Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2014] NZERA Auckland 118
Hearing date 31 Mar 2014
Determination date 02 April 2014
Member R Larmer
Representation Labour Inspector in person ; S Grice
Location Tauranga
Parties Spence (Labour Inspector) v Vinetech Ltd
Summary PENALTY - Applicant sought penalty for respondent's breach of Minimum Wage Act 1983, failure to keep adequate wage and time records and failure to keep adequate holiday and leave records - Employee (K") not paid because respondent thought K merely assisting boyfriend to work more quickly and earn more - Respondent acknowledged breaches - Kiwifruit industry"
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -;PENALTY: Appropriate to impose one penalty to reflect all three of respondent's breaches. Harm to K limited but harm to respondent significant given severe financial consequences and loss of largest client. Respondent understood requirement to comply with employment law obligations but necessary to deter other employers from taking lax or casual approach to employment law obligations. Respondent's breaches inadvertent. Previous concerns about respondent did not require enforcement proceedings. Appropriate to reduce penalty significantly to reflect severe financial hardship suffered by respondent already as result of breaches and ongoing financial hardship respondent's breaches likely to cause. $1,000 penalty appropriate.
Result Application granted ; Penalty ($1,000)(payable to Crown) ; Disbursements in favour of applicant ($71.56)(filing fee) ; No order for costs
Main Category Penalty
Statutes ERA;ERA s130;ERA s130(4);Holidays Act 2003 s81;Minimum Wage Act 1983 s6
Cases Cited Xu v McIntosh [2004] 2 ERNZ 448
Number of Pages 8
PDF File Link: 2014_NZERA_Auckland_118.pdf [pdf 111 KB]