Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2014] NZERA Auckland 342
Hearing date 6 Aug 2014
Determination date 20 August 2014
Member E Robinson
Representation R Morgan ; B Frowein
Location Auckland
Parties Deibert v Wurth (NZ) Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Incapacity - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Failure to follow process for notifying absences - Warnings - Absenteeism - Injury - Surgery - Abandonment - Sales representative
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant had history of absenteeism commencing less than three months into employment. Applicant failed to notify absences on three separate occasions. Applicant clearly advised of respondent's expectations as regards absenteeism. Applicant failed to be co-operative after supplying information relating to applicant's fitness to return to work. Applicant failed to attend meetings, did not schedule medical appointment until day before return to work and did not inform respondent would not be attending work until five minutes before expected start time. Applicant did not attend work following doctor's appointment and conveyed to respondent by attitude and attire that had no intention of resuming work with respondent. Applicant failed to act in good faith. Dismissal justified.
Result Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4;ERA s4(1A)(b);ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3)
Cases Cited Canterbury Clerical Workers Industrial Union of Workers v Andrews and Beaven Ltd [1983] ACJ 875;Hoskin v Coastal Fish Supplies Ltd [1985] ACJ 124
Number of Pages 13
PDF File Link: 2014_NZERA_Auckland_342.pdf [pdf 213 KB]