| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2014] NZERA Auckland 85 |
| Hearing date | 11 Mar 2014 |
| Determination date | 11 March 2014 |
| Member | R Larmer |
| Representation | L Darroch ; G McKenzie |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Puleiku v SPK Industries Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Whether applicant employed on trial period provision - COSTS - Applicant sought contribution towards costs - Storeman |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: No trial period provision in applicant's employment agreement. Respondent did not comply with bargaining requirements for individual employment agreement. Proposed employment agreement not provided to applicant until after applicant commenced work. No valid trial period provision. No information given to applicant as to why restructuring necessary or why applicant selected for redundancy. No information presented to suggest applicant dismissed as result of genuine restructuring. Respondent did not meet procedural fairness or good faith requirements. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $6,950 reimbursement of lost wages. $5,000 compensation appropriate.;COSTS: Less than one day investigation meeting. Appropriate to adopt pro-rated notional daily tariff. Respondent to pay applicant $500 contribution towards costs. |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($6,950) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5,000) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($500) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee) |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4;ERA s63A;ERA s67A;ERA s67A(2);ERA s67A(3);ERA s67B;ERA s67B(1);ERA s68(2)(d);ERA s103A;ERA s103A(2);ERA s103A(3);ERA s103A(4);ERA s124;ERA s128(2) |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | 2014_NZERA_Auckland_85.pdf [pdf 220 KB] |