admincasual worker.
However, when she submitted returns to her supervisors, she did not include the casual worker as being part of the staff employed at Macheke.
Her failure to include the casual worker on the documents made the basis of contravening Clause 4 (14) of the Zimpost Code of Conduct.
Zimpost alleged that such failure to disclose the casual worker constituted falsification of records.
It also appeared that when Mberi issued out certain vouchers, she was a signatory as well as another person. She, however, did not ensure that a second signature was appended to such vouchers.
This formed the basis for gross disregard of standing procedures, resulting in potential financial loss to Zimpost.
With respect to the second signature, Mberi had the following to say:
“The clerk was then supposed to put the other signature, but I think he forgot. I do not think that the issue of the signature is very serious as on this other voucher written by the clerk, there is only one signature but he was not charged.”
After two disciplinary proceedings, Mberi was dismissed before appealing to the Labour Court.
Labour Court president Ms Euna Makamure was of the view that Mberi did not take some of her duties seriously. Said Ms Makamure: “She was the person in charge and she ought to have ensured that where two signatures were required, they were obtained. She is of the view that was not serious and I disagree.
If two signatures were required according to standing rules, she was supposed to adhere to that requirement.”
On the first charge, Ms Makamure said there did not appear to have been a directive stopping Mberi from disclosing the existence of casual workers at her station.
Online Reporter