Can you be dismissed for not wearing a face mask at work?

“I’m an HR manager and also responsible for health & safety at my workplace. Lately I’ve noticed an increasing number of employees failing to keep their Covid masks on at work, despite regular warnings. My employer is very worried about this and has asked if we are allowed to dismiss employees that blatantly fail to adhere to our Covid-19 protocol of wearing a face mask. Not wearing a face mask is in my view very serious, but dismissing someone is also a serious step. Can someone be dismissed for not wearing their face mask?”

Our Labour Court has recently confirmed that the answer to this question is “yes” you can be dismissed for not wearing a face mask at work. As always, the facts of each case and the severity of the transgression will need to be taken into account to determine whether dismissal is the appropriate sanction, but our courts view dismissal as an option if justified and appropriate.

In the case of Eskort Limited v Mogotsi and others an employee went for a Covid-19 test and failed to inform his employer of this. During this period the employee came to work and walked around without a mask and had physical contact with other employees. It then also transpired that the employee had tested positive for Covid-19. The Court viewed the employee’s conduct as inconsiderate and nonchalant and that the employee’s conduct was extremely irresponsible and reckless. The dismissal was held to be fair and an appropriate sanction in the circumstances.

This confirms that dismissal can be an appropriate option for the failure to wear a face mask at work, bearing in mind that the necessary substantive and procedurally fair disciplinary steps must be followed by the employer.

October 12, 2021
Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

Out with maternity leave, in with parental leave

A landmark judgment delivered on 3 October 2025 by the Constitutional Court of South Africa has reshaped the legal landscape governing employment and family rights. In Van Wyk and Others v Minister of Employment and Labour; Commission for Gender Equality and Another v Minister of Employment and Labour and Others (CCT 308/23) [2025] ZACC 20, the Court declared several provisions of the Basic Conditions of Employment Act 75 of 1997 (“BCEA”) and the Unemployment Insurance Act 63 of 2001 (“UIF Act”) invalid and inconsistent with the Constitution in that they unfairly discriminate between different classes of parents.

AI regulation on the horizon

AI regulation on the horizon

Artificial Intelligence (AI) is rapidly transforming industries, and everyday life. We now live in an era where information cannot be trusted at face value, and content creation blurs the lines between reality and fiction. With such a dangerous capability literally at anyone’s fingertips, it is normal to wonder whether AI is being regulated in South Africa. In this article, we look at the current position regarding AI in South Africa.

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

The tax distinction between local and foreign dividends

Dividends from South African resident companies fall under the dividends tax regime and are subject to a 20% withholding tax in terms of section 64E of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962 (“Act”), known as dividends tax, rather than normal income tax. In contrast, foreign dividends are included in a taxpayer’s gross income unless relief is available under section 10B of the Income Tax Act 58 of 1962, which provides a full or partial participation exemption depending on certain circumstances. In this article, we unpack the important distinction in the tax treatment of local vs foreign dividends in South Africa.

Sign up to our newsletter

Pin It on Pinterest