Whistleblowers Dismissed Following Exposé of CCMA's Alleged Wasteful Expenditure

The Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) has found itself embroiled in a contentious matter involving the dismissal of two employees, Mothibedi Mokoena and Nelson Reddy, who brought allegations of wasteful expenditure against the institution. The individuals, since identified as whistleblowers, claimed that the CCMA was involved in the profligate spending of more than R40-million. Yunis Shaik, a former senior commissioner of the CCMA and brother of convicted fraudster Schabir Shaik, recommended their dismissal, describing the conduct of Mokoena and Reddy as “shocking” and “disgraceful.”

The case unfolds against a complex backdrop wherein the CCMA, facing an increase in its case load in the wake of the global economic downturn, acquired an additional R32 million from the National Treasury. This funding was requested on the premise that the CCMA had only R2.4 million left in its accounts and needed support to continue operating. Despite this financial injection, the whistleblowers claimed the entity was involved in various questionable activities, including:

- The award of a R20-million contract to Thabiso New Technologies (TNT) which had purportedly submitted false tender information and is now being deregistered;

- The use of funds allocated for staff bonuses to pay off a South African Revenue Service (Sars) debt, despite CCMA denials—a claim now under investigation by the auditor general;

- Securing weekly accommodation, car hire, and flights for directors at the taxpayer's expense, costing an estimated R1.5 million until May of the previous year.

Yunis Shaik's involvement became a point of contention as he was assigned to chair the disciplinary inquiry into Mokoena and Reddy's conduct. Critics viewed Shaik’s role as a conflict of interest due to his former employment at the CCMA and alleged aim to suppress the whistleblowers’ claims. Despite these allegations, CCMA director Nerine Kahn defended the appointment, stating that the proper legal processes were followed and dismissing the conflict of interest assertions.

Mokoena and Reddy's allegations were undercut by Shaik's judgment, which deemed their information "useless" and failed to recognize the public-interest basis of their complaint. Following this, information unearthed by investigative journalists suggested unscrupulous contractual engagements by the CCMA, throwing more doubt on the organization’s financial integrity.

In a twist to this saga, sources revealed that a settlement negotiation was in the pipeline, potentially seeing Mokoena and Reddy receive six months’ salary in exchange for dropping their appeal. This development, if true, would likely bring an end to the legal confrontation but raises serious questions about transparency, accountability, and whistleblower protection within South African public institutions.

The CCMA's situation implicates broader concerns regarding governance and oversight in public entities and the protection offered to individuals who disclose irregularities. This story not only casts a shadow on the CCMA's financial stewardship but also on the mechanisms in place to safeguard those who challenge institutional wrongdoing.