Muwenga v PTC 1997 (2) ZLR 483 (S)

Mr Biti for the appellant Administrative law,  The appellant had been the acting telephone supervisor at an exchange for a long period and had given good service during his time. When the substantive position was filled, however the appellant was not appointed to the post, which went to someone else. The Labour Relations Tribunal found that the failure to promote the appellant to the post of superintendent did not amount to an unfair labour practice.

On appeal held, that the minister of public service, labour and social welfare is empowered to prescribe by statutory instrument, the acts of omissions which constitute unfair labour practices. Regulations have been passed spelling out what are unfair labour practices. The situation surrounding the failure to promote the appellant is not one of the specified unfair labour practices

Held further, that in the circumstances the employer had not created a situation which cause the appellant to legitimately to expect that he would be promoted into the post in which he was a citing. Most importantly, although the appellant had experience in the post, he lacked required academic qualifications for it. The decision to appoint a person with the required qualifications had not been unfairly arrived at. There is need for the courts to avoid undue interference int he administration of public authorities. Indeed, it could be contended with some persuasion that the promotion of an employee is a privilege, left to the discretion of the employer. It is not a right an employee is entitled to claim, unless his contract of employment so provides.