Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Wellington
Reference No [2012] NZERA Wellington 102
Hearing date 26 Jul 2012
Determination date 14 September 2012
Member P R Stapp
Representation R Ward ; F Stieger
Location Palmerston North
Parties Soo v Autoglas-Stieger Levin Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Applicant complained bullied, harassed and threatened and offensive language used by respondent - Applicant claimed asked by respondent to inflate invoices and this morally offensive – Accounts and administration manager
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Respondent had financial difficulties and ceased to trade rendering applicant’s position surplus. Applicant unable to establish respondent had ulterior motives relating to applicant and alleged invoice matter. Applicant did not have opportunity to face decision maker or influence any options when business continued from same premises but under another name in same group of companies. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. $3,000 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,000); Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A
Cases Cited Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd (2011) 9 NZELC 94,015;Soo v Autoglas-Stieger Levin Ltd [2012] NZERA Wellington 87
Number of Pages 8
PDF File Link: 2012_NZERA_Wellington_102.pdf [pdf 178 KB]