A berry picker from the Western Cape received compensation of R62,100 following a labor court case against Hoopenberg Berries, which dismissed her after she returned from maternity leave.
Nomaindia Mphotosi, mother of three children, worked for the blueberry producer in Stellenbosch since July 2021, earning R4,600 monthly. Her employment ended in June 2024.
Mphotosi agreed to maternity leave with the employer starting February 1, 2024, and returned to work on June 3, as agreed. However, instead of resuming her duties, she was informed that the company no longer had the funds to pay her salary and could not retain her.
The former berry picker testified that she received no calls or notifications from the employer during her maternity leave and was not consulted regarding possible downsizing.
Court Ruling
Judge C May, who issued the ruling on October 6, found that Hoopenberg Berries violated legally established redundancy procedures, and Mphotosi's dismissal was both procedurally and substantively unfair.
The court awarded her maximum compensation equivalent to 12 months of ordinary unfair dismissal, amounting to R55,200, plus R2,300 in severance pay and R4,600 for notice pay. The total sum of R62,100 must be paid within 30 days of the ruling.
Lack of Income
Initially, Mphotosi filed her dispute with the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA). At a hearing in December 2025, Hoopenberg Berries stated that it had downsized her and about 16 other employees due to financial difficulties.
Nevertheless, the CCMA ruled that it lacked jurisdiction to resolve the dispute and referred Mphotosi to the Labour Court. Mphotosi, representing herself, filed a claim in February 2026, later amending it to include the company's alleged failure to consult, provide necessary redundancy notices, or pay severance and notice.
Despite Hoopenberg Berries' participation in the CCMA proceedings, the company failed to defend its actions in the Labour Court, even after receiving court documents. Consequently, the case was heard by default judgment.
Lack of Evidence
May noted that the company's absence prevented the court from assessing whether the grounds for the redundancy were reasonable. Furthermore, no evidence was presented that the company followed the consultation procedures required by the Labour Relations Act.
As a result, the court deemed the dismissal unfair both in substance and procedure. When determining compensation, May took into account the impact on Mphotosi, who remained unemployed for over two years after being dismissed.
Mphotosi relied on child support for survival and care of her three children. The judge stated that dismissal under such circumstances, related to maternity leave, constitutes an infringement on the equality and dignity of women in employment. May described the impact on Mphotosi as severe and extremely difficult, deeming the award of maximum compensation justified.
Worker Well-being
This ruling comes against a backdrop where Hoopenberg Berries had previously drawn attention for initiatives aimed at improving worker well-being. In July 2022, BerryWorld published an article titled 'Hoopenberg Berries, Rooted in Goodness,' detailing a project implemented in collaboration with the farm and the Waitrose Foundation to improve working conditions for employees.
This initiative included renovating the staff canteen, which was described as a central meeting point for workers, and the subsequently updated space was used for training. The first training session was a financial counseling seminar, with further sessions planned. BerryWorld noted that this project reflects a commitment to supporting producers and their workers, calling it an investment in people.