| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2016] NZERA Auckland 7 |
| Hearing date | 19 - 20 Aug 2015 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 07 January 2016 |
| Member | Vicki Campbell |
| Representation | T Oldfield ; K Ashcroft |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Franich v Vodafone New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE– Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s failure to investigate bullying claims and in restructuring – PENALTY – GOOD FAITH – Applicant sought penalty for breach of good faith and breach of employment agreement – Account manager |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: Respondent took appropriate steps to address initial complaints. After respondent raised other concerns in writing, respondent took immediate steps to investigate and addressed concerns in formal way. No disadvantage from investigation into bullying claims. Respondent failed to consult with employees before deciding to disestablish roles, in breach of duty of good faith. Staff only given two days to provide feedback on selection criteria and not advised to seek independent advice. Respondent failed to provide applicant with crucial information about managerial assessment and failed to consult before redeploying applicant. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Reinstatement ordered. $7,000 compensation appropriate.;PENALTY – GOOD FAITH: Insufficient evidence to prove claim of breach of employment agreement. Respondent breached obligations of good faith in restructure process. Respondent’s breaches deliberate and sustained. No evidence that conduct intended to undermine employment relationship. No remorse shown. Considerable impact on employee. $5,000 penalty appropriate. |
| Result | Applications granted ; Reinstatement ordered ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($7,000) ; Penalty ($5,000)(payable to applicant) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1);ERA s4(1A);ERA s103A(1);ERA s103A(2);ERA s103A(5);ERA s124;ERA s136(2);ERA s174E |
| Cases Cited | Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd (No 2) [2011] NZEmpC 160, [2011] ERNZ 46;Brake v Grace Team Accounting Ltd [2013] NZEmpC 81;Franich v Vodafone New Zealand Ltd [2015] NZERA Auckland 251 ;;George v Auckland Council [2013] NZEmpC 179, [2013] ERNZ 675;Goel v Director-General for Primary Industries [2015] NZEmpC 214;Grace Team Accounting Ltd v Brake [2014] NZCA 541, [2015] 2 NZLR 494;Harwood v Next Homes Ltd [2003] 2 ERNZ 433 (EmpC);New Zealand Educational Institute v Board of Trustees of Auckland Normal Intermediate School [1992] 3 ERNZ 243;Rittson-Thomas t/a Totara Hills Farm v Davidson [2013] NZEmpC 39, [2013] ERNZ 55 ;;Tan v Yang [2014] NZEmpC 65, [2014] ERNZ 733 |
| Number of Pages | 25 |
| PDF File Link: | 2016_NZERA_Auckland_7.pdf [pdf 375 KB] |