Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2016] NZERA Auckland 22
Hearing date 14-Jan-16
Determination date 20 January 2016
Member Eleanor Robinson
Representation N Bolstad ; A Swan
Location Hamilton
Parties Wano v Opus International Consultants Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s failure to offer fixed term parental leave positive after redundancy
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: Respondent did not consider applicant suitable incumbent for position at issue, but had good faith duty to discuss situation and allow applicant to provide feedback. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. $3,000 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,000) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4 ; ERA s103(1)(b) ; ERA s124
Cases Cited Bilkey v Imagepac Partners EmpC Auckland AC65/02, 7 October 2000 ; Tranz Rail Ltd v Rail & Museum Transport Union (Inc) [1999] 1 ERNZ 460 (CA) ; Victoria University of Wellington v Haddon [1996] 2 NZLR 409 (CA) ; Wellington Area Health Board v Wellington Hotel IUOW [1992] 3 NZLR 658 (CA)
Number of Pages 10
PDF File Link: 2016_NZERA_Auckland_22.pdf [pdf 201 KB]