| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | [2012] NZERA Wellington 111 |
| Hearing date | 24 Jul 2012 |
| Determination date | 26 September 2012 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | M Gould ; P Cranney |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Tranzit Coachlines Wairarapa Ltd v Morgan & Ors |
| Other Parties | Wilson, Manufacturing and Construction Workers Union Inc |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Interpretation of first respondents’ employment agreements (“EA”) - First respondents claimed entitled to payment for public holidays which fell outside school term – Authority found not relevant whether first respondents had worked continuously rather whether had service under continuing fixed term arrangement – Found EAs were not broken during 12 month period and made no provision for split periods of employment – Found first respondents entitled to be paid for public holiday – Question answered in favour of first respondents - Bus Drivers |
| Abstract | First respondents employed as bus drivers. First respondents claimed entitled to payment for public holidays which fell outside school term. First respondents covered by fixed term employment agreement (“EA”) extended for another two years. EAs stated first respondents required to work on “as and when required” basis and applicant had absolute discretion to vary days and hours of work. EA also stated first respondents entitled to three weeks’ annual leave on “completion of one year’s service.” First respondents worked during school terms only. First respondents claimed employed continuously for 12 months. Applicant claimed first respondents not entitled to four weeks’ paid annual leave for year as did not work continuously for 12 months. Labour inspector previously determined first respondents on annual leave on particular day during school holidays (“public holiday”) and therefore first respondents entitled to be paid for public holiday.;AUTHORITY FOUND –;DISPUTE: Authority noted labour inspector’s determination remained binding and Authority investigation entirely separate and investigated on own merits. First respondents’ EAs provided for work on as required basis and respondent had absolute discretion to vary days of work employees expected to be available. Not relevant whether first respondents had worked continuously rather whether had service under continuing fixed term arrangement. EAs were not broken during 12 month period and made no provision for split periods of employment. First respondents entitled to be paid for public holiday. |
| Result | Questions answered in favour of first respondents ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | Holidays Act 2003 s16;Holidays Act 2003 s29;Holidays Act 2003 s34;Holidays Act 2003 s40 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | 2012_NZERA_Wellington_111.pdf [pdf 234 KB] |