| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2015] NZERA Christchurch 75 |
| Hearing date | 10 Apr 2015 ; 15 Apr 2015 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 10 June 2015 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | K Coulston ; R Webster |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Doran v South Pacific Meats Ltd and Ors |
| Other Parties | Lindsay, Burgess |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondents’ failure to provide safe workplace and failure to provide medical treatment – Whether respondents disadvantaged applicant on return to workplace by removing applicant from role – PENALTY – GOOD FAITH - Applicant sought penalty for respondents’ breaches of employment agreement (“EA”) and good faith – BREACH OF CONTRACT – Applicant sought damages for first respondent’s breach of EA and statutory duties – Slaughterman |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: First respondent did not provide applicant with transport to doctors. First respondent breached duty to provide applicant with safe workplace by failing to provide medical treatment beyond first aid after workplace injury. Failure not justifiable and disadvantaged applicant because applicant’s injury was serious. After applicant returned to work, first respondent removed applicant from role and reduced applicant’s employment status to casual without providing applicant with opportunity to explain or have explanation be considered. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by failure to provide medical treatment and removal from role. REMEDIES: 10 per cent contributory conduct. First respondent to pay applicant reimbursement of lost wages (quantum to be determined). Leave reserved to determine amounts. $10,800 compensation appropriate. PENALTY – GOOD FAITH: No penalty for first respondent’s breach of EA as breach recognised in disadvantage remedies. First respondent seriously breached good faith duties in a deliberate and sustained way by treatment of applicant after applicant returned to work. Breach partly arose from first respondent’s dissatisfaction with applicant’s raising of personal grievance. $3,000 penalty appropriate.BREACH OF CONTRACT: No damages for breach of EA as compensation and lost wages already awarded. No jurisdiction to consider claim of breach of statutory duty. |
| Result | Applications granted (unjustified disadvantage) (penalty) ; Contributory conduct (10%) ; Reimbursement of lost wages (quantum to be determined) ; Compensation for humiliation etc. ($10,800) ; Penalty ($3,000)(payable to Crown) ; Application dismissed (breach of contract) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4;ERA s103A;ERA s 124;Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992 |
| Number of Pages | 27 |
| PDF File Link: | 2015_NZERA_Christchurch_75.pdf [pdf 343 KB] |