| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Christchurch 138 |
| Hearing date | 2 Jul 2012 |
| Determination date | 06 July 2012 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | A Oberndorfer ; P Brown |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Bradford v Zaks of Halswell Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL- Serious Misconduct - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent's actions and unjustifiably dismissed - Authority found applicant resigned during heated discussion - No dismissal - Found applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent's failure to follow up with applicant following heat of moment resignation - REMEDIES - Compensation not appropriate, 100 percent contributory conduct - Hairdressing junior |
| Abstract | Applicant employed by respondent as hairdressing junior. Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed and unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent. Applicant suffered injury while working during earthquake. Respondent advised applicant to see doctor and applicant subsequently excused from work for two days. Applicant did not attend work on third day as expected and failed to advise respondent. Respondent phoned applicant to establish applicant's whereabouts. Applicant claimed respondent was abusive and was dismissed during call. Respondent denied dismissal took place and claimed received second phone call from applicant and applicant and told respondent that applicant quit. Applicant denied second phone call took place and claimed subsequent attempts to contact respondent failed.;AUTHORITY FOUND - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant misunderstood what was said during phone call and respondent did not intend to dismiss applicant. Applicant resigned during a heated exchange in subsequent phone call. No dismissal.;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: Applicant disadvantaged by respondent's actions in accepting heat of moment resignation and failing to give applicant opportunity to reflect on decision. REMEDIES. Compensation not appropriate, 100 percent contributory conduct. |
| Result | Application granted (unjustified disadvantage); Contributory conduct (100%); Application dismissed (unjustified dismissal); Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s124 |
| Cases Cited | Donaldson v Adventure Travel Specialists, unreported, J Crichton, 31 July 2009, CA 120/09;Hansen v RDF & F Catering Ltd t/a Rainbow Dairy and Cafe, P Montgomery, 31 July 2007, CA88/07;Kostic v Dodd, unreported, Couch J, 11 July 2007, CC14/07;Taylor v Milburn Lime Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 164 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_138.pdf [pdf 182 KB] |