| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Auckland 512 |
| Hearing date | 21 Oct 2013 |
| Determination date | 12 November 2013 |
| Member | E Robinson |
| Representation | J Moore ; T Whimp |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Black v Tristam Whimp as Trustee for the Dome Trust t/a My Flatpack |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Abandonment - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent failing to set out changes or train applicant in new role and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - New role with 90 day trial period provision - Respondent claimed applicant not coping with new role and failed to follow specific instructions - Applicant took sick leave - Manager |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent's failure to provide support or guidance in new role. Fair and reasonable employer would have given applicant clear objectives and provided applicant with employment improvement plan when concerns arose. Applicant already employee when 90 day trial period agreed to therefore trial period provision invalid. No evidence applicant did not intend to return to work following sickness. Applicant dismissed. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: Seventy per cent contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $11,960 reimbursement of lost wages. $1,800 compensation appropriate. |
| Result | Applications granted ; Contributory conduct (70%) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($11,960) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($1,800) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s67A;ERA s67B;ERA s103(1)(b);ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3);ERA s124;ERA s128(2) |
| Cases Cited | E N Ramsbottom Ltd v Chambers [2000] 2 ERNZ 97;Smith v Stokes Valley Pharmacy (2009) Ltd [2010] ERNZ 253 |
| Number of Pages | 15 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Auckland_512.pdf [pdf 237 KB] |