She failed to convince the court that she was treated unfairly after believing she had the job.
Picture: iStock
A woman who quit her job and made plans to move to KwaZulu-Natal after thinking a Transnet Freight Rail vacancy was hers has lost her court case against the company.
How it happened
The dispute arose from a recruitment process that started in September 2013, when Transnet advertised a horticultural assistant post in Vryheid.
Rachel Nkhwatshirema applied and made the shortlist for interviews alongside two others.
After hearing nothing back, she phoned the company and spoke to one of the panellists. She said she was told to expect “good news” and to monitor her email. That conversation took place between October 2013 and January 2014.
But when she followed up in February 2014, she was told she had not been appointed. The post had gone to another candidate, whom the court accepted had scored higher in the assessment process.
The dispute
Nkhwatshirema argued that Transnet had misled her and that she resigned from her job and prepared to relocate because she believed the post was hers.
Judge Reynaud Neil Daniels rejected that version, saying there was no evidence that Transnet had promised her employment. He said the phrase “good news” was too vague to amount to a binding commitment.
He also said it was improbable that the company would offer her the job and then withdraw it without explanation.
During the case, Nkhwatshirema said her complaint was not based on race or gender. At different points, she suggested that her qualifications, and later even her age, may have influenced the outcome.
The court said those claims were not clearly pleaded and shifted from one version to another.
Transnet argued that the real issue was that she had been seen as overqualified for the role.
Judge Daniels said that even if that was the case, it would not automatically amount to unfair discrimination. Employers, he said, are allowed to assess applicants based on suitability, experience, long-term fit and the likelihood that they will stay in the post.
He added that employers may hesitate to appoint candidates they regard as overqualified because such applicants may use the job as a stepping stone to something better.
Laws
The court also stressed that the Employment Equity Act does not prohibit every form of differentiation between applicants. It bars only unfair discrimination that harms dignity or entrenches disadvantage.
In this case, the court found no such harm.
The judge also found Transnet’s witnesses to be credible and consistent, while describing parts of Nkhwatshirema’s testimony as contradictory and unreliable.
Even so, the court declined to order her to pay Transnet’s legal costs.
Judge Daniels said labour courts do not automatically punish unsuccessful litigants with costs and noted that she had represented herself throughout the case. He accepted that she genuinely believed she was defending her constitutional right to equality, even though her claim was legally flawed.
The case was dismissed, with each side ordered to pay its own costs.
