Former Sasol employee disputes R1. 8 million payout 10 years after retrenchment
Image: Pexels
A former Sasol employee took Old Mutual to the Financial Service Tribunal (FST) to dispute the R1.8 million payout he received after his retrenchment in 2015.
Thabiso Sehlabaka worked for Sasol from 1988 until he was retrenched in 2015.
Initially a member of the Sasol Pension Fund, Sehlabaka transitioned through the Sasol Negotiated Provident Fund before finally migrating to the Old Mutual Superfund.
Following his retrenchment, in April 2015, Sehlabaka received over R1.8 million after tax deductions. Four years later, in November 2019, he received an additional sum of R26,777 from the Unclaimed Benefits Preservation Fund, but it was only in August 2024, that he raised concerns about his payout.
He lodged a complaint with the Pension Funds Adjudicator (PFA) as he was dissatisfied with his payout. Unfortunately, in December 2024, the PFA declined to investigate his complaint, finding it time barred.
The setback did not deter Sehlabaka, who filed an application for reconsideration with the FST in February 2025. He argued that he only became aware of potential discrepancies in early 2024, leading him to assert that his complaint was still within acceptable time limits.
His dissatisfaction stemmed from claims of insufficient compensation after 27 years of service, discrepancies in years of service accounted for, and pivotal issues regarding taxation. Sehlabaka alleged an incorrect South African Revenue Services (SARS) tax deduction of R15,000 that he claims remains unpaid and is owed to him.
Furthermore, he claimed that he never consented to his exit from the Sasol Negotiated Provident Fund to Old Mutual's Superfund. He was also dissatisfied with the overall benefit amount received after 27 years of service. Moreover, he said some years of service were not accounted for.
However, Sasol clarified that Sehlabaka was not required to opt into the Superfund, as this was accomplished through a Section 14 Transfer.
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Advertisement
Video Player is loading.
Play Video
Play
Unmute
Current Time
0:00
/
Duration
-:-
Loaded :
0%
Stream Type LIVE
Seek to live, currently behind live
LIVE
Remaining Time
-
0:00
This is a modal window.
Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window.
Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan
Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque
Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps
Reset
restore all settings to the default values Done
Close Modal Dialog
End of dialog window.
Next
Stay
Close ✕
Presiding over the tribunal, Advocate Salmé Maritz examined the case and found Sehlabaka offered insufficient reasons for the nine-year delay in raising his concerns. Maritz noted that the allegations of incorrect tax deductions and unaccounted service years were vague and unsupported, lacking any new factual basis that could not have been unearthed with reasonable diligence.
Regarding the disputed R15,000 tax deduction, Maritz clarified that this amount was lawfully deducted in accordance with the Income Tax Act and specified that Old Mutual was mandated to remit taxes to SARS prior to disbursing any funds.
"The Superfund (Old Mutual) is legally required to deduct and pay this tax to SARS before making a payment. The Superfund cannot refund lawfully deducted tax to the applicant (Sehlabaka). If the applicant disputes the deduction or believes it wasn't paid to SARS, he must raise it with SARS," added Maritz.
Consequently, Sehlabaka's application was dismissed.
sinenhlanhla.masilela@iol.co.za
IOL News
Get your news on the go, click here to join the IOL News WhatsApp channel
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Citizen
9 hours ago
- The Citizen
Government must intervene with US tariffs, act stronger with police corruption
There is no time for South Africa's government to drag its feet with responding to the US tariffs and corruption in the police. Government must urgently consider interventions to lower US tariffs as South Africa braces for the impact of them. In addition, people expected stronger action from President Cyril Ramaphosa to deal with the corruption in the police. Busisiwe Mavuso, CEO of Business Leadership South Africa (BLSA), says in her weekly newsletter that the notification from the White House that many of South Africa's exports will face 30% tariffs from August is 'deeply concerning'. 'While there may be scope to negotiate some reprieve, we must prepare for the worst-case scenario. Although exports from SA to the US make up just 2.2% of gross domestic product (GDP), some of that basket will be unaffected because there are specific exemptions, particularly for raw materials, such as platinum, gold, chrome and coal that the US deems critical. 'The most critical sectors to be affected are vehicles and parts, agricultural output, steel and aluminium (which faces 50%) and other manufactured goods. That will hit certain companies hard where they are significantly exposed to the US market.' ALSO READ: Ordinary South Africans will feel impact of US tariffs Businesses affected will find other markets, but it takes time She says some of those businesses will be able to find new markets for their output, but that takes time. In the short term, they will face a shock that will ripple through their supply chains. She said she worries about how the automotive sector will withstand this. She points out it is not just vehicle manufacturers, but the many parts manufacturers and other service providers who support them. 'Under the Trump tariff regime, vehicles and parts will get their own tariff of 25%. 'The US acquired R35 billion in luxury cars and components last year, with a third of that consisting of parts, many provided by relatively small businesses. 'The citrus industry is also bracing for a huge impact. South Africa has become the world's second-largest citrus exporter after Spain, but the biggest in the southern hemisphere, positioning it well for northern hemisphere winter demand.' ALSO READ: Trump's new 30% tariff less about trade and more about power The US market consumed around R1.8 billion of citrus exports, supporting about 140 000 jobs across the value chain. 'Add to that wine, beef and other exports and large parts of our agricultural sector will be hit. 'The critical question is whether affected companies can survive long enough to pivot to new markets. Shifting production capabilities and securing alternative import agreements takes years, not months. In the interim, hundreds of thousands of jobs hang in the balance.' Urgent decisions needed on US tariffs Mavuso says government must make urgent policy decisions. 'Much like during Covid, when companies were forced to close during lockdowns, the shocks are temporary. But losing companies and the thousands of jobs would be permanent. 'Then, government took the decision to support companies with loan schemes and support jobs with the Temporary Employer/Employee Relief Scheme (Ters). Similar interventions should urgently be considered to deal with the tariff fallout.' Of course, she says, government should also actively engage their US counterparts to find ways to avoid the full impact of the tariffs, but we must prepare for the worst. We cannot be left scrambling for a solution only after all other options have failed, she says. ALSO READ: Where Trump's tariffs will hurt most She points out that government's recent R753 million emergency funding for HIV programmes, necessitated by the US withdrawal of Pepfar, demonstrates a model for the challenge and response. 'While this represents only a tenth of Pepfar's previous spending, it shows government can move quickly when crises demand action. 'We must get ahead of this challenge. Government should immediately establish a tariff impact fund to support viable companies through the transition period while simultaneously working with affected industries to identify and develop alternative markets. Parallel diplomatic efforts with US counterparts remain important, but we cannot wait for their outcome.' Police corruption also needs urgent attention Turning to the governance crisis exemplified by the Senzo Mchunu affair, Mavuso says the crisis also demands urgent attention. 'The decision Ramaphosa announced last night to grant the police minister leave of absence is welcome, although proper suspension pending investigation would have been more appropriate given the serious allegations of lying to parliament and interfering in police investigations of political assassinations in KwaZulu-Natal. 'The president's appointment of Firoz Cachalia as acting minister does suggest an effort to put someone into the role without political baggage and is welcome. However, it would have been better to see stronger action. 'Just two weeks ago, the president dismissed a deputy minister for the relatively minor infraction of taking an overseas trip without final approval. If we fire officials for procedural violations, how can we treat potential obstruction of justice investigations with less severity?' Inquiry's recommendations must not gather dust again The commission of inquiry offers hope, provided it receives proper resources to support Acting Deputy Chief Justice Mbuyisile Madlanga, who has been appointed to head it, she says. 'The Nugent Commission on Sars and the PIC Commission successfully contributed to restoring those institutions, proving commissions can work when properly structured and supported. 'However, we cannot afford the delays and budget overruns that have plagued other inquiries, nor can we allow recommendations to gather dust like many from the Zondo Commission on state capture. Judge Madlanga will need to be swift and recommend immediate actions to suspend those who pose particular risk to the security services.' ALSO READ: Cameron questions urgency of commission into Mchunu probe Mavuso says this situation strikes at the heart of our criminal justice system. 'Police must have unwavering political backing to investigate crime without fear or favour. Any suggestion of political interference is devastating to public trust and emboldens criminal syndicates that have infiltrated our political systems. 'These networks must be dismantled and the president must lead this charge by ensuring police have his full backing to pursue investigations wherever they lead.'
TimesLIVE
11 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Sassa encourages honesty from grant beneficiaries during income reviews
The South African Social Security Agency (Sassa) continues its phased review of social grant recipients, urging beneficiaries to be honest and transparent during the income verification process. Multiple pensioners did not receive their July grants after the agency discovered what it called 'additional income' in their bank accounts. Brenton van Vrede, Sassa's executive manager for grants administration, told journalists on Monday that for normal social grants such as the older person's grant, disability grant and child support grant the focus is not just on how much money appears in a bank account. 'We are encouraging people to disclose. It's not about how much is in the account. It's about understanding the source of that income so we can test whether the person qualifies for the full grant amount, a partial amount or doesn't qualify. 'Maintenance is considered income in terms of the social assistance regulations, but each case is individually assessed.' He emphasised that honesty in the application, including providing three months of bank statements and explaining each source of income, is essential to ensure people are assessed fairly. Van Vrede noted most grant recipients will probably still qualify, even if they receive small amounts of financial support from family members. 'The qualifying income threshold for the older person's grant is quite high, more than R8,900 per month. So, if someone is receiving R2,000 from their children, it's unlikely to result in disqualification unless they have additional income, such as from a pension fund or rental income,' he said. Sassa CEO Themba Matlou addressed confusion about the social relief of distress (SRD) grant, maintenance income and the process by which reviews are triggered. He said no beneficiaries have been suspended but confirmed the agency is reviewing about 210,000 beneficiaries out of 19-million, a small fraction, after red flags were raised about possible ineligibility due to employment or other income sources. 'We have not experienced a situation where someone has been verified and not been paid. If the person no longer qualifies in terms of the legislation, we will suspend the grant but there hasn't [yet] been any suspension.' Matlou noted that means testing varies depending on the type of grant. For child support grants, it is the primary caregiver's income that is assessed, not the child's. In contrast, the SRD (Covid-19) grant involves more stringent, automated income checks via bank verification to determine eligibility. 'With SRD, we verify through the banks whether there's consistent money that comes through. But for normal grants, the means test usually applies to the primary caregiver only.' To reduce panic and long queues at Sassa offices, Matlou said the agency is developing a self-review online platform so grant recipients can review their own information without visiting offices. Hotspot offices with high volumes are being staffed with additional personnel to handle reviews more efficiently. 'We've only sent out the first rounds of notifications in June. We're still within the review time frame. Once we pass that, and if clients haven't come forward, then suspension will occur not necessarily because they don't qualify but because they failed to do the review.' The agency will publish data on the number of beneficiaries reviewed, the outcomes of those reviews and the number of grants continued or cancelled by the end of July.
IOL News
11 hours ago
- IOL News
Gauteng High Court upholds protection order against manager for offensive language
The Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, ruled that the use of profane language at work towards a colleague is not workplace banter. Image: File Repeated insults with the use of profane and demeaning language during a salary dispute with a colleague resulted in a line manager being slapped with a protection against harassment order, which he now tried to overturn, stating that his language simply constituted 'workplace banter'. But the Gauteng High Court, Johannesburg, did not agree and turned down the appeal against the harassment order. The court said words such as the 'f' word and calling someone an 'asshole' did not belong in the workplace. Nonhlanhla Mabuza obtained the protection order in April against her line manager, Garth Roberts. Both work for a company known as Africa Rainbow Minerals. Video Player is loading. Play Video Play Unmute Current Time 0:00 / Duration -:- Loaded : 0% Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 0:00 This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Window Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Transparency Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Dropshadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset restore all settings to the default values Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Advertisement Next Stay Close ✕ Ad loading Mabuza joined the company in 2019 and was placed on a three-month probation period at a specified salary. After serving her probation, she was confirmed permanently, but her salary was reduced by R3,000. No reasons were given to Mabuza for this reduction. This discrepancy necessitated a meeting between her and Roberts, during which a representative of the human resources department was also present. The proceedings were recorded. It is not disputed that Roberts told Mabuza during the meeting that she signed a 'f***ing' paper because she is an 'asshole'. The issue in the appeal is to determine whether these utterances constitute harassment, justifying a protection order against him. Judge Percival Motha, during the appeal, inquired from counsel for Roberts whether it is proper for a white man to call a black woman an 'asshole' in this racially charged society. The answer was a clear 'no'. Judge Majake Mabesele, who sat with Judge Motha on the appeal and who wrote the judgment, remarked that although the question raised with counsel is legitimate, the court is alive to the fact that the emphasis should not be placed on race in this matter. 'Instead, the emphasis should be placed on 'power'. Harassment at the workplace knows no race. It is about misuse of power, thereby violating a person's right to dignity, and a right not to be subjected to psychological torture,' Judge Mabesele said. Roberts' lawyer, meanwhile, argued that the utterances made by his client, objectively viewed, were not of such an overwhelmingly oppressive nature as to make them oppressive and unreasonable. He argued that Roberts was, at the time, attempting to assist Mabuza with a salary situation and that she thanked him for attending the meeting. In his argument, the lawyer stressed the point that the word 'asshole' is regarded as workplace banter and could not have caused Mabuza serious distress. However, the judge stated that this argument lacks merit. 'The word 'asshole' should be regarded as an insult in circumstances where a female is accused of wrongdoing by a male person. The word becomes extremely disturbing and causes serious fear and distress when uttered simultaneously with the 'f' word, as it transpired in the meeting between Mr Roberts and Ms Mabuza,' Judge Mabesele said. He added that it is apparent from the entire recorded conversation that the word 'asshole' was uttered more than once and the 'f' word was uttered three times, despite protest by Mabuza, who was pleading for a salary adjustment. Mabuza told the court the reason for her obtaining a protection order against him was not simply because he called her an 'asshole' or used the 'f' word. 'This is just to show how Mr Roberts is.' But the court said logic dictates that the words that were uttered to her must have caused her serious distress.
