| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Christchurch 162 |
| Hearing date | 1 Aug 2012 |
| Determination date | 03 August 2012 |
| Member | M B Loftus |
| Representation | A Sharma ; M Kirk |
| Location | Nelson |
| Parties | Turner v Talleys Group Ltd |
| Summary | RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE – Whether grievance raised within 90 days - Applicant claimed raised grievance at meeting with respondent manager before applicant's employment terminated - Authority noted dismissal occurs upon cessation of employment and grievance cannot be raised in respect of future event – Authority found applicant precluded from raising grievance at meetings with respondent manager as meetings before applicant's employment ended – Alternatively, found no evidence of exceptional circumstances justifying delay in raising grievance - Application dismissed |
| Abstract | Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent. Respondent claimed Authority did not have jurisdiction to investigate matter as grievance not raised within 90 days. Applicant claimed, although seasonal employee, had been employed by respondent for ten years by moving from one seasonal agreement to another. Applicant claimed employment effectively permanent. Respondent claimed no guarantee applicant would be considered for re-employment for new season. Applicant discovered would not be employed for following season two weeks before season ceased. Applicant met with respondent manager (“C”) twice to discuss matter before employment ended. Respondent declined applicant’s request that respondent set out in writing reasons why applicant not offered further employment. Applicant attempted unsuccessfully to engage lawyer (“B”) and found second lawyer (“S”) who agreed to act for applicant two weeks before 90 day period expired. S not available until after 90 day period expired due to workload. S raised grievance. Applicant claimed first raised grievance at first meeting with C. C denied applicant suggested dismissed at meeting and claimed did not raise grievance. Applicant claimed alternatively exceptional circumstance existed as B delayed return of applicant’s file.;AUTHORITY FOUND –;RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE: Dismissal occurs upon cessation of employment and grievance cannot be raised in respect of future event. Applicant claimed raised grievance at meeting with C before employment ended therefore preceding dismissal date. Applicant precluded from raising grievance at meetings with C. Although respondent did not initially tell applicant outside 90 day limit, no evidence respondent made any attempt to resolve applicant’s grievance which could have amounted to respondent consenting to applicant raising grievance out of time. Grievance not raised within 90 days. Alternatively, no application for grievance to be raised out of time. Even if B had file, applicant could have instructed S before B returned file and advised S file to come. No exceptional circumstances justifying delay in raising grievance. Application dismissed. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Arrears |
| Statutes | ERA s5;ERA s114;ERA s114(1);ERA s114(2);ERA s114(3);ERA s114(4) |
| Cases Cited | Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections v Waitai (2010) 8 NZELR 627;Commissioner of Police v Creedy [2007] ERNZ 505;Commissioner of Police v Hawkins [2009] 3 NZLR 381;Creedy v Commissioner of Police [2008] ERNZ 109 ; [2008] 3 NZLR 7;Creedy v Commissioner of Police [2006] ERNZ 517;Hayden v Wellington Free Ambulance Service [2002] 1 ERNZ 399;Jacobsen Creative Services Ltd v Findlater [1994] 1 ERNZ 35;Melville v Air New Zealand Ltd (2010) 8 NZELR 190 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Christchurch_162.pdf [pdf 172 KB] |