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.