In a country where traditional healing is an essential part of culture, new regulations are guiding the use of traditional healer sick notes. Thato Makoaba, associate in employment law practice at Cliffe Dekker Hofmeyr, unpacks how HR can integrate these certificates while staying legally sound and inclusive.
Q: How can organisations adapt their sick leave policies to incorporate traditional healer-issued medical certificates?
A: For many years traditional healers have operated in an effective legal grey area. One area of contention was the legitimacy of medical leave certificates provided by a traditional healer and whether these should be accepted by employers. But legislation published for comment earlier this year – the Traditional Health Professional Regulations, 2024 (Regulations) – marked a significant step forward in terms of formalising the practice of traditional healing in South Africa.
At the outset, it is essential that employers treat medical certificates issued by registered traditional health practitioners with the same legitimacy as those issued by conventional medical professionals. This principle is supported by the Basic Conditions of Employment Act (BCEA) when read together with the Traditional Health Practitioners Act (THPA), which together confirm that registered traditional healers are recognised as authorised professionals for the purpose of issuing sick notes and medical certificates if registered in terms of the Traditional Health Practitioners Council.
To ensure legal compliance and operational fairness, it is also suggested that policies indicate that certificates from traditional health practitioners are permissible only when issued by individuals who are registered with the Traditional Health Practitioners Council and who hold a valid certificate of registration issued by the Registrar under the THPA. HR policies should go further than simply acknowledging this right – they must outline clear criteria for what constitutes a valid medical certificate from a traditional healer.
HR personnel and line managers should be trained not only to recognise these certificates but also to follow a consistent verification process, for instance, by requesting proof of registration or checking against any publicly available practitioner database maintained by the council. By embedding these practices into HR and leave management processes, employers not only safeguard against legal risk but also foster a workplace culture that respects diversity, ensures procedural fairness and treats all employees with equal dignity.
Q: What can employers do if they suspect sick leave abuse through fraudulent certificates, even from registered traditional healers?
A: Beyond the company risking being seen as culturally insensitive or discriminatory, employees could potentially bring discrimination claims against the company. Rejecting a legitimate certificate could also result in the wrongful docking of pay or leave, leading to employee grievances and reputational damage for the company. It is therefore vital for HR to take care when assessing these documents and ensure any rejections are backed by due diligence. Only registered traditional healers who are properly registered with the council can issue legally valid medical certificates. Otherwise, employers may reject non-compliant certificates.
In line with section 23(2) of the BCEA, medical certificates issued by traditional healers who have not met the registration requirements of the THPA will not be legally recognised. Employers must be cognisant of this when dealing with proof of incapacity in their sick leave policies and sick leave management systems.
Q: What HR risks could arise if a company wrongly rejects a valid certificate from a registered traditional healer?
A: Employers retain the right to investigate suspected sick leave abuse, regardless of whether the certificate is issued by a traditional healer or medical doctor. In such cases, employers can:
- Request proof of registration with the Traditional Health Practitioners Council.
- Engage with the issuing practitioner for clarification or verification, as permitted under the Protection of Personal Information Act, 2013, and company policy.
- Initiate disciplinary proceedings if there is credible evidence of fraud or misrepresentation.
Employers must, however, apply uniform procedures for all types of practitioners to ensure consistency and avoid claims of unfair treatment.
Q: How can this regulatory shift be seen as an opportunity to boost employee engagement and promote a more inclusive workplace culture?
A: This regulatory shift can be seen as more than just a compliance issue – it’s definitely also an opportunity to build a more inclusive and engaged workplace. By recognising traditional health practices, employers demonstrate respect for cultural diversity, which strengthens trust and employee belonging.
Updating our policies and offering education for managers and teams helps embed this inclusivity into the company culture. In the long term, these efforts can enhance employee engagement, reduce conflict and support a workforce that feels valued in all aspects of their identity.
