| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2015] NZERA Christchurch 101 |
| Hearing date | 3 Feb 2015 - 4 Feb 2015 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 22 July 2015 |
| Member | M B Loftus |
| Representation | G Lloyd ; D Erickson |
| Location | Nelson |
| Parties | Wallace v New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering, Printing and Manufacturing Union Inc. and Anor |
| Other Parties | Carter Holt Harvey Ltd |
| Summary | JURISDICTION – Whether first applicant in employment relationship with respondent - GOOD FAITH – Applicants sought determination that respondent breached good faith by denying first applicant access to workplace until first applicant took drug test – Union official - Whether whole workplace safety-sensitive – Whether first applicant deliberately targeted for testing to deny first applicant access to workplace - BREACH OF CONTRACT - Applicants sought determination that respondent breached parties’ collective agreement (“CEA”) and statutory duties relating to union rights to enter workplace by denying first applicant access – PENALTY – GOOD FAITH - Applicants sought penalties for respondent’s breaches of good faith, CEA and statutory duties |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –JURISDICTION: First applicant union official. No employment relationship between union employees and employers. First applicant not in employment relationship with respondent. No jurisdiction to consider first applicant’s claim.GOOD FAITH: Whole workplace not safety-sensitive. Area in which first applicant was present administration block and not safety-sensitive. No need to subject first applicant to random drug testing. First applicant not originally listed for testing and appeared to have been substituted for another person, against respondent’s policy. Respondent wrong to submit first applicant to testing and bar first applicant from workplace. Breach of good faith.BREACH OF CONTRACT: CEA and Employment Relations Act 2000 provided all officials of second applicant, including first applicant, entitled to enter workplace at all times for relevant purposes. Respondent breached CEA and statutory duties by denying first applicant access to workplace. Breach of contract.PENALTY –GOOD FAITH: Appropriate to award penalty for respondent’s breaches of good faith, CEA and statutory duties. $10,000 penalty appropriate. |
| Result | Applications granted ; Penalty ($10,000)(Payable to second applicant) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Good Faith |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1);ERA s4(2);ERA s4A;ERA s5;ERA s20;ERA s25(a);ERA s25(b);ERA s 53;ERA s129(1);ERA s 134(1);ERA s136(2) |
| Cases Cited | Maritime Union of New Zealand v TLNZ Ltd (2007) 5 NZELR 87 (EmpC);NZ Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union Inc v Air New Zealand Ltd [2004] 1 ERNZ 614 (EmpC);Sim v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd t/a Woodproducts New Zealand [2014] NZERA Christchurch 81 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | 2015_NZERA_Christchurch_101.pdf [pdf 287 KB] |