Robben Island Museum’s suspended chief operating officer, Dr Jonty Tshipa, has accused the museum’s CEO and council of ignoring his grievance after he raised concerns about the recruitment of the institution’s top executive and an alleged conflict of interest.
Tshipa told Parliament that the council failed to acknowledge his formal complaint, while his attempts to engage CEO Leanne Williams were met with further delays. He said the situation culminated in him being prevented from attending a parliamentary meeting, having his laptop taken away and being told to pack his belongings and go home.
“I’d raised a couple of issues about the recruitment of CEO and conflict of interest. The council ignored me. I then lodged a grievance and I was ignored. No acknowledgement was given,” Tshipa told the Portfolio Committee on Sport, Arts and Culture.
He said he had also tried to secure a brief meeting with Williams to discuss his concerns.
“I asked for five minutes with the CEO, and I was told that she would have five minutes in ten days,” he said.
Tshipa told MPs that he was subsequently instructed to leave the workplace.
“They took my laptop. I was told to pack and go home,” he said.
He characterised his treatment as constructive dismissal.
The allegations raised questions about why the grievance was not acknowledged, who was responsible for responding to it and whether the museum followed its own procedures for handling complaints from employees.
Professor Saths Cooper, the museum’s council chairperson, acknowledged that the council had not dealt with Tshipa’s matter and said it would be considered at a future council meeting.
Cooper said Tshipa had resigned and continued completing work for the museum. He also acknowledged that he had not responded to the grievance, citing the circumstances at the institution, and said the letter concerning the matter had surprised him.
He said the council was waiting for further information.
Cooper had previously told the committee:
“In this instance it was sent to everybody. We’re in the dark on how to respond, council did not respond but will respond.”
His explanation did not resolve why the grievance had apparently remained unanswered or why the council had not communicated with Tshipa about its handling of the complaint.
Council member Camille De Koker confirmed that the grievance had not been acknowledged, despite a policy requiring a response within five days.
Her evidence raised further questions about the council’s compliance with its own procedures and its handling of a complaint involving a senior executive.
Another council member, Zolani Mkiva, told the committee:
“We spoke about it and we trusted the Chairperson to respond to him.”
The statement suggested that council members had relied on Cooper to respond to Tshipa, but the committee was left without a clear explanation for the failure to acknowledge the grievance.
ANC MP Matsholo Mmolotsane questioned the Department of Sport, Arts and Culture about what action it would take if the council chairperson had failed to respond to the grievance.
Department director-general Cynthia Khumalo said she was unaware of the details and could not comment without understanding the grounds of the complaint and hearing both sides.
Khumalo nevertheless expressed concern about the situation, saying responsibility rested with the board as a whole. She indicated that if the chairperson was found to be responsible, appropriate action would be considered.
Her response placed the department under pressure to clarify whether it would investigate the handling of the grievance and what action it could take if the council had failed to follow its own procedures.
The dispute comes as the museum faces broader questions about governance and leadership, including allegations surrounding Williams’s appointment.
Tshipa linked his grievance to concerns he said he had raised about the recruitment process and a potential conflict of interest. Those allegations have not been established, and the circumstances surrounding his employment dispute remain contested.
The council must explain what steps it took after receiving the grievance, why it was not acknowledged within the prescribed period and what decision was made about Tshipa’s workplace access and employment status.
The department must also clarify what oversight role it intends to play.
At the heart of the dispute is a troubling question, how did a formal grievance from a senior executive remain unacknowledged while the council relied on its chairperson to respond?
