Eskom sets record straight on disciplinary process, suspensions

Saturday, 19 August 2017: There’s nothing untoward about the processes and/or decisions regarding certain employees about whom media reports emerged this week.

This was said by Eskom’s Group Executive: Human Resources, Ms Elsie Pule, while she sought to set the facts straight against damaging allegations in the public domain.

“While we can confirm that suspensions occurred this week, in line with our procedure on the basis of preliminary precaution with pay and with immediate effect, the affected individuals were called upon to make written representations to motivate why the preliminary decision to suspend should not be made final,” she explained.

Pule said that they were expected to submit their representations within two working days of receipt of the letter, which they did.

“Upon receipt of their representations on 17 August 2017, the respective line managers of these employees, assisted by HR, considered them and in turn decided to lift the preliminary suspensions,” Pule added.

Messrs Edwin Mabelane and Charles Khalima could therefore not be procedurally kept away from work.

She emphasised that the process followed is in strict compliance with the Eskom Disciplinary Procedure as well as established labour law principles.

As far as the disciplinary matter against Mr Koko is concerned, the report by both Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr and Nkonki Incorporated went through an entire process of edification, as critical documents, presentations and submissions by various parties internally and externally were required in strict accordance with a fair process.

“We don’t believe that the ‘dragging of feet’ allegation is based on a fair assessment of the prescribed process against the actual steps taken thus far on the Koko matter,” she stated.

Pule enumerated some milestones for the matter pertaining to Mr Koko thus far:

- A board decision to proceed with a disciplinary process

- Termination of special leave

- The intention to suspend

- Representations by the employee

- The suspension itself

- Notification for the hearing and charges

- The procurement of the presiding officials

- The setting up of mutually acceptable dates

“All these milestones are vital in ensuring a fair outcome, and unfortunately they could not have been achieved without spending some time addressing them,” Pule elaborated.

She explained that Eskom appreciates the national interest attached to the matter and therefore the utility sought to be extremely meticulous so as to carry aboard the interest of both Eskom and the employee in question.

“I can confirm that we are gone through all the critical hoops and are at a stage when the commencement of the hearing will occur in the short while subject to the tying up of the last loops,” she said.

Pule added, that it important to note that this being an employer-employee matter, Eskom is not at liberty to communicate the intimate details thereof, lest we harm the parties’ interest by compromising the entire process.

“According to the delegation of authority (DoA), the appointments and terminations of employment of executives and senior management are required to be approved by the People and Governance Committee, a Sub-Committee of the Board in terms of the authority delegated to it by the Board. And therefore, it is incorrect to suggest any wrongdoing on the part of the Board,” Pule said.

Therefore, Pule added, the handling of the hearing by the Office of the Company Secretary, which is responsible for corporate governance in the company, is in absolute accordance with the relevant Corporate Governance Framework.

Statement issued by Eskom, 19 August 2017