Understanding the Nature and Composition of a Disciplinary Authority in Zimbabwe

In terms of the Labour (National Employment Code of Conduct) Regulations, 2006 (‘Model Code’) a Disciplinary Authority is defined as any person, authority or a committee dealing with disciplinary matters at the workplace whose composition is not dictated by the Code of Conduct. In terms of the Model Code, a Disciplinary Authority can be constituted by a single person and it can be extended to a Disciplinary Committee.

In terms of section 2 of the Model Code, a Disciplinary Committee refers to a Committee set up at a workplace or establishment which Committee is composed of the employer and employees’ representatives, to preside over and decide over disciplinary cases and or worker grievances.

Disciplinary proceedings against employees facing misconduct charges are conducted by the employer or a disciplinary authority appointed by it. The disciplinary authority is expected to conduct a hearing in terms of section 6 of the Model Code at the workplace. see Madziyauswa v ZFC Ltd & Another SC 73-15.

A disciplinary committee envisages a body in which body the employer and the employers are represented. The employer has a discretion in determining the nature and composition of the disciplinary authority. see National Engineering Workers Union v Dube 2016 (1) ZLR 314 (S).

A disciplinary authority should ensure that an employee has been given at least three (3) working days’ notice of the proceedings against him or her, advised of the charges which have been proffered against him or her, notified of his or her rights to be represented at the hearing and his or her right to call witnesses and have them cross – examined as well as to be notified of the reasons for a decision and to address the disciplinary committee in mitigation before the ultimate penalty is imposed.