| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2014] NZERA Auckland 63 |
| Hearing date | 22 Jan 2014 |
| Determination date | 24 February 2014 |
| Member | E Robinson |
| Representation | E Thomas ; L Thomas |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Scott v Methode Media Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive Dismissal – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Restructure of applicant’s part time position into full time position – Restructure while applicant recovering from surgery – Respondent decided not to proceed with restructure – Whether applicant employed on valid trial period provision – Whether applicant employed on three or six month fixed term employment agreement – Graphic designer |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Trial period provision did not comply with requirements of Employment Relations Act 2000. Applicant employed previously by respondent and applicant not issued with notice before end of trial period. Applicant not employed on valid trial period provision. Authority unable to conclude respondent had genuine reasons based on reasonable grounds for specifying applicant’s employment to end after three month period. No reason for respondent’s view employment agreement “rolled on” for further three month period only. Applicant not employed subject to valid fixed term employment agreement. Respondent’s communications to applicant did not allay any misunderstanding that applicant being presented with fait accompli. No opportunity for applicant to comment on proposal before firm decision made. Fair and reasonable employer anxious to correct misunderstanding and to provide employee opportunity to provide feedback would have left message when called applicant or sent further e-mail or letter. Applicant not provided with information relevant to decision. Respondent breached duty of good faith. No reasonable basis for respondent’s view applicant offered promotion and no real attempt to correct any alleged misunderstanding on applicant’s part. Reasonably foreseeable applicant would resign. Applicant constructively dismissed. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $5,827 reimbursement of lost wages. $6,000 compensation appropriate. |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($5,827.75) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($6,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA;ERA s4;ERA s4(1A);ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s4(1A)(c)(i);ERA s4(1A)(c)(ii);ERA s66;ERA s66(2)(a);ERA s66(2)(b);ERA s67A;ERA s67A(2);ERA s67A(3);ERA s67B;ERA s67B(1);ERA s124;ERA s128(2) |
| Cases Cited | Auckland Electric Power Board v Auckland Provincial District Local Authorities Officers IUOW Inc [1994] 1 ERNZ 168 ; [1994] 2 NZLR 415 |
| Number of Pages | 13 |
| PDF File Link: | 2014_NZERA_Auckland_63.pdf [pdf 277 KB] |