| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2014] NZERA Auckland 160 |
| Hearing date | 24 Jan 2014 |
| Determination date | 28 April 2014 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | S Austin ; S McBeth |
| Parties | Bright v Global Candy Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Respondent facing liquidation - Analysis of sales activity showed applicant’s region least profitable - Applicant claimed shocked when advised of redundancy and unaware feedback sought by respondent - Sales Representative |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Respondent’s conclusion business could be made more efficient by disestablishment of applicant’s position fair and reasonable. Sales representatives aware of financial and supply difficulties. Respondent did not communicate to applicant reason for sales activity analysis or why decision to disestablish position made. Respondent did not clearly identify that disestablishment of applicant’s position a proposal and feedback sought, and applicant not given enough information to make alternative proposal. Respondent relied too much on expectation that applicant would draw inferences about future employment and did not meet obligations to consult with applicant. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. $2,500 compensation appropriate. |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,500) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4;ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3)(a);ERA s103A(5) |
| Cases Cited | Rittson-Thomas (t/as Totara Hills Farm) v Davidson (2013) 10 NZELR 391 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | 2014_NZERA_Auckland_160.pdf [pdf 120 KB] |