When Training Falls Short, Liability Rises
In today’s rapidly evolving workplaces, proper employee training isn’t just a box to tick — it’s a legal necessity. South African labour law places a clear duty on employers to ensure that staff are adequately trained for the tasks they perform. Failure to meet this obligation can result in severe consequences — including reputational harm, financial loss, and legal liability.
A recent court case has brought this issue into sharp focus, offering a cautionary tale for employers across all industries. In Hobongwana v Benteler South Africa (Pty) Ltd [2023] 4 BLLR 359 (ECP), the High Court held an employer liable for damages after an employee was injured while operating machinery — due, in large part, to a lack of proper training.
The Incident: A Shift, a Shortage, and a Serious Injury
The employee in question had been recently reassigned to a new production line. During his shift, he suffered a lower back injury while operating machinery. The employee contended that he had not been trained on how to safely use the equipment on that specific line.
Despite raising his concerns with a team leader, the employee was told to continue with the task due to staff shortages. This decision — made under operational pressure — would prove to have costly legal consequences.
The Employer’s Defence: Generic Training Materials
In its defence, the employer argued that all employees had received basic health and safety training, delivered through a generalised slide presentation. However, this was not sufficient to satisfy the Court.
The judge found that the training provided did not adequately prepare employees for the hazards associated with the specific equipment the injured employee was asked to use. In fact, the training lacked task-specific instructions, real-world practical guidance, and risk assessments tailored to the job at hand.
Legal Findings: The “But For” Test and Employer Negligence
The High Court applied the “but for” test of causation — a cornerstone in negligence law. The question posed was: But for the lack of training, would the injury have occurred? The answer was clear: no.
The Court found that:
- The injury was foreseeable.
- The employer had a legal duty to provide training specific to the task.
- The failure to do so was the direct cause of the employee’s injury.
Moreover, the court noted that supervisory negligence and pressure to perform dangerous work without adequate preparation aggravated the employer’s liability.
The Consequences: Financial and Reputational Damage
As a result, the employer was held liable for:
- The employee’s damages.
- Legal fees.
- Expert witness costs.
This outcome not only represents a financial blow to the employer but also serves as a warning to all business owners who neglect proper training and safety protocols.
What Employers Can Learn from This Case
This case is a vivid reminder of the risks of generic or outdated training materials. In South African labour law, the duty to provide task-specific training is not optional — it’s a statutory obligation under the Occupational Health and Safety Act (OHSA) and aligned with common law principles of negligence.
Employers must ensure that:
- Every employee is properly trained for the equipment and tasks they are assigned.
- Onboarding programs are detailed and tailored to actual job functions.
- There are clear reporting lines and procedures for employees to raise safety concerns.
- Supervisors are trained to escalate rather than ignore such concerns.
- Regular workplace audits and training refreshers are conducted.
Avoiding Legal Pitfalls: How Labour Law with Luzan Can Help
At Labour Law with Luzan, we work closely with businesses to prevent precisely these kinds of legal missteps. We offer:
- Customised training programs that comply with current labour regulations.
- HR audits to assess gaps in training and safety policies.
- Representation in disputes where liability or negligence is in question.
- Support for building legally sound onboarding protocols and safety policies.
Don’t wait for a court case to expose the gaps in your training. We’re here to help you stay compliant, proactive, and protected.
Conclusion: Prevention Is Cheaper Than Litigation
Employers often underestimate the impact of inadequate training — until it’s too late. This case highlights how critical it is to invest in your workforce’s safety and preparedness. Not only does it protect your employees, but it also shields your business from costly legal claims and reputational harm.
If you’re unsure whether your current training practices are legally compliant, reach out to Labour Law with Luzan today. We’ll help you get it right — the first time.
Case Reference:
Hobongwana v Benteler South Africa (Pty) Ltd [2023] 4 BLLR 359 (ECP)
