Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2014] NZERA Christchurch 180
Hearing date 13 Mar 2014 - 14 Mar 2014 (2 days)
Determination date 11 November 2014
Member M B Loftus
Representation A Sharma ; M Logan
Location Nelson
Parties Gillan v Wakatu Inc
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by deprival of Christmas bonus and suspension and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Ongoing performance concerns and issues - Problems with invoicing - Applicant claimed inadequate training - GOOD FAITH - PENALTY - Applicant sought penalty for applicants breach of good faith - Failure to provide training - Accounts administrator
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Staff required to purchase gift and provide receipt for reimbursement to respondent. Applicant did not provide receipt for reimbursement. No evidence applicant raised concerns with respondent. Applicant not unjustifiably disadvantaged by deprival of Christmas bonus. Applicant's failures not wilful and resulted from inadequate induction and training. Allegedly poor practices continued as result of weak supervisory oversight. Appropriate remedial training should have been provided. No notification suspension contemplated. Short length of suspension did not excuse failures. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by suspension. No substantive justification for dismissal. Respondent failed to follow proper process. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $19,130 reimbursement of lost wages. $10,000 compensation appropriate.;GOOD FAITH - PENALTY - Failures possibly inadvertent. No breach of good faith. No penalty.
Result Applications granted (unjustified disadvantage)(unjustified dismissal); Reimbursement of lost wages ($19,130); Compensation for humiliation etc ($10,000); Applications dismissed (unjustified disadvantage)(good faith)(penalty); Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4(1)(b);ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3)(b);ERA s103A(3)(c);ERA s103A(3)(d);ERA s124;ERA s128(2);ERA s135(5)
Cases Cited Birss v Secretary for Justice [1984] 1 NZLR 513;Sefo v Sealord Shellfish Ltd [2008] ERNZ 178;The Salad Bowl Ltd v Howe-Thornley [2013] NZEmpC 152
Number of Pages 12
PDF File Link: 2014_NZERA_Christchurch_180.pdf [pdf 187 KB]