| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Auckland 162 |
| Hearing date | 8 May 2012 |
| Determination date | 11 May 2012 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | H Burdon ; G O'Brien |
| Location | Hamilton |
| Parties | Hose v Webb |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s actions – Applicant received letter from respondent summonsing applicant to disciplinary meeting – Respondent informed applicant of general concerns – Respondent put 53 allegations to applicant at meeting – Applicant required to respond to each allegation immediately – Respondent refused request for adjournment by applicant’s support person to allow applicant to obtain legal representation – Applicant given written warning and respondent indicated applicant’s conduct sufficient to warrant dismissal – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by disciplinary process – Employment relationship continued although applicant unable to work due to ill health – Authority found respondent did investigate allegations sufficiently before taking action against applicant – Found respondent failed to raise concerns with applicant with sufficient particularity and failed to warn applicant of potentially serious consequences – Found respondent had failed to provide applicant with material supporting allegations – Found meeting conducted unfairly by refusing applicant adjournment to seek legal representation, by upsetting applicant and by not giving applicant reasonable opportunity to respond before action taken – Found reasonable opportunity to respond important given respondent’s view that applicant’s behaviour warranted dismissal – Found respondent did not genuinely consider applicant’s explanation – Found applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s actions – Authority told parties preferable for employment relationship to be terminated formally – REMEDIES – No contributory conduct - $2,000 compensation appropriate but found respondent loaned applicant $1,100 and reduced compensation to $900 |
| Result | Application granted; Compensation for humiliation etc ($900); Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee); Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s65;ERA s103A;ERA s157(2) |
| Cases Cited | Vice-Chancellor of Massey University v Wrigley (2011) 9 NZELC 93,782 |
| Number of Pages | 11 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Auckland_162.pdf [pdf 53 KB] |