A former employee at Nissan South Africa (NSA) has been ordered to pay the car manufacturer over R350 000 for travel costs and monthly stipends she received when she was studying in Japan.
The order was made by the South Gauteng High Court in Pretoria after NSA approached the court demanding former employee Senyatsi Bennita Phasha pay back money spent on her while she was at a Japanese university for two years.
Phasha worked for NSA as a fleet manager from October 2014.
After two years, in 2016, she was nominated to participate in the African Business Education Initiative for Youth (ABE) of the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA).
She signed a JICA agreement on August 11, 2016.
In court, an HR manager from NSA testified that the purpose of the programme was to ensure that the company kept a pool of talent and employees will be able to give back once the programme is completed.
It was stipulated that after completing the programme, Phasha had to stay with the company for two years and six months; however, she only stayed for one year and three months.
She resigned and took a position as a product manager in another company. The name of the company was not mentioned in the court documents.
Her resignation troubled NSA and an application was launched in which it wanted Phasha to pay back over R412 000 used for her upkeep while she was in Japan.
In her defence, Phasha said that Clause 14 of the JICA agreement states: “The employee acknowledges that after completion of the programme, this agreement shall become null and void and the provisions of the agreement to be entered into between the parties shall apply”.
Based on this, she said the terms of the JICA agreement were null and void, because her employment terms were then regulated by the provisions of the new contract of employment that she signed with NSA when she returned from Japan.
Moreover, she said the costs associated with the JICA programme were paid for by Nissan Global, not NSA.
She added that the HR manager’s evidence was hearsay as he was not involved in the negotiation and conclusion of the JICA agreement as well as the new employment agreement.
In reply, the HR manager disputed Phasha’s evidence and explained that the new agreement that she signed when she returned from Japan was in line with NSA’s undertaking to offer her a new contract of employment upon her return. He said the contract didn’t replace the JICA agreement.
He denied that his evidence was hearsay and said even though he was not involved in the drafting and execution of the agreement, the JICA agreement fell under his division, and the HR department attended to the administration thereof.
He said this included covering costs for travelling, accommodation, food, and a stipend.
He disputed Phasha’s version that Nissan Global covered the programme.
Looking at the evidence, acting judge M Ntanga said Phasha attended the JICA programme until completion and during the duration of the programme, she received a stipend and benefits from NSA.
Judge Ntanga said when Phasha completed the programme, NSA fulfilled its obligation by employing her in terms of the new contract of employment, however, this didn’t terminate the JICA agreement because its purpose was to contribute towards NSA’s long-term strategy as well as assist Phasha in her role as a manager.
Judge Ntanga noted that NSA had miscalculated the amount Phasha had to pay back and said the amount will be reduced to what could be proven, which was R353 005.89.
The judge further ordered Phasha to pay the money with interest at the rate of 09.00% until the date of final payment.
The Mercury