Labour Court overturns arbitrator ruling in National Foods dispute

The Labour Court has set aside an arbitration ruling that had favoured a group of employees in a dispute with National Foods Limited, finding that the arbitrator exceeded his mandate and made speculative conclusions not supported by evidence.

In a judgment delivered on 30 January 2026, Justice Tsikwa ruled in the matter National Foods Limited v Madzama and Others (LC/H/1072/25), allowing the company's appeal and dismissing the employees' claims for lack of merit.

The dispute arose after employees in grades C3 to C6 accused the company of unilaterally banning their meetings, refusing to recognise their elected committee and conducting a job‑grading exercise without consultation — allegedly resulting in downgraded positions and altered conditions of service.

The matter was referred to arbitration after conciliation failed, and the arbitrator ruled in favour of the employees. However, the Labour Court found that the arbitrator committed several errors of law.

Justice Tsikwa held that the arbitrator improperly addressed the issue of employee downgrading, which had not been part of the original claim.

"The arbitrator strayed beyond the dispute placed before him and granted relief that was neither pleaded nor supported by evidence," the court ruled, describing the award as speculative.

On the issue of consultation, the court acknowledged that employers are required to consult workers' committees under the Labour Act, but emphasised that failure to consult does not automatically invalidate an employer's decision.

"The law makes consultation mandatory but does not prescribe nullification as a consequence of non‑compliance," the judgment reads.

The court also addressed the question of workers' representation, ruling that employees cannot form multiple workers' committees within the same organisation. It found that the arbitrator erred in allowing the respondents to establish a separate committee, contrary to Statutory Instrument 372 of 1985.

In addition, the court noted that the employees were already represented by a trade union, undermining claims that they lacked representation.

The ruling reinforces the principle that appeals from arbitration to the Labour Court must strictly concern points of law, not factual disputes.

In its final order, the court allowed the appeal, set aside the arbitration award and substituted it with a dismissal of the employees' claims. No order as to costs was made after the company indicated it was not seeking them.

The judgment is expected to have significant implications for labour disputes involving job grading, workers' committees and the limits of arbitral authority in Zimbabwe.