Abstract

Reasonableness reviews in the Labour Court are something of a lottery because different judges have different thresholds for unreasonableness. This article discusses three things that the labour courts can do with a view to achieving a measure of consistency in decision-making: firstly, by determining the intensity with which reasonableness reviews should be undertaken, particularly in relation to dismissal for misconduct awards; secondly, by setting uniform standards for the threshold for unreasonableness; and, thirdly, by adopting a uniform approach to the methodology involved in testing for reasonableness on review.