Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2014] NZERA Auckland 365
Hearing date 27 Aug 2014
Determination date 03 September 2014
Member V Campbell
Representation S Mitchell ; A Caisley
Parties Bailey v Fullers Group Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by final written warning - Customer unable to produce ticket proving customer paid for ticket - Customer left terminal and applicant chased her - Customer complaint - Alleged applicant called customer thief, crazy and loopy
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: Applicant referred to what customer doing as theft but did not call customer thief. Full copies of interview notes and CCTV footage should have been provided to applicant during disciplinary process but applicant provided with relevant detail from interview notes. Defect minor and did not result in unfairness. Respondent reached reasonable conclusion that applicant's actions following customer off work site without authorization and reminding customer what she had done was theft constituted serious misconduct in that it was intimidating and harassment. Applicant's actions demonstrative of poor customer service. Final written warning fair and reasonable. No unjustified disadvantage.
Result Application dismissed; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3);ERA s103A(4);ERA s103A(5)
Cases Cited Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 160; (2011) 9 NZELC 94,015; [2011] ERNZ 466;Van der Sluis v Health Waikato Ltd [1996] 1 ERNZ 514
Number of Pages 12
PDF File Link: 2014_NZERA_Auckland_365.pdf [pdf 148 KB]