| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Christchurch 106 |
| Hearing date | 1 May 2012 |
| Determination date | 30 May 2012 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | M Freeman ; K Dalziel |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Jarvis v Brookton Farm Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious Misconduct - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Authority satisfied on balance of probabilities that applicant attempted to mislead respondent about applicant's relationship with applicant referees provided at job interview - Found respondent followed fair process in accordance with parties' EA - Found fair and reasonable employer could have dismissed applicant - Dismissal justified |
| Abstract | Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent. Respondent manager (F") denied aware applicant referees from previous employers were applicant's mother and stepfather. F denied agreed at applicant job interview that would be at least five other employees at respondent while applicant working. Applicant claimed told respondent not enough employees, workload high and health and safety issues at workplace but F failed to address matters. Applicant told F under stress and requested sick leave. Parties unsuccessfully attempted to resolve matter before applicant gave F grievance letter. Respondent director told applicant to return to work and could not request sick leave as had not been employed for six months. Respondent proposed to suspend applicant on full pay, investigation commenced. Respondent claimed applicant failed to disclose referees were family and applicant and applicant's mother had threatened and harassed F. Applicant dismissed. Parties' employment agreement ("EA") stated applicant could be dismissed if misrepresentation during pre-employment stage.;AUTHORITY FOUND -;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Authority ordered determination amended as applicant incorrectly stated employer. Authority satisfied on balance of probabilities that applicant tried to mislead respondent about applicant's relationship with referees. Respondent followed fair process in accordance with parties' EA. Applicant's mother threatened respondent if did not pay applicant compensation, applicant would contact Department of Labour. No evidence respondent did not provide safe workplace. No evidence number of employees became term of EA. Fair and reasonable employer could have dismissed applicant. Dismissal justified" |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Number of Pages | 11 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_106.pdf [pdf 55 KB] |