| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | [2014] NZERA Wellington 62 |
| Hearing date | 13-16 May 2014 |
| Determination date | 04 June 2014 |
| Member | G J Wood |
| Representation | P McBride ; P White |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Goulden v Capital & Coast District Health Board |
| Summary | COMPLIANCE ORDER - HEALTH AND SAFETY - Applicant sought compliance with parties' employment agreement (EA") and Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 - Whether respondent took all practicable steps to ensure applicant's safety at work - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - DISCRIMINATION - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent's actions - Applicant claimed discriminated against - Exclusion from emergency department after concerns raised about applicant's behaviour - Suspension during investigation lasting five months - Personal grievances raised - Security orderly" |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -;COMPLIANCE ORDER - HEALTH AND SAFETY: Authority ordered non-publication of identity of respondent's patients. Implementation of systems in place less than ideal. Procedures in place did not protect applicant from hazards associated with potentially infectious patients and soiled linen. Respondent did not take all practical steps to ensure safety of staff from potentially violent patients or visitors. Compliance order most appropriate remedy but respondent attempting to put appropriate steps in place. Open to applicant to pursue application for compliance order should compliance not be forthcoming within acceptable period.;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - DISCRIMINATION: Respondent often failed to respond to applicant's concerns in timely manner. No guarantee of confidentiality over concern raised by applicant about other staff member. Applicant not excluded from staff meeting deliberately. Insufficient evidence manager sought to elicit complaints against applicant in respect of conduct during and after union meeting and respondent obliged to investigate complaints by looking for additional witnesses. Nothing improper in respondent's investigator making views on process to be followed by investigator known to applicant. Investigator did not breach confidentiality by raising allegations about applicant's behaviour with other witnesses or expand scope of investigation unnecessarily. No predetermination. Respondent entitled in circumstances to request that communication be limited to between counsel. Applicant's exclusion from emergency department justifiable in relevant circumstances given wishes of some staff for applicant to be excluded. Respondent substantively justified in suspending applicant and maintaining suspension when most serious complaints not withdrawn. Respondent breached own policy by not holding meeting before suspension. Delays in investigation inconsistent with parties' EA requiring disciplinary process be conducted promptly. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by suspension. Applicant not suspended for reasons in any way related to fact applicant raised personal grievances. No discrimination. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Reinstatement on conditions appropriate given gross delays in investigation. $1,000 compensation appropriate. |
| Result | Application granted (unjustified disadvantage) ; Reinstatement ordered ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($1,000) ; Application partially granted (compliance order - health and safety) ; Application dismissed (discrimination) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 |
| Number of Pages | 18 |
| PDF File Link: | 2014_NZERA_Wellington_62.pdf [pdf 210 KB] |