Date: 26 February 2026
Time: 15:05 – 16:03
Venue: Online (Microsoft Teams)
Case Number: GAJB 2946-26
Attendees
- Mr. Legodi
- Ms. Rikhotso
- Ms. Mdaga
- Mr. Sekhuza
- Mr. Cumming
- Mr. Johannes
Background
The case meeting with Mr. Sekhuza was attended following a request from the Royal Committee for me to act as the representative of SayPro in the matter. The case involved Mr. Sekhuza, a former intern of SayPro who worked under the Strategic Partnerships department.
Commencement of Proceedings
The meeting was initially scheduled for 12:00. However, due to limited availability of commissioners, the session was postponed and eventually commenced between approximately 14:30 and 15:00.
Nature of the Case
The case lodged by Mr. Sekhuza under case number GAJB 2946-26 concerned amounts allegedly owed to him. Specifically, Mr. Sekhuza claimed that SayPro owed him salary payments for two months.
Introductions
The meeting was convened by Mr. Cumming, who introduced the purpose of the session. He confirmed that SayPro was the respondent and Mr. Sekhuza was the complainant. Mr. Johannes and Mr. Cumming attended as representatives of the CCMA.
From SayPro, the attendees included myself, Clifford Legodi (Operations – Royal Team), Ms. Rikhotso from Monitoring and Evaluation (M&E), and Ms. Mdaga from Strategic Partnerships. Members of the Royal Board were unable to attend due to power outages.
Initial Response
Mr. Cumming outlined the process and then afforded me the opportunity to respond. In my response, I requested clarity on the foundation of the matter and further asked that the complainant explain the nature of the dispute, including the reasons for lodging the case, to ensure that all parties had a clear understanding.
Complainant’s Submission
Mr. Sekhuza explained that SayPro owed him salary for December 2025 and January 2026. As part of his complaint, he raised several issues that arose during his employment with SayPro. He indicated that he was initially required to work from the office; however, due to financial challenges faced by the organisation, staff were later required to work from home.
He stated that working from home led to salary delays. As a result of these delays, he had to relocate from his place of residence. During this relocation process, he was robbed of his cellphone and a laptop that had been issued to him by SayPro.
Mr. Sekhuza contended that SayPro should pay him for the two months in question in terms of his contract. He further stated that had he not been instructed to work from home and had his salary not been delayed, he would not have lost the equipment required to perform his duties.
He also indicated that he had communicated these challenges, including the loss of devices and lack of data. However, no proof of such communication was presented to SayPro.
Mr. Sekhuza stated that he did not receive adequate support to continue working and reiterated that he was on a fixed-term contract. He therefore maintained that SayPro was obligated to pay him for December 2025 and January 2026. He further asserted that the robbery occurred as a result of delayed payments and thus attributed responsibility to SayPro.
Response on Behalf of SayPro
In my response as the representative of SayPro, I requested that Mr. Cumming interject to assist with clarity and to facilitate discussion. It was confirmed that Mr. Sekhuza’s claim related to unpaid salaries for December and January.
Mr. Sekhuza confirmed that he was claiming an amount of R7,600 for the two months, being December 2025 and January 2026.
At the request of the Commissioner, Mr. Cumming, a discussion was initiated between myself and Mr. Sekhuza to determine whether an agreement could be reached.
I explained that SayPro operates in terms of internal policies and is accountable to partners and clients. These policies require the submission of reports, completed logbooks, and attendance registers before payments can be processed. Mr. Sekhuza was aware of these requirements.
I further stated that payments cannot be substantiated or released in the absence of reports, as SayPro must account for all payments during audits and reporting to partners. An individual cannot be paid for a full month without evidence of work performed.
Further Engagement
Mr. Sekhuza responded by stating that SayPro was being defensive and reiterated that the robbery was the organisation’s fault. He argued that his contract did not specify that he was required to work from home and that delayed payments contributed directly to his circumstances.
I responded by stating that if Mr. Sekhuza worked during December and was robbed on 20 December, he should still have reports covering the period from 21 November to 12 December 2025, being the organisation’s closure date. Submission of these reports would enable payment for December.
Mr. Sekhuza indicated that he did not have data and was unable to submit reports. This effectively meant that he was unable to perform work during that period.
I reiterated that SayPro could not process payment where no work was performed or evidenced. Reports, logbooks, and attendance registers are mandatory for internal audits and compliance with organisational policy.
Withdrawal of the Case
Mr. Sekhuza then stated that he had discovered that his UIF records were incorrectly filed, reflecting only 8 hours for the entire month instead of the required 160 hours. He indicated that, in light of the lack of merit in his case, he was willing to withdraw the claim.
He requested that SayPro issue a UI-19 form and a Certificate of Service confirming his period of employment, rather than pursuing payment. His request therefore shifted from a monetary claim to administrative documentation.
Settlement and Agreement
The Commissioner asked whether SayPro agreed to this proposal. I confirmed that SayPro agreed, but expressed a preference that Mr. Sekhuza complete his final month of the programme, as this would contribute towards his qualification.
I further emphasised the importance of completing the programme, logbook, and attendance records. I noted that SayPro had previously offered Mr. Sekhuza the opportunity to return to work in January to complete outstanding duties, sign the required documents, and be paid accordingly.
Mr. Sekhuza advised that he was unable to return due to distance and lack of resources. He confirmed that he only required a termination letter and the UI-19 form and requested that SayPro assist in correcting his UIF records.
Following this, SayPro and the Commissioner, Mr. Cumming, agreed that SayPro would address the UI-19 issue and issue the requested documents so that Mr. Sekhuza could submit his UIF claim at the Department of Labour.
Conclusion
A settlement document was issued, confirming that Mr. Sekhuza had withdrawn and dismissed his own claim. The document reflects that SayPro is required only to provide the UI-19 form and termination letter.
I received the settlement agreement and was required to sign and return it. It was confirmed that a fully signed copy would be sent to us thereafter.
In conclusion, the case was formally withdrawn, and SayPro is required to correct the UI-19 and issue a termination letter to enable Mr. Sekhuza to claim UIF benefits.
Als this one
Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) case with Mr Sekhuza unedited Report
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.
