| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2015] NZERA Christchurch 49 |
| Hearing date | 26 Sep 2014 |
| Determination date | 17 April 2015 |
| Member | M B Loftus |
| Representation | S Zindel ; N Ironside |
| Parties | Lines v Southlink Logistics Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Client complaint – Written warning – Whether ulterior motive for redundancy |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Increased competition and reduction in volume of freight carried meant applicant’s run no longer viable. Applicant chose not to challenge written warning at time. Technically correct that applicant authorised respondent to approach previous employer. No promises made regarding job security or attainment of forklift licence. Applicant’s run combined with other run and other employees not hired at same time applicant’s position disestablished. Decision to disestablish applicant’s role substantively justified. Meeting to discuss redundancy proposal short with no supporting information provided for applicant to consider. Possible alternative to dismissal not considered. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. $5,000 compensation appropriate. |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3)(a);ERA s103A(3)(b);ERA s103A(3)(c);ERA s103A(3)(d);ERA s124 |
| Cases Cited | Coutts Cars Ltd v Baguley [2002] 2 NZLR 533 (CA);Jinkinson v Oceana Gold (NZ) Ltd (No 2) [2010] NZEmpC 102, (2010) 9 NZELC 93,655 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | 2015_NZERA_Christchurch_49.pdf [pdf 166 KB] |