Steenkamp said the subordinate had not been found guilty of misconduct but had been one of Simmadari’s targets. She had alluded to him in a comment about “old white men and old age homes” and given him a pack of oversized playing cards as a jibe at his age.
In her affidavit‚ Steenkamp said‚ Simmadari said she was “targeted for dismissal through artificial changes because of her race ... and treated differently through victimisation and harassment ... due to the fact that she is a black spearheading transformation”.
But she had failed to identify any individual who had been treated differently from her based on race. “On her version‚ even if she was white and pursued transformation‚ she might still have been victimised. Consequently‚ whatever her race‚ this had no link to her alleged discrimination.
“She has not established that she was dismissed on the grounds of her race rather than for misconduct; and she has not shown that she was treated differently to [her subordinate] because of her race‚ gender or conscience.”
Steenkamp ordered Simmadari to pay Absa’s costs‚ saying she had made “far-reaching allegations” against the bank without any basis for doing so.