Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2014] NZERA Auckland 86
Hearing date 11 Mar 2014
Determination date 11 March 2014
Member R Larmer
Representation M Harrson ; L Li
Location Auckland
Parties George v SPK Industries Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Poor Performance - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Whether applicant signed contracts on behalf of respondent without prior authorisation - COSTS - Applicant sought contribution towards costs - General manager
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant never subjected to performance management or monitoring process. Applicant not given advance notice could be dismissed at meeting or advised of right to bring support person to meeting. Respondent did not go through reasons believed applicant unsuitable for role and did not provide specific details about alleged performance concerns. Fair and reasonable employer could not have dismissed applicant even if performance concerns proven. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $26,250 reimbursement of lost wages. $10,000 compensation appropriate.;COSTS: Less than one day investigation meeting. Appropriate to apply pro-rated notional daily tariff. Respondent to pay applicant $500 contribution towards costs.
Result Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($26,250) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($10,000) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($500) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee)
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4;ERA s103A;ERA s103A(2);ERA s103A(3);ERA s128(2)
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: 2014_NZERA_Auckland_86.pdf [pdf 207 KB]