| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2013] NZERA Christchurch 231 |
| Hearing date | 23 Oct 2013 |
| Determination date | 11 November 2013 |
| Member | D Appleton |
| Representation | A Sharma ; D Ballantyne |
| Location | Nelson |
| Parties | Woodward v Totally Boating 2004 Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by being forced to take holiday at short notice at time that did not suit applicant and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Respondent claimed applicant accumulated leave in excess of four weeks and could not carry leave over - Applicant given letter on return from leave and considered position redundant - Respondent scored four employee's in applicant's position and applicant received lowest score - Boats applicant worked on had most problems (comebacks") and this contributed to decision - Whether selection criteria reasonable - Technician" |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Respondent did not give 14 days notice as required by Holidays Act 2003. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by being forced to take holiday at short notice at time that did not suit applicant. Respondent's decision to reduce wage costs incurred by employing four technicians was sensible and reasonable. Redundancy genuine. Number of procedural failings. Respondent failed to consult with other employee's. Criteria reasonable but no opportunity provided to applicant to comment on criteria. Selection criteria should have been communicated to applicant and failure alone could constitute unjustified dismissal. Applicant deprived of opportunity to respond to scoring. Applicant not aware of comebacks" relied on - Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. As redundancy genuine appropriate to only award reimbursement of lost wages for wages applicant would have received if proper consultation carried out. Respondent to pay applicant $1,960 reimbursement of lost wages. $10,500 compensation appropriate." |
| Result | Applications granted; Reimbursement of lost wages ($1,960); Compensation for humiliation etc ($10,000)(unjustified dismissal) ($500)(unjustified disadvantage); Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA - ERA s4(1A)(a) - ERA s4(1A)(b) - ERA s4(1A)(c) - ERA s103A - ERA s124 Holidays Act s19 - Holidays Act s19(1)(a) - Holidays Act s19(2) |
| Cases Cited | Aoraki Corp Ltd v McGavin [1998] 3 NZLR 276;Christchurch City Council v Davidson [1997] 1 NZLR 275;G N Hale & Sons Ltd v Wellington etc Caretakers etc IUOW (1990) ERNZ Sel Cas 843 ; [1991] 1 NZLR 151;Hildred v Newmans Coachlines Ltd [1992] 3 ERNZ 165;New Zealand Nurses Union v Air New Zealand Ltd [1992] 3 ERNZ 548;Rittson-Thomas t/a Totara Hills Farm v Davidson [2013] NZEmpC 39;Simpsons Farms Ltd v Aberhart [2006] ERNZ 825 |
| Number of Pages | 19 |
| PDF File Link: | 2013_NZERA_Christchurch_231.pdf [pdf 299 KB] |