A Gauteng school principal has lost his bid to get his job back after being dismissed for making sexual advances toward a young volunteer who had been helping him at the school.
The incident occurred when the volunteer, who sometimes assisted the principal with administrative tasks, went to his office to help proofread some documents. After she finished, he asked her for a hug. She agreed, but during the hug, he squeezed her tightly enough for her to feel his erect body. He then tried to kiss her. When she refused, he told her that he would “settle for a baby kiss.”
The volunteer’s mother, who worked at the school, happened to see part of the incident through a window. Alarmed, she immediately went looking for her daughter, soon urging her to leave the school grounds. Later that day, she sent the principal a message warning that her daughter intended to open a sexual harassment case.
It was also alleged that the principal’s wife contacted the mother and offered to send “uncles” to pay damages for the incident—something typically associated with attempts to resolve disputes informally.
The principal denied wrongdoing. He claimed the volunteer initiated the hug, and said the accusations were fabricated by her mother, whom he accused of having made unwanted advances toward him in the past. He insisted that the school was busy on that day and argued that he would not have tried to kiss anyone under such circumstances.
However, evidence revealed that he had sent the mother an apologetic message after the incident. He later said the apology was simply for keeping her daughter at school past normal working hours.
When the matter went before an arbitrator, the volunteer and her mother were found to be more credible witnesses than the principal. The arbitrator also said that even if the principal’s version were true, accepting and participating in such physical contact with a much younger subordinate was inappropriate for someone in his position.
The Labour Court agreed, ruling that his dismissal was justified and that his behavior breached the standards expected of a school leader. His attempt to challenge the decision was dismissed, and the ruling confirming his dismissal stands.