| Restrictions | Includes non-publication order |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Christchurch 137 |
| Hearing date | 26 - 28 Mar 2013 |
| Determination date | 08 July 2013 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | L Ryder, J Goldstein ; R Hargreaves |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Walker v Delta Community Support Trust |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s actions at time of and during applicant’s suspension and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Allegation applicant failed to follow cash handling and recording procedures – Missing donations - Allegation applicant used client income to make up for shortfalls in cash float – Manager |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Suspension and process followed action of fair and reasonable employer. Fair and reasonable for respondent to replace applicant’s paid suspension with sick leave until applicant medically cleared to return to work. No unjustified disadvantage. Applicant failed to ensure funds paid received by respondent or advise funds missing. Applicant in management role failed to account for funds in petty cash float and this serious omission obscured accountability as to client income received and how petty cash float made up. Fair and reasonable process followed for nine out of thirteen allegations and applicant given opportunity for explanation, and further investigation undertaken precluded pre-determination. Respondent justified in conclusion that applicant’s conduct in nine of thirteen allegations impacted on necessary trust and confidence and could no longer rely on applicant in role of manager. Fair and reasonable for respondent to dismiss applicant given circumstances despite fact not all allegations established. Dismissal justified. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3);ERA s103A(3)(a);ERA s103A(3)(b);ERA s103A(3)(c);ERA s103A(3)(d);ERA s103A(4);ERA s103A(5) |
| Cases Cited | Ashton v Shoreline Hotel [1994] ERNZ 421;Auckland Local Authorities Officers IUOW v Northcote Borough Council [1989] 2 NZILR 67;Faapito v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections [2012] NZEmpC 206;Graham v Airways Corporation of New Zealand [2005] ERNZ 587 |
| Number of Pages | 36 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Christchurch_137.pdf [pdf 375 KB] |