| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Christchurch 201 |
| Hearing date | 20 Sep 2013 |
| Determination date | 26 September 2013 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | R Thompson, C McDonald ; No appearance |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Hiddleston v Hooper |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Dismissal – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by delays in wage payments and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – No employment agreement – Applicant disqualified driver – Respondent arranged for applicant to be collected each day – Applicant often paid late – Applicant incurred bank fees – Respondent dismissive of applicant’s concerns – Applicant advised no further work for rest of week – Respondent failed to pay wages – Respondent hand delivered payment – Payment two days short – Respondent advised applicant could leave if unhappy – Respondent failed to pick up applicant – Applicant unable to contact respondent – Applicant sought copy of employment agreement – Whether applicant dismissed – PENALTY – Applicant sought penalties for respondent’s failure to provide wage and time records, and employment agreement – ARREARS OF HOLIDAY PAY – Applicant sought arrears of holiday pay – COSTS – Applicant sought contribution towards costs – No appearance for respondent |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Failure to pay wages as agreed caused applicant disadvantage. No discussion with applicant about late payments. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by late wage payments. Respondent conveyed employment relationship over by failing to pick up applicant. No good reason relationship ended. Respondent not responsive and communicative. Not fair and reasonable to ignore communications. Applicant dismissed. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $119 reimbursement of lost wages for unjustified disadvantage and $10,400 reimbursement of lost wages for unjustified dismissal. $9,000 compensation appropriate.;PENALTY: Applicant able to calculate holiday pay without wage and time records. Unclear whether employment agreement would have made difference. No penalty.;ARREARS OF HOLIDAY PAY: Respondent to pay applicant $832 arrears of holiday pay.;COSTS: Less than one day investigation meeting. Extra work required due to respondent’s absence. Appropriate to award costs based on half of notional daily tariff. Respondent to pay applicant $1,750 contribution towards costs. |
| Result | Applications granted (unjustified disadvantage – unjustified dismissal)(arrears of holiday pay) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($10,519) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($9,000) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($832) ; Application dismissed (penalty) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($1,750) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee)($160)(service fee) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4;ERA s4(1A)(b);ERA s63A;ERA s63A(3);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);ERA s128(3);ERA s130;ERA s130(2);ERA s130(4);ERA Second Schedule cl12 |
| Cases Cited | New Zealand Cards Ltd v Ramsay [2012] NZEmpC 51;Wellington, Taranaki and Marlborough Clerical etc IUOW v Greenwich (t/a Greenwich and Associates Employment Agency and Complete Fitness Centre) (1983) ERNZ Sel Cas 95 |
| Number of Pages | 15 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Christchurch_201.pdf [pdf 194 KB] |