VANDERBIJILPARK.- Following two allegations leveled against an educator known as N.J Taaso from Bophelong Secondary School, the Gauteng department of Education has dismissed the alleged sex pest.

Taaso was employed as an educator at Bophelong Secondary School in 2018 teaching History and Sesotho.

According to the Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC) the first allegation is that Taaso conducted himself in an improper, disgraceful, and unacceptable manner, in that he proposed love to a Grade 10 learner (TS) by holding her hand and trying to kiss her.

The second allegation is that during the third term of 2018 Taaso allegedly caressed the body of a female learner (NN) and kissed her.

Both TS and NN had failed their respective grades.

TS learned Sesotho as a subject in 2019 for the first time upon her arrival at Bophelong Secondary School from Vaal High a model C town school and she struggled to get to grips with the subject.

The office, which is the alleged place of the two incidents, is situated at a quiet place at the library.

Taaso had requested TS cellphone number and she had eventually given the number to him.

According to ELRC Taaso had called TS on her cellphone. “An audio clip of one of the whatsapp conversations was played during the course of the arbitration hearing.”

“The Respondent lead the evidence of five witnesses namely learner TS, learner NN, TS father Mr. Skosana; TS mother Mrs. Skosana and deputy principal, Ms. Evodia Mawela.”

TS parents’ reported the incident to the police station, a short while after reporting the matter to the school.

Taaso allegedly visited the home of TS three times together with two other educators and his brother and had spoken to TS parents concerning the allegations against him.

NN (the second learner) testified that the teacher arrived in the third term of 2018 at the school and taught her history.

She described early conversations that the teacher initiated with her. He had wanted to know where she stayed and at one point had asked her what teachers’ she likes.

On a certain day Taaso approached her and asked her to go to his office and fetch his lunch box and instructed her that thereafter she should warm it in another office. She went to his office and found it locked.

She returned to Taaso who gave her the office key. The educator followed her and rapidly slipped in with her after she had opened the door.

The educator quickly kissed her on the mouth and grabbed her by the arm. She got scared and ran out of the office. After the incident the educator changed towards her and made fun of her in front of the class making negative insinuations about her appearance and financial status.

During exam time for the third Taaso approached her again and asked what she likes to drink and what places does she like to visit afterhours.

NN testified that she had reported the various incidents, involving the educator, to her mother who did not take her seriously. “This caused her to doubt whether the educators at school would take her seriously and for that reason she did not report the matter at school.”

When she eventually heard that TS had made allegations against the Taaso in 2019 she decided to come forward and report her similar experiences with him at school.

Arbitrator Mark Hawyes said: “I find that the TS’s parents accurately heard the employee apologize for his behavior and admit that he could not control his emotions. The employee was hoping to persuade TS’s parents to stop the investigation that was in its infancy at the District Office and that was the sole reason for his three visits to the TS parental home. His appeal to the parents to approach the school and withdraw the complaint as a ’misunderstanding’ was a blatant act of self-interest and an unwarranted interference in an ongoing departmental investigation.

“Both learners TS and NN gave evidence which revealed a certain consistent pattern of conduct and modus operandi on the part of the employee in dealing with the learners that caught his fancy. The Applicant utilized psychology, seduction tactics and grooming to weaken the learners resolve to resist his advances and obtain their cell phone numbers.

The evidence of TS’s parents amply supported the testimony of their daughter. NN gave an adequate and probable explanation why she waited so long to come forward with the allegations against the employee.”