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.