Skip to main content

Article 44/2023

How should an employee be dealt with if tested positive for being under the influence of cannabis?

Has the decriminalisation of the use of cannabis in private surroundings had any effect on the approach to be adopted

_____________________________________

  • It is recommended that a difference should be made between an employee dependent on cannabis and an employee not dependent on cannabis
  • if an employee is dependent on cannabis, the matter should be dealt with as incapacity: ill-health, entailing, inter alia, that items 10 and 11 of Schedule 8 to the LRA should be taken into account
  • on the other hand, if an employee is not dependent on cannabis and wilfully disregards the workplace rules, such conduct may constitute misconduct – under the misconduct scenario, items 1 to 5 and 7 of Schedule 8 to the LRA should be taken into account
  • the aforesaid approach should also be applied in respect of alcohol and other drugs

(see, inter alia, Mthembu and Others v NCT Durban Wood Chips KNDB 4091-18 and Transnet Freight Rail v Transport Bargaining Council (2011) 32 ILJ 1766 (LC))

The previous article dealt with the distinction between misconduct constituting desertion and misconduct constituting abscondment – see, further, in this regard, Okhahlamba Local Municipality v Mabuya (2021) 32 SALLR 12 (LC).

In this article, what we attempt to do is provide some clarity as to a very different misconduct, namely, the misconduct of deeming desertion.

What is the difference between desertion and abscondment?

We think that everyone understands that an employer is vicariously liable for the wrong committed (an act or omission) by its employee during the course/scope/sphere of employment/engagement in any activity reasonably incidental to it.

But, what is the extent of an employer’s vicarious liability where the employee commits a wrong on his or her own volition?