Date: 26 February 2026
Time: 15:05 – 16:03
Venue: Online Teams
Attendees
Mr. Legodi Ms. Rikhotso
Ms. Mdaga Mr. Sekhuza
Mr. Cumming Mr. Johannes
SayPro Operations Clifford – SayPro Operations Royal
Mr. Cumming
Mr. Johannes
The case meeting with Mr. Sukhuza, as I was requested earlier by the Royal Committee to be the representative of SayPro with regards to the case that we had at hand with Mr. Sukhuza, one of the former interns of SIPRO that worked under the strategic partnerships.
The meeting was initially scheduled for 12 o’clock. Unfortunately, they had not so many commissioners available. So they pushed it until eventually it was about 2:30 – 3pm, That’s when the meeting eventually started.
SayPro Operations Clifford – SayPro Operations Royal 0 minutes 45 seconds
The case by Mr.Sekhuza, Case N0:GAJB 2946-26, the case was regarding amounts owing. So it means that SayPro owed Mr. Sekhuza salary payments for two months as per the case that he had lodged with the CCMA.
The gentleman who had called the meeting, Mr. Cumming, introduced the purpose to say this is, of course, a case with the respondent being SayPro and a case that was lodged by Mr. Sekhuza being the complainant. So, in the meeting, we had Mr. Johannes, as well as Mr. Cummingwhich were the representatives from CCMA.
CCMA and from SayPro, of course we had myself Clifford Legodi from Operations Royal T. We had Miss Rikhotso from M&E. We also had Miss Mdaka from Strategic Partnership. Unfortunately, the Royal Board could not join due to the issue of power cuts.
Mr. Cumming introduced the purpose and then gave Mr. Legodi, an opportunity to respond. So in my response, I requested that I would like to at least get the foundation of the matters to the purpose, but also I’d like to hear from the complainant as to what the case is about, or what, why they’ve lordged the case so that other member can understand.
Mr. Sekhuza explained the reason for his case, saying that SayPro owes him salary for December last year, as well as December 2025 and January 2026.
So, as part of his complaint, Mr. Sekhuza mentioned a number of issues that emanated during his time with SayPro, one being that he was mandated to work at the office and then to eventually the company faced financial challenges and they were mandated to work from home. So, with him having to work from home, unfortunately, he faced salary delays and with salaries being delayed, there was a time where he had to move from where he was staying to move to a different location and in the process of doing that, he got robbed the cell phone as well as the laptop that SayPro had given him.
He believes that SayPro should pay him for the two months as per his contract and that had he not been asked to work from home then he would still have his resources to actually deliver on the work.
Mr, Sekhuza also said that he did communicate and talk about these challenges to say his devices are lost. He also did not have data, but as it stands no proof of communication of the challemnges was presented to SayPro.
We have not received support for him to work, he wants SayPro to pay him for December 2025 and January 2026 because he had a fixed contract with SayPro as an employer. So he wants to be paid because if it wasn’t for us paying him late, then he wouldn’t have gotten robbed. So in a sense, it means it’s SayPro’s fault.
In my response as the representative of SayPro,
I then asked Mr. Cumming to interject and ask a few questions, but also to get clarity. So, in my response, it was that Mr. Sekhuza is claiming that SayPro owes him for December and January.
It was confirmed. Mr. Sekhuza said yes, that’s whatthe claim is about. So he wants SayPro to pay him an amount of 7 600, which he was getting for two months December 2025 and January 2026
.
So I then asked, I put the questions to Mr. Sukuza as it was a conversation between him and me The arbitrator, Mr. Cumming, requested that we have a conversation and we see if we can come to an agreement.
So in responding, I did indicate to say we have an internal policy as SayPro and also we have partners and clients that we work with that we are mandated to provide certain reports when we are claiming for payments and everything.
So Mr. Sekhuza being aware of the internal policy that we have that in order for people to be paid, they are required to submit reports. In him being aware of that and also knowing that we cannot substantiate, if there are no reports, then payments cannot be made because we cannot substantiate as to why we are paying people.
A cannot not work for an entire month and expect that He’d be paid. What is he saying about that.
Mr. Sekhuza responded in saying that we are being defensive. It is our fault that he got robbed. So in a sense, the contract didn’t say that he was mandated to work at home.
So if it wasn’t the case, and also if it wasn’t the case that we delayed his salary, then he wouldn’t have had the issue of getting robbed. So we are required to make sure that we pay him the amounts owed.
I, Clifford Legodi then responded in saying that unfortunately, in order for everything to happen, sincerely saying that he worked in December and he got robbed on the 20th of December. That means he must have reports for the 21 November – 12 December 2025, which is the date that we closed on, so that we can pay him for that month of December.
Mr. Sehuza then said, unfortunately, he did not have data. He cannot provide those reports. He doesn’t have them in his position, which in another sense, it means that he was not able to work.
I did reiterate to say, unfortunately, SayPro is not in a position to pay if no work has been done because we are still mandated to go back and provide reports. There’s logbook that needs to be completed. There’s an attendance register that also needs to be completed that needs to be in place. So if those things are not there, then we cannot release payments because we also have to make evidence for our internal audits, as well as the reporting to our partners and clients, but also most importantly, it is in accordance with the policy that we have within SayPro. Then, from there on.
Mr. Sibusiwe said, since when we are being defensive and we are protecting ourselves. He also found out that his UIF filing was not done correctly. It is recorded as 8 hours for the entire month and it’s supposed to be 160 hours on the Department of Labor Database, so he is now willing to witdraw the case as it lacks merit his case and chooses to his claim and dismiss the case on the bases that a UI19 and Certificate of Service is issued which just indicates that he was working with us for a particular period. So those are the things that he wanted. So he moved from claiming money that he thought to be owed to now requesting that we have to send him the letter to show that he was working with us and that the contract ended.
So the arbitrator, which is the commissioner, came in and advised that, do you guys agree to this? Is it something that you as the respondent asking me that I can agree with? And I did indicate that if that is the case, I agree but I would like for him to complete his last month as it will work towards his qualification.
I further noted that completion of the programme as well as his logbook is important and I would have wished we had a much different agreement to say he can come to work because I offered to say he can come to work for the month of January to cover the work that has not been done so that he can sign the logbook and the attendance register so that he can then be paid for the work that he has done.
Mr. Sokuza said that he’s not in a position to do that because he’s far and he doesn’t have resources. So right now he just needs a termination letter. And on top of the termination letter, he needs the UI19 document. So he requested that we at least fix that for him and then issue him with the documents.
So with that said, we then agreed with the Commissioner, Mr. Cumming, to say it is fine. As SayPro, we will then look into the matter of addressing the issue of the UI19, and Mr. Sikhuza will then be issued with the documents that he has requested from us as his former employer.
In this instance, so that he’s able to make his claim at the UIF Office or the Department of Labour offices.
The meeting concluded with us agreeing. So they sent me a document that is the settlement document and that The document indicates that Mr. Sekhuza has withdrawn the cases closed or he has dismissed his own claim. He’s now requesting SayPro to just provide him with the U19 for him to be able to claim for UIF. So in a sense, as it stands, that is where the meeting ended.
In my position, I have the document with me that I was required to sign the document a settlement agreement that was sent. They said that they will send us the signed one once I’ve signed and sent it back.
In conclusion the case was withdrawn and SayPro is required to fix his UI19 and termination letter for UIF claims.
