| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Auckland 314 |
| Hearing date | 20 Dec 2012, 20 Feb 2013, 28 Jun 2013 |
| Determination date | 23 July 2013 |
| Member | E Robinson |
| Parties | Sisifa v Big Black Sacks New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE - Whether grievance raised within 90 days – Applicant paid piece-rate - Applicant noticed reduction in pay rate – Applicant raised issue with respondent – Original piece-rate reinstated – Applicant complained to Department of Labour about entitlements – Labour inspector confirmed no breaches – Whether applicant’s work reduced – Whether applicant advised no further work – Applicant engaged community law centre to send three letters to respondent – Respondent did not respond to letters – Applicant’s representative sent further letter on 12 November raising personal grievance for disadvantage in workplace and constructive dismissal – Respondent claimed to be formulating allegations of serious misconduct – Applicant raised further grievance for disadvantage in workplace in letter dated 30 November – Whether unclear what disadvantage claim related to – Applicant invited to disciplinary meeting – Applicant subsequently dismissed – Outworker |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;RAISING PERSONAL GRIEVANCE: First three letters demonstrate intention to raise personal grievance. Intention to raise personal grievance insufficient. 12 November letter did not provide sufficient information as to nature of disadvantage grievance. 12 November letter provides no detail of events that led to constructive dismissal. Raising of constructive dismissal grievance undermined by references to respondent’s failure to act in good faith. Applicant accepted still employment relationship. 12 November letter failed to raise personal grievances. 30 November letter did not raise personal grievance. Totality of communications made respondent aware applicant raised disadvantage grievance for failure to allocate piece rate work. Grievance raised within 90 days. |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Raising PG |
| Statutes | ERA - ERA s103(1)(b) - ERA s114 - ERA s114(1) – ERA s144(1);Holidays Act 2003;Minimum Wage Act 1983 |
| Cases Cited | Balfour v Chief Executive, Department of Corrections [2007] ERNZ 808;Board of Trustees of Te Kura Kaupapa Motuhake O Tawhiuau v Edmonds [2008] ERNZ 139;Creedy v Commissioner of Police [2006] ERNZ 517;Dickson v Unilever New Zealand Ltd (2009) 6 NZELR 463;Idea Services Ltd (in stat man) v Barker [2012] NZEmpC 112;Liumaihetau v Alterm East Auckland Ltd [1994] 1 ERNZ 958;Winstone Wallboards Ltd v Samate [1993] 1 ERNZ 503 |
| Number of Pages | 16 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Auckland_314.pdf [pdf 247 KB] |