Abstract

This article addresses the question of whether a sexually harassed employee has recourse to the Compensation for Occupational Injuries and Diseases Act 130 of 1993. This is dependent on whether injuries or diseases sustained as a result of sexual harassment can be regarded as injuries or diseases that arise out of and in the course of employment. A very restrictive test has been developed to answer this question, which is whether the act giving rise to the injury or disease, in this context sexual harassment, can be regarded as a risk inherent to the work performed by the employee. The test focuses on the duties performed by the employee and the risks that are ordinarily inherent in the performance of those duties. Sexual harassment will generally not be regarded as a risk inherent to the performance of a job and is therefore discounted as an occupational injury or occupational disease. However, the courts’ approach is criticised for failing to interpret important social security legislation in line with international standards and in a purposive manner that gives effect to the constitutional right afforded to everyone to access social security.