| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Auckland 274 |
| Hearing date | 9 Aug 2012 |
| Determination date | 10 August 2012 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | K McLachlan (in person) ; F Crabb (in person) |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | McLachlan v Crabb t/a Communication Gurus & Anor |
| Other Parties | Communication Gurus Ltd |
| Summary | ARREARS OF WAGES – Applicant sought arrears of wages – Applicant employed by first respondent (“C”) personally until C’s business incorporated and applicant then employed by second respondent (“CGL”) - Authority found even if C provided evidence of allegations against applicant, unless applicant’s actions fell under statutory exemptions of Wages Protection Act 1983 C could not withhold applicant’s wages – Found however if C could provide evidence applicant falsified time sheets and wages paid to applicant were overpayment could be basis for future recovery – Found applicant entitled to arrears of wages - C to pay applicant $304 arrears of wages - CHL to pay applicant $853 arrears of wages |
| Abstract | Applicant sought arrears of wages from either first respondent (“C”) or second respondent (“CGL”). C acknowledged when changed banks money owed to applicant for wages inadvertently not paid but due to applicant’s breaches of obligations C entitled not to pay applicant arrears of wages. Applicant engaged by C. C’s business later incorporated but later payment to applicant still from C personally. Applicant’s final pay after employment terminated received from CGL. C unable to provide evidence applicant breached obligations owed to C but indicated allegations included applicant falsifying time sheets.;AUTHORITY FOUND –;ARREARS OF WAGES: Applicant employed by C personally until C’s business incorporated and applicant then employed by CGL. Even if C provided evidence of allegations against applicant, unless applicant’s actions fell under statutory exemptions of Wages Protection Act 1983 C could not withhold applicant’s wages. However if C could provide evidence applicant falsified time sheets and wages paid to applicant were overpayment, could be basis for future recovery. Applicant entitled to arrears of wages. C to pay applicant $304 arrears of wages. CHL to pay applicant $853 arrears of wages. |
| Result | Application granted ; Arrears of wages ($304.23)(payable by first respondent) ; Arrears of wages ($853.14)(payable by second respondent) ; Costs to lie where they fall |
| Main Category | Arrears |
| Statutes | Wages Protection Act 1983 s4;Wages Protection Act 1983 s5;Wages Protection Act 1983 s6 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Auckland_274.pdf [pdf 148 KB] |