Teacher Fired in KwaZulu-Natal: Appeal Over Unpaid Wages Rejected Due to Qualification Forgery

The attempt by a former teacher from KwaZulu-Natal to secure unpaid wages ended unsuccessfully after it was established that she no longer had the right to remuneration, as her dismissal was confirmed on appeal.

Decision of the Labour Relations Council

The Commissioner of the Education Labour Relations Council (ELRC), Nolundi Shezi, dismissed a claim of unfair labour practice filed by Kalivan Govender against the KwaZulu-Natal Department of Education. The Commissioner ruled that she lacked a legal right to receive a salary following the official termination of her employment contract.

Reasons for the Dispute

The roots of the disagreement trace back to January 2025, when the department dismissed Govender following a disciplinary hearing. The hearing found her guilty of a serious misconduct related to providing a forged qualification certificate. Govender attempted to overturn this decision by lodging a formal appeal with the office of the Minister of Education of KwaZulu-Natal (MEC).

Dismissal Process and Errors

However, the MEC rejected Govender's appeal and upheld her dismissal in January 2026. Due to a communication failure between the MEC's office and the provincial department's human resources division, the Pinetown district never received notification of the final decision. Despite the dismissal, Govender continued to report to work and received full pay for January, February, and March 2026.

Suspension of Payments and Dispute

The department's administrative oversight suddenly halted when Musavencosi Dlamini, an internal investigator for the department's fraud and ethics unit, intercepted the MEC's order from January. Discovering a documentation error, Dlamini issued an urgent directive in April 2026 to the Pinetown district to freeze Govender's profile and immediately cease processing any further state funds. Consequently, when the standard payday in the province arrived on April 15, 2026, Govender received no payments. The next day, she left the school and did not return, later filing a claim with the ELRC for unfair labour practice and demanding April's remuneration along with a birthday bonus.

Arguments of the Parties in Court

During the hearing, Govender argued that she only learned of her appeal's failure in June 2026, insisting that she deserved compensation for providing direct service to the school until mid-April. She also pointed out that receiving official digital payslips proved her continuous employment. Nevertheless, the department countered, asserting that the earnings after dismissal were solely the result of a standard administrative error, and confirmed that internal mechanisms were already in place to recover and reimburse the erroneously paid salaries for February and March.

Commission's Conclusion

In its final analysis of the evidence, Commissioner Shezi accepted the department's explanation that the payments for February and March resulted from administrative oversight after the appeal outcome was not promptly implemented. Since Govender's employment relationship had already been terminated upon confirmation of her dismissal, the Commissioner concluded that she had no legal right to continue providing services or receiving remuneration. Commissioner Shezi found that the department had a valid reason to stop payments once the finality of her dismissal became known. Ultimately, the ELRC ruled that Govender failed to prove that the department committed unfair labour practice by withholding her April 2026 salary, and completely dismissed her application.

The teacher was dismissed after an arbitrator found him guilty of a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old student, which resulted in her pregnancy. The decision also ruled that he is unfit to work with children.

Ruling and Allegations

Arbitrator Mamakhola Gloria Rabanyana issued a severe ruling, establishing that Andile Malusi Kunene, a teacher at Lotus Gardens High School, committed gross misconduct. In addition to losing his job, the council recommended permanently barring Kunene from the South African Council for Educators (SACE) register. The decision also declared Kunene unfit to work with children and ordered his name to be placed on the National Child Protection Register, Part B.

The situation arose following allegations in September 2025 that Kunene, who was then a department head at Lotus Gardens High School, impregnated a former Grade 12 student identified in the proceedings as KMM. The student's mother initially approached the police and the school administration, claiming that Kunene was the father of her grandson and had engaged in a sexual relationship with her daughter while she was a student.

Local community organizations and civic leaders intervened after reports began circulating on WhatsApp and payment records in public forums, allegedly demonstrating a connection between the educator and the student. Although criminal charges were not filed because the student was already 18 years old when the complaint was lodged, the Department of Education initiated disciplinary proceedings under Section 188A of the Labour Relations Act through an arbitrator's investigation.

Conflicting Witness Testimony

The case was characterized by sharp changes in the testimony of key witnesses. Both the student and her mother later attempted to withdraw or soften their allegations, stating that Kunene was not the biological father of the child and that the initial accusations were based on misinformation.

Ultimately, the student stated that she falsely claimed Kunene was the father of her child, and that their relationship only began in 2025 after she graduated from school and enrolled in college. However, the arbitrator deemed these later versions unreliable and contradictory to the initial statements, documentary evidence, and WhatsApp correspondence between them.

The ruling noted that the student initially testified under oath that she had had sexual contact with Kunene in November 2024 while still a Grade 12 student, and that she learned of the pregnancy in December of the same year.

WhatsApp Messages and Financial Transactions

Dozens of WhatsApp messages and bank records showing money transfers from Kunene to the student over several months were central to the employer's case. These conversations allegedly contained discussions about the pregnancy, medical consultations, preparation for childbirth, and requests for financial support.

The arbitrator found that several messages, which Kunene admitted were authentic, contradicted his claim that the relationship began only in January 2025. One exchange mentioned that the student was seven months pregnant in May 2025 and expected delivery in about two months, which, in the arbitrator's view, strongly supported the student's original account of conception in late 2024.

The ruling also highlighted the monthly payments Kunene made to the student from February 2025 to January 2026, some of which increased significantly after public complaints and societal pressure. Despite Kunene denying some payments and challenging the authenticity of some WhatsApp screenshots, the employer requested his bank records, which confirmed many transactions.

Rebuttal of Teacher's Defense

Kunene argued that the relationship only started after the student left school, and therefore the matter was irrelevant to his employment. He also insisted that he was hospitalized during parts of November and December 2024 and thus could not have been involved in the alleged conduct during that period.

The educator also disputed the location where the relationship supposedly began, providing evidence that he only moved into his residence in January 2025. The arbitrator rejected these defenses, deeming them presented too late in the proceedings and inconsistent with the broader body of evidence.

The ruling described Kunene as an unreliable witness whose testimony changed in response to the evidence presented during the investigation. Since the Teachers Employment Act mandates the dismissal of educators found guilty of sexual relations with students, the arbitrator ruled that no lesser penalty could be applied. The decision noted: 'Mitigating and aggravating factors become academic,' underscoring the seriousness of the offense and the trust placed in educators by parents and the community.

Unsuitability for Working with Children

One of the most significant aspects of the ruling was that the ELRC used provisions of the Children's Act to declare Kunene unfit to work with children. The Department of Social Development will now be notified to have his name entered into the National Child Protection Register. The decision also ordered that this ruling be sent to the South African Council for Educators (SACE), potentially affecting his future registration as an educator.