Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2015] NZERA Auckland 473
Hearing date 14 - 15 Sept 2015 (2 days)
Determination date 23 December 2015
Member Tania Tetitaha
Representation M Piper, C Mulrennan ; D Gelb
Location Auckland
Parties Simei-Barton v LDJS Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Poor performance – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – 90 day trial – Chef
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: On balance of probabilities, no unfair bargaining for employment agreement (“EA”). Applicant not employee before signing EA. Trial period clause in EA failed to adequately state when trial period started. Clause did not conform to statutory requirements. Applicant unjustifiably dismissed. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant reimbursement of lost wages, quantum to be determined. $2,000 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages (quantum to be determined) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($2,000) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s63A;ERA s63A(3);ERA s63A(4);ERA s67A;ERA s67A(2);ERA s67B;ERA s68;ERA s124;ERA s128;ERA s134;Wages Protection Act 1983
Cases Cited Carter Holt Harvey v Yukich [2005] ERNZ 300 (CA);Sam’s Fukuyama Food Services Ltd v Zhang [2011] NZCA 608, [2011] ERNZ 482;Smith v Stokes Valley Pharmacy [2010] NZEmpC 111, [2010] ERNZ 253;Warmington v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd [2012] NZEmpC 19, [2012] ERNZ 1
Number of Pages 10
PDF File Link: 2015_NZERA_Auckland_473.pdf [pdf 183 KB]