Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2015] NZERA Auckland 223
Hearing date 27 Jul 2015
Determination date 29 July 2015
Member R Arthur
Representation G Bennett ; D Organ
Location Auckland
Parties McCormick v Compass Communications Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Health and safety - Installation Technician
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Fair and reasonable employer could have considered that applicant’s actions in using ladder inappropriately, leaving tools unsecured and failing to report incident immediately serious misconduct. Respondent’s decision appeared to be pre-determined, applicant not given adequate opportunity to prepare for meeting or all relevant information, applicant not given proper opportunity to comment and applicant not given opportunity to speak directly to decision-maker. REMEDIES: 33 per cent contributory conduct. $8,000 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted ; Contributory conduct (33%) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($8,000) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4(1A);ERA s103A;ERA s103A3(c);ERA s103A3(d);ERA s124;ERA s128;ERA s174B
Cases Cited Allen v TransPacific Industries Group Ltd (t/a Media Smart Ltd) (2009) 6 NZELR 530 (EmpC);Angel v Fonterra Co-operative Group Ltd [2006] ERNZ 1080 (EmpC);Click Clack International Ltd v James [1994] 1 ERNZ 15 (EmpC);Hall v Dionex Pty Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 29;Irvine Freightlines Ltd v Cross [1993] 1 ERNZ 424 (EmpC);Maharaj v Recon Professional Services Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 61;Makatoa v Restaurant Brands (New Zealand) Ltd [1999] 2 ERNZ 311 (EmpC);Northern Distribution Union v BP Oil New Zealand Ltd [1992] 3 ERNZ 483 (CA) ;;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 (EmpC);Quinn v Bank of New Zealand [1991] 1 ERNZ 1060 (LC)
Number of Pages 14
PDF File Link: 2015_NZERA_Auckland_223.pdf [pdf 333 KB]