| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Christchurch 64 |
| Hearing date | 30 Sep 2010 |
| Determination date | 13 April 2012 |
| Member | M B Loftus |
| Representation | M Guest ; R Harrison |
| Location | Dunedin |
| Parties | Linnell v Les Mills International Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Authority noted delay in issuing determination due to Christchurch earthquake – Respondent claimed applicant distributed pornographic email in breach of respondent’s policy – Applicant denied email pornographic in nature – Employee received email and complained to respondent – Applicant suspended and investigation commenced – Respondent manager (“L”) claimed justified in suspending applicant without consultation as applicant admitted sent email – Respondent claimed respondent logo also on email and applicant potentially damaged respondent’s reputation – Parties’ employment agreement included computer policy stating applicant could be dismissed if viewed offensive material on respondent computer – Respondent claimed applicant did not appreciate impact of actions and had lost trust and confidence in applicant – Applicant dismissed and investigation commenced – Applicant claimed had not taken much notice of respondent computer policy and did not appreciate significance – Applicant claimed dismissal predetermined - Applicant claimed in respondent branch where worked employees frequently sent and received emails of similar nature – Found L gave contradictory evidence whether had received offensive emails from other employees - Authority found L disagreed with applicant’s lawyer comment that dismissal inappropriate in early stages of investigation – Found respondent’s computer policy contradictory – Found applicant’s investigation superficial and predetermined – Found fair and reasonable employer would not have dismissed applicant – Found respondent failed to give applicant opportunity to respond to conclusions respondent had lost trust and confidence in applicant and that applicant had failed to show any remorse – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct - $915 reimbursement of lost wages - $6,000 compensation appropriate - Membership Consultant |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($915.90) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($6,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3);ERA s103A(3)(b);ERA s103A(3)(c);ERA s103A(3)(d);ERA s124;ERA s128(2);Interpretation Act 1999 s4;Interpretation Act 1999 s7 |
| Cases Cited | Dallas v Wellington Newspapers Ltd [1998] 2 ERNZ 456 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_64.pdf [pdf 59 KB] |