Hoffmann v South African Airways

The Constitutional Court held that South African Airways' policy of refusing employment to HIV-positive cabin attendants constituted unfair discrimination on the basis of disability under the Constitution and the Employment Equity Act. The Court found no rational connection between HIV status and the inherent requirements of the job, and that the blanket exclusion violated the applicant's right to equality and dignity.

Hoffmann applied for a position as a cabin attendant with South African Airways and was provisionally accepted subject to medical tests. After testing HIV-positive, SAA withdrew the offer solely on the basis of his HIV status, citing concerns about his health, passenger safety, and operational costs. Hoffmann challenged this refusal as unfair discrimination.

Whether SAA's refusal to employ Hoffmann as a cabin attendant solely on the basis of his HIV-positive status constituted unfair discrimination under the Constitution and the Employment Equity Act.

The Court held that the refusal constituted unfair discrimination on the basis of disability and HIV status. SAA failed to demonstrate that HIV status was an inherent requirement of the job or that the discrimination was fair.

Discrimination on the grounds of HIV status in employment is presumptively unfair and violates the constitutional rights to equality and dignity unless the employer can demonstrate that the discrimination relates to an inherent requirement of the job.

The Court found that SAA's justifications were based on generalized assumptions and prejudice rather than individualized assessment. The concerns about operational costs, health risks, and passenger safety were not substantiated by evidence and did not constitute inherent job requirements. The policy perpetuated harmful stereotypes about people living with HIV and violated fundamental rights to equality, dignity, and fair labour practices.

The Court emphasized the importance of combating HIV-related stigma and the need for individualized assessment rather than blanket exclusions in employment decisions affecting people living with HIV.

This landmark case established that HIV status is a protected ground under the constitutional right to equality and that employment discrimination based on HIV status is presumptively unfair. It remains foundational for understanding disability discrimination, the inherent requirements defence, and the constitutional protection of dignity in South African labour law.

Hoffmann v South African Airways 2001 (1) SA 1 (CC) [2000] ZACC 17