Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2015] NZERA Auckland 195
Hearing date 10 Apr 2015
Determination date 29 June 2015
Member R Arthur
Representation S Greening ; P Muir
Location Auckland
Parties Jarden v NKD Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Constructive Dismissal – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by suspension and failure to pay applicant, and unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Deductions from wages - Whether employee casual or permanent part-time – Shop worker
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant usually worked regular hours. Applicant permanent part-time employee. Respondent unable to roster applicant off from further work at will. No express contractual provision authorising suspension. Respondent did not have sufficiently investigated basis that applicant had been overpaid and failed to give applicant opportunity to comment on suspension. Unjustifiable disadvantage. Respondent not in breach of requirement to provide wage and time records at time of resignation as applicant resigned shortly after receiving records. Respondent’s breaches of duty regarding suspension and pay serious and could have caused applicant to resign. However, applicant aware that respondent able to proceed with disciplinary action with possible end result of dismissal and applicant took other job shortly after resigning. Likely that applicant’s resignation premature to avoid disciplinary action. Resignation not caused seriousness of respondent’s breaches. No dismissal. REMEDIES: $2,000 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted (unjustified disadvantage) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,000) ; Application dismissed (unjustified dismissal) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s6;ERA s103A(5) ;;ERA s174
Cases Cited Auckland Electric Power Board v Auckland Provincial District Local Authorities Officers Industrial Union of Workers Inc [1994] 2 NZLR 415 (CA);Auckland Shop Employees IUOW v Woolworths (NZ) Ltd [1985] 2 NZLR 372 (CA);Graham v Airways Corporation of New Zealand Ltd [2005] ERNZ 587 (EmpC);Honda NZ Ltd v New Zealand Boilermakers Union [1991] 1 NZLR 392 (CA);Jinkinson v Oceana Gold (NZ) Ltd [2009] ERNZ 225 (EmpC);New Zealand Institute of Fashion Technology v Aitken [2004] 2 ERNZ 340 (EmpC);New Zealand (with exceptions) Shipwrights etc Union v Honda NZ Ltd [1989] 3 NZILR 82 (LC);PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 (EmpC);Rush Security Services Ltd v Samoa [2011] NZEmpC 76, [2011] ERNZ 529;Singh v Sherildee Holdais Ltd t/a New World Opotiki EmpC Auckland AC53/05, 22 September 2005
Number of Pages 14
PDF File Link: 2015_NZERA_Auckland_195.pdf [pdf 333 KB]