| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Christchurch 140 |
| Hearing date | 27 Jun 2012 |
| Determination date | 09 July 2012 |
| Member | D Appleton |
| Representation | L Acland ; L: Radich |
| Location | Blenheim |
| Parties | Hook v Gale Contracting Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed – Authority found applicant mistakenly believed authorisation to apply for licence was limited licence itself and had right to drive – Found respondent owner told applicant employment terminated as believed applicant lied about licence, applicant did not resign – Dismissal unjustified – REMEDIES - 50 per cent contributory conduct - $3,768 reimbursement of lost wages - $3,750 compensation appropriate - Respondent failed to provide EA copy but applicant did not seek penalty - ARREARS OF WAGES – Found respondent withholding applicant’s wages unlawful as applicant did not consent to deductions - Respondent to pay applicant $1,282 arrears of wages - Foreman |
| Abstract | Applicant employed as foreman. Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent and sought arrears of wages. Respondent claimed applicant resigned and no arrears of wages as applicant owed respondent money. Respondent denied applicant not given copy of employment agreement (EA"). Applicant lost driver’s licence during employment after had accident in respondent’s vehicle while intoxicated. Respondent claimed driving vehicle essential part of applicant’s employment. Applicant obtained authorisation order from Court to apply for limited licence. Applicant claimed thought authorisation order was licence itself and did not need to make application. Applicant’s vehicle impounded by Police when discovered applicant did not have limited licence. Applicant told respondent vehicle impounded as vehicle not warranted or registered. Respondent claimed applicant resigned after Police told respondent owner (“M”) applicant said was “fed up” with living in area. Respondent claimed later confirmed applicant employment terminated as applicant did not have licence.;AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant mistakenly believed authorisation to apply for licence was limited licence itself and had right to drive. M told applicant employment terminated as believed applicant lied about licence, applicant did not resign. Respondent did not follow process before dismissal. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: 50 per cent contributory conduct. $3,768 reimbursement of lost wages. $3,750 compensation appropriate. Respondent failed to provide EA copy but applicant did not seek penalty.;ARREARS OF WAGES: No documentation of respondent loan to applicant and respondent did not make counterclaim. Therefore respondent withholding applicant’s wages unlawful as applicant did not consent to deductions. Respondent to pay applicant $1,282 arrears of wages." |
| Result | Applications granted ; Contributory conduct (50%) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($3,768) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,750) ; Arrears of wages ($1,282.14) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s124;ERA s128;ERA s128(2);ERA s128(3;Wages Protection Act 1983 s4;Wages Protection Act 1983 s5(1);Wages Protection Act 1983 s6;Wages Protection Act 1983 s6(2) |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_140.pdf [pdf 248 KB] |