Notice of disciplinary hearing template

The notice is the first document an arbitrator reads when a dismissal is challenged, and it is often where the employer's case starts to go wrong. A notice that says "you are charged with gross misconduct, hearing tomorrow at 9" tells the employee almost nothing and gives them no real chance to prepare. A dismissal that follows it may be found procedurally unfair even if the employee did exactly what was alleged. This template is built to avoid that. It sets out each allegation in enough detail to answer, gives a date, time and place, names the chairperson, lists the evidence, and spells out the employee's rights and the possible outcome.

This page is written mainly for employers and managers. If you are an employee who has just received a notice like this, read the section near the end and then how to prepare for a disciplinary hearing as an employee.

What this document does and when to use it

The notice does one job: it tells the employee, in writing and in advance, what they are accused of and how they will be heard. That is the heart of a fair procedure. It is not a finding and it is not a warning. Nothing has been decided when it goes out, and the wording should say so.

Use it when the allegation is serious enough that dismissal, or a final written warning, is a realistic outcome, or when your disciplinary code requires a formal hearing. For minor misconduct you usually do not need a hearing at all. A conversation and, if needed, a warning will do, and the written warning template covers that. Do not use this notice for poor work performance or ill health. Those are matters of capacity, which call for evaluation, guidance and time to improve rather than charges.

For the bigger picture of how warnings, hearings and dismissal fit together, read discipline at work. For the hearing itself, from choosing a chairperson to deciding the sanction, read how to run a disciplinary hearing as an employer.

What the 2025 Code actually requires

Since 4 September 2025 the Code of Good Practice: Dismissal, 2025 has replaced the old Schedule 8 code to the Labour Relations Act 66 of 1995. A lot of older material still quotes Schedule 8. Do not rely on it as current law.

Item 11 of the new Code deals with fair procedure for misconduct. It says the purpose of a fair procedure is to ensure a genuine dialogue and an opportunity for reflection before any decision is taken, and that a fair procedure is one in which the employee has had an adequate and reasonable opportunity to respond to the allegation. It then lists what should usually happen before a decision to dismiss. The employee should be:

• notified of the allegations of misconduct, preferably in writing;
• given an opportunity, within a reasonable period of time, to prepare and to make representations on both the allegations and the appropriate sanction;
• allowed the assistance of a fellow employee or a trade union representative; and
• where reasonably possible, given the opportunity to converse in a language they are comfortable with.

The Code adds that the allegations should be made available or explained in enough detail for the employee to understand them. It also says that discipline against a trade union representative, or an office-bearer or official of a trade union, should not be started without first informing and consulting the union.

Three points in that list are easy to miss. First, the employee may respond on sanction, not only on guilt, so the notice should tell them so. Second, the Code speaks of a language the employee is comfortable with, which is a practical reason to offer an interpreter rather than wait to be asked. Third, the Code does not mention calling witnesses in so many words. But an employee cannot have a reasonable opportunity to respond if they cannot put their own evidence and test the employer's, so the notice should say both are allowed.

How much notice is reasonable

Neither the Labour Relations Act nor the Code sets a number of days. The test is whether the employee had a reasonable period to prepare, and that depends on the case. Many disciplinary codes set a minimum, and 48 hours is a common practice for a simple allegation. It is a practice, not a rule of law.

A useful way to think about it: how long would a reasonable person need to read the evidence, find a representative, line up witnesses and think about what to say? One allegation of being absent on a particular day, with a clocking report, may need little time. Several allegations of fraud with a thick bundle of statements and bank records need a good deal more. Count working days, not calendar days, where a weekend falls in between.

If your own disciplinary code sets a minimum, follow it. Departing from your own procedure without a good reason is itself evidence of unfairness. If the employee asks for a postponement for a good reason, such as their representative being unavailable or the bundle arriving late, grant a reasonable one. Refusing usually costs more at the CCMA than a few days' delay costs at work.

When a small employer can use a less formal process

The 2025 Code is more openly realistic about small businesses than the code it replaced. Item 3 says the Code should not be read as requiring small businesses to comply with obligations that are not practical or feasible for them, and that small businesses cannot reasonably be expected to run time-consuming investigations or pre-dismissal processes while keeping the business going. Item 6 says smaller employers may adopt a less formal approach to discipline. Item 11 says an investigation or enquiry does not have to be formal, and that its nature should suit the circumstances, including the type of allegation and the nature and size of the employer.

What that allows is a simpler process: a short, structured meeting in the office rather than a hearing with an external chairperson, a one-page notice rather than a bundle, and the owner asking the questions. What it does not allow is skipping the core. Even the smallest employer should still tell the employee what the allegation is, preferably in writing, give them a fair chance to prepare and answer, let them bring a colleague or a shop steward, and make sure they understand the language being used. This template works for a small business too: simply fill in fewer allegations and keep the hearing short.

The Code also allows an employer to dispense with some or all of these steps in exceptional circumstances where it cannot reasonably be expected to follow them, but warns that the employer may have to justify that if the dismissal is challenged. Treat that as a narrow exception, not a shortcut.

Before you send it: get these facts straight

The evidence. Investigate first and charge second. Collect the documents, statements, footage and records before you frame the allegations, not after.

The rule. Identify the rule or standard that was broken and where it is written, and check that the employee knew about it or could reasonably be expected to.

The allegations. Write each one with the date, the place, the conduct and the rule. Charge what you can prove, and keep the list short.

The chairperson. Choose someone who did not investigate, is not a witness and has not already formed a view. In a very small business that may mean an outside chairperson.

Your own code and any collective agreement. The Code does not change rights and obligations created by a collective agreement, and your own code binds you. Check the notice period, the appeal route and any rules on representation.

Union status. If the employee is a shop steward or a union office-bearer, inform and consult the union before you start.

Walking through it, section by section

The heading and Part 1 identify the employee and the employer, and say who issued the notice. Part 2 sets out the allegations, one per paragraph, each with the rule breached, the date, time and place, and a factual description. Where the facts could fit more than one description, the template lets you add an alternative allegation, for example theft or, in the alternative, unauthorised possession of company property.

Part 3 gives the hearing details: date, start time, venue or online link, the chairperson's name and the name of the person presenting the employer's case. Part 4 lists the documents you will rely on and the witnesses you intend to call, and says where the employee can inspect anything not attached.

Part 5 sets out the employee's rights: assistance by a fellow employee or trade union representative, the position on legal representation under your code, an interpreter, calling witnesses and presenting evidence, questioning the employer's witnesses, making representations on sanction, and asking for a postponement. Part 6 explains attendance, including what happens if the employee does not attend without good reason. Part 7 states the possible outcome, so that the employee knows what is at stake. Part 8 is the acknowledgement of receipt, with a witness line if the employee refuses to sign.

A worked example

This example is illustrative only and the facts are invented.

Pieter van der Merwe owns a panel-beating business in George with nine employees. On Monday 12 October 2026 a customer reports that a spray painter, Thabo Mokoena, offered to repair her car privately over the weekend for R4 500 cash, using the workshop's paint. Pieter has the customer's WhatsApp messages and a paint stock sheet showing two litres unaccounted for.

He takes a short written statement from the customer, then completes the notice on Wednesday 14 October. Allegation 1 is soliciting the business's customer for private work, in breach of the conflict of interest clause in Thabo's contract. Allegation 2 is removing paint without authorisation on or about 10 October. The hearing is set for Tuesday 20 October at 10:00 in the workshop office, giving Thabo four working days. Because Pieter is a witness, he asks a labour consultant to chair. The notice attaches the messages, the statement and the stock sheet, tells Thabo he may bring a colleague or a shop steward, offers an isiXhosa interpreter, and says dismissal is a possible outcome. Thabo signs for receipt.

Change the facts: if Pieter had called Thabo into the office on Monday afternoon, read the customer's messages aloud and dismissed him on the spot, the reason might still be sound, but a commissioner would very likely find the dismissal procedurally unfair. Being a small business would not excuse giving no notice and no chance to respond.

The mistakes that make one of these useless

Vague allegations. "Dishonesty" or "gross misconduct" is a label, not an allegation. The employee must know what they are said to have done, when and where.

Too little time. A notice handed over the evening before a hearing on a complex matter invites a finding that the employee could not prepare.

Hiding the evidence. Evidence the employee never saw and could not answer should not be relied on.

A chairperson with a stake. The investigator, the complainant or a witness should not decide the case.

Leaving out the outcome. If dismissal is possible and the notice does not say so, the employee may not take the hearing seriously enough to prepare.

Sounding like a verdict. A notice that reads as if guilt has already been decided undermines the whole process. Use the word "allegation".

How to deliver it and prove you did

Hand the notice over in person where you can, explain it in a language the employee understands, and give them a copy. Ask them to sign the acknowledgement in Part 8, which confirms receipt, not guilt. If they refuse, have a witness complete the witness section and give them the copy anyway. If the employee is suspended or away from work, send it by email and by WhatsApp or SMS to the number on file, and keep the delivery and read receipts. Count the preparation time from the day the employee actually received the notice. File a signed copy with the evidence.

If you are the employee who received one

Read the allegations carefully and ask in writing for any document listed that you have not received. Arrange your representative, tell the employer who it is, and line up your witnesses. If the time is too short, ask for a postponement in writing before the hearing and give your reasons. Attend, even if you think the allegations are unfair, because the hearing is your chance to give your side and a hearing can go ahead without you. How a disciplinary hearing works explains what to expect, and whether you can bring a lawyer covers representation. If you are dismissed, an unfair dismissal dispute must be referred to the CCMA or a bargaining council within 30 days, and the CCMA deadline calculator works out the date.

LawMatch is not a law firm and this article is not legal advice.

Frequently asked questions

How much notice must the employee get before a disciplinary hearing?

No statute or Code fixes a number of days. The employee must have a reasonable period to prepare, which depends on how complex the allegations are. Many disciplinary codes use 48 hours as a minimum for simple matters; follow your own code and allow more for complex cases.

Can the employee bring a lawyer to the hearing?

There is no automatic right to legal representation at an internal hearing. It depends on your disciplinary code, and where the code is silent the chairperson may allow it in a complex or serious case. The Code itself refers to a fellow employee or a trade union representative.

Does a small business have to hold a formal hearing?

No. The 2025 Code says smaller employers may adopt a less formal approach, and that an enquiry does not have to be formal. But the employee must still be told of the allegations, be given time to prepare, be allowed assistance and be heard before a decision is made.

What if the employee refuses to sign for the notice?

The notice is still valid. Have a witness record that it was explained and handed over, give the employee a copy anyway, and keep the record.

Can the hearing go ahead if the employee does not attend?

Usually yes, if the employee received proper notice and stayed away without a good reason. The chairperson should check that the notice was received, consider any reason given, and record the attempts made to reach the employee before proceeding.