Dismissal of gambling technician highlights the importance of workplace leave policies

Leaving your workplace early, without the permission of your employer can cost you your job, especially if it causes operational disruptions and financial loss to the employer, a gaming technician responsible for seeing the smooth operation of gambling machines in a casino, had discovered.

Ally Mokomane was fired by Tsogo Sun, trading as Montecasino, for simply leaving early, after he was refused a day off. He later explained that he left due to a personal emergency, claiming his mother was ill. But this excuse was not accepted as it could not be verified.

Mokomane failed to have his dismissal overturned during arbitration and he subsequently turned to the Johannesburg Labour Court to get his job back. He was, however, once again unsuccessful. 

Mokomane was one of several gaming technicians engaged by the casino and the technicians were scheduled to work according to a roster, issued about a month in advance. 

According to the casino management they are short staffed in respect of technicians. The casino is extremely busy during December, at the peak of the festive season. Mokomane had applied for and was scheduled to take annual leave from December 23. 

Two days prior to this he asked his supervisor for permission to leave early and was granted permission to do so. Later that same day, he applied, on SAGE (the system used), for a half day’s leave for the next day as well. 

Mokomane (applicant) testified that he needed to leave early because his mother was sick and he needed to attend to her. He explained that before leaving, he applied for leave for the latter half of 22 December because he was not sure whether he would be able to “complete” the emergency on December 21.

The senior manager meanwhile contacted the two shift supervisors and enquired whether they were aware that Mokomane had applied for a half day’s leave. The manager informed them that the applicant could only do so if the casino had adequate coverage. They investigated the issue and decided that the casino did not have adequate coverage.

Mokomane was subsequently told that his application for leave had been declined. One of the shift supervisors testified that Mokomane was unhappy and said that he “would take his leave, he had a personal life, and the casino could not stop him”. 

The applicant indicated to his supervisors that he would be prepared to stay until noon but they were unwilling to negotiate. However, early that morning he told them that he was not feeling well and needed to leave. They told him that he ought to go to the inhouse clinic, but he was uninterested.

According to the supervisors Mokomane simply left early and he left the machine keys unattended in the office, which they said is a security risk.  As a result of his early departure, guests of the casino complained and the casino was forced to switch off some machines leading to a loss of revenue.

Mokomane admitted that he was aware of the rule that he could not simply leave if there is no one to replace him, but he explained that he had no choice because he had to attend to his sick mother.

Labour Court Judge Reynaud Daniels questioned why Mokomane did not issue his employer with documentary proof that his mother was ill. “Indeed, if the applicant’s mother was seriously ill, one would have expected him to mention the nature of her illness,” the judge said in confirming his dismissal.

zelda.venter@inl.co.za