Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2014] NZERA Auckland 332
Hearing date 29 Jul 2014
Determination date 08 August 2014
Member T G Tetitaha
Representation E Millar (in person) ; D Grindle
Location Kerikeri
Parties Millar v Whangaroa Health Services Trust
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by being placed on garden leave after resignation - Applicant locked out of IT system - Whether applicant exhibited hostile attitude towards respondent - Whether applicant made disparaging comments about respondent to other employees - Clinical Services Manager
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: No express term in employment agreement requiring consultation before applicant placed on garden leave. Parties agreed applicant would work until end of notice period. Reasonable employer would have investigated rumours about applicant prior to taking further action. Respondent bound by course of conduct to allow applicant to work notice period. No investigation of respondent's concerns giving rise to change in position about garden leave and no opportunity for applicant to respond. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by being placed on garden leave after resignation. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. No proof applicant suffered damage. No compensation.
Result Application partially granted ; No order for costs
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103(1)(b);ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3)
Cases Cited Attorney-General v NZ Post Primary Teachers Assoc [1992] 1 ERNZ 1163 ; [1992] 2 NZLR 209;Delaney v Staples (trading as De Montfort Recruitment) [1992] 1 AC 687;Martin v Foodstuffs (Wellington) Co-operative Society Ltd unreported, P Stapp, 23 August 2005, WA136/05;Westpactrust v Stevens [2002] 2 ERNZ 682
Number of Pages 9
PDF File Link: 2014_NZERA_Auckland_332.pdf [pdf 237 KB]