| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2015] NZERA Christchurch 167 |
| Hearing date | 21-Jul-15 |
| Determination date | 04 November 2015 |
| Member | Christine Hickey |
| Representation | R Thompson ; S Langton, T von Dadelszen |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | King v Linfox Logistics (NZ) Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Dismissal - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantage by suspension - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent - Applicant failed to disclose all criminal convictions - Upon discovering the failure to disclose criminal convictions applicant sent home with pay - Applicant dismissed next working day - Storeman |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant not supplied with employment agreement containing right to suspend. Applicant not told why he was sent home or given opportunity to respond. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged by suspension. Applicant not told purpose of meeting in which dismissal occurred. Applicant had no opportunity to respond and decision pre-determined. Procedural flaws caused more than minor unfairness. REMEDIES: Applicant failed to disclose dishonesty convictions which highly relevant to employment. No lost remuneration as decision to dismiss was substantively justified. 100 per cent contributory conduct |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | Criminal Records (Clean Slate) Act 2004 - ERA s103A |
| Cases Cited | Knapp v Locktite Aluminium Specialities Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 71;Waterford Holdings Ltd v Morunga [2015] NZEmpC 132 |
| Number of Pages | 14 |
| PDF File Link: | 2015_NZERA_Christchurch_167.pdf [pdf 266 KB] |