

According to Theunis van Staden, Solidarity organiser in the Public Sector, this ruling is one of the few where not only compensation was granted, but where the promotion itself was also enforced. “This is a powerful corrective step for justice in the workplace, and we are delighted that our member is being compensated in more ways than one. She deserves it, even though there were officials who wanted to take it away from her,” Van Staden said.

At the hearing, Solidarity argued that race played a role in the decision to reject her appointment and to appoint a less qualified candidate.

“First of all, the position was not advertised as a position reserved for affirmative action. We said Breedt’s exclusion was based on race without a nuanced application of affirmative action.”

“The SAPS failed to apply its own policy (National Instruction 3 of 2015) in terms of which various requirements must be considered in a nuanced manner. Qualifications, experience, as well as the effect this appointment would have on service delivery must be taken into account, among other things. By overlooking all these requirements in order to establish only race as a requirement, an absolute ceiling is created, which is already considered unlawful by the South African legal system. In this case, the qualifications and experience of the appointed candidate were insufficient, which makes the appointment based solely on race all the more outrageous,”  Van Staden said. Van Staden added that this victory for a dedicated member is also a verdict that shows that procedure, merit and fairness must still be applied. He stated that this verdict added to a growing list of successes achieved by Solidarity on behalf of SAPS members against unfair exclusion in the name of transformation. Click here for the judgement.