Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2015] NZERA Auckland 12
Hearing date 26 Nov 2014 - 27 Nov 2014 (2 days)
Determination date 16 January 2015
Member V Campbell
Representation T Oldfield ; D France
Location Auckland
Parties Delamere v Asaleo Care New Zealand Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Failure to follow reasonable instruction - Respondent instructed applicant to monitor bales and move bales if required - Whether instruction lawful - Multiple communications about requirement to move bales - Whether applicant refused instruction on days alleged - Applicant sought reinstatement
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND -UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Union and respondent agreed respondent would move bales. Request within the scope of parties' employment agreement. Instruction to move bales lawful and reasonable. Applicant held reasonable belief did not have to move bales unless specifically requested. Applicant not specifically requested to move bales on days in question. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: 50 per cent contributory conduct. Reinstatement practicable and reasonable. Reimbursement of lost wages, quantum to be determined. $2,500 compensation appropriate. Compensation for loss of benefit, quantum to be determined.
Result Application granted; Contributory conduct (50%); Reinstatement ordered; Reimbursement of lost wages (quantum to be determined); Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,500); Compensation for loss of benefit (quantum to be determined)(travel, laundry and transport allowances); Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A;ERA s124;ERA s125
Cases Cited Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd (No 2) [2011] NZEmpC 160, [2011] ERNZ 466;H v A Ltd [2014] NZEmpC 189;Lewis v Howick College Board of Trustees [2010] NZCA 320;Sky Network Television v Duncan [1998] 3 ERNZ 917 (CA)
Number of Pages 20
PDF File Link: 2015_NZERA_Auckland_12.pdf [pdf 224 KB]