Joburg’s insourced guards included rapists, thieves and murderers

Former Johannesburg mayor Herman Mashaba’s insourcing of security guards in 2018 has seemingly blown up in his face, after 182 guards were dismissed when it was found they had criminal records including murder, rape and assault.

The Citizen previously reported how a group of security guards insourced by former mayor Mashaba in 2018 have been without work for almost two years.

According to a report from the city’s group forensic investigation service (GFIS) which The Citizen has seen, vetting was conducted on 2,952 insourced security guards and 223 results were received, resulting in the dismissal of 182 guards.

Also Read: City of Johannesburg insources 1600 security personnel for permanent work

While 95 were found to have pending cases, at least four were found to have been convicted of rape and murder, 71 for assault with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, 91 for theft and 16 for fraud and robbery.

No vetting done

In 2019, Mashaba welcomed more than 900 security guards with much fanfare, saying 3,700 security guards had been taken from contractors into the employment of the city since 2018.

But the report signed off by GFIS head Shadrack Sibiya in June 2020 indicates none were vetted prior to absorption, with the city having to do the vetting retroactively.

“Of concern regarding the results is the prevalence of serious criminal convictions such as murder, rape, assault with intent to do grievous bodily harm and high incidences of theft,” the report says.

Another factor to be noted, GFIS said, was that monitoring would be needed for a large number of criminal cases still under way at various courts and outstanding vetting results.

The report contains a litany of crimes, ranging from fraud to possession of unlicensed firearms, possession, dependence on and dealing in drugs, housebreaking, selling alcohol without a licence and malicious damage to property.

Last month a group of 75 dismissed security guards demonstrated outside the Johannesburg Metro Police Department (JMPD) headquarters in Martindale demanding their jobs back.

Despite having been dismissed, the group said they were unable to apply for grants because the system registered them as still being employed.

Mashaba and EFF wash their hands

The EFF, which campaigned hard for the insourcing and was thanked by Mashaba for its support, did not respond to a request for comment.

Mashaba washed his hands of the development, saying a mayor was not by law responsible for laws in a municipality.

“In the event of any wrongdoing by officials, that is when the mayor is responsible to ask the city manager to take the necessary action. Ask the current mayor to take the necessary action,” he said.

Nthatisi Modingoane, Joburg deputy director of communications, said the dismissal of the officers followed their non-compliance with security vetting.

“It should be noted that the security officers were, at all times, privy to the insourcing processes and aware of the terms of their employment contracts which entailed security vetting. It has always been clear that anyone found with a criminal record, his or her employment contract would come to an end.

“Having conducted a vetting process, it was established the said officers were convicted and have criminal records, which is in breach of the inherent requirements of the security officers’ job,” he said.

Modingoane said in October 2019 the city advised the officers in writing to make representations and give reasons as to why the city should not proceed to dismiss them.

He said after considering the representations, the city decided to terminate the officers’ services with immediate effect in accordance with a fair procedure.

According to Modingoane, in March last year the officers indicated they had approached the Commission for Conciliation, Mediation and Arbitration (CCMA) seeking relief for an alleged unfair dismissal.

He said the CCMA said it lacked the requisite jurisdiction to entertain the dispute and they were consequently advised to approach the South African Local Government Bargaining Council (SALGBC).

In January the guards approached the SALGBC through their attorneys and the following month, after having heard the application for condonation by the officers’ representatives, the commissioner ruled the officers’ application was unreasonable and excessively late by 329 days.

Modingoane said the commissioner also found the officers were unable to show good cause for the late filing of their dispute and were aware their prospects of success in the main dispute were slim. The application for condonation was dismissed.

“Subsequently, on 26 March 2021 the officers’ representatives filed a review application in terms of Section 145 of the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995 as amended, seeking the commissioner’s ruling to be reviewed and set aside.

“The matter is now before the Labour Court and, as such, the city cannot make further comment as it is sub judice,” he added.

– siphom@citizen.co.za