Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2016] NZERA Auckland 23
Hearing date 18-Jan-16
Determination date 19 January 2016
Member Eleanor Robinson
Representation R Samuels ; V Raggett
Location Auckland
Parties Hann v Phoenix 66 Ltd t/a Synergy Hair Manukau
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Summary dismissal - Hairdresser
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Respondent failed to conduct interviews or view camera footage. Fair and reasonable employer would have carried out more robust investigation before finding serious misconduct occurred. Applicant not advised of disciplinary nature of meeting, informed properly of concerns, given chance to respond or told she could bring support person. Speed of respondent’s decision to dismiss implied predetermination. Applicant unjustifiably dismissed. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant reimbursement of lost wages, quantum to be determined. $3,500 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages (quantum to be determined) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,500) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3);ERA s124
Cases Cited Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd (No 2) [2011] NZEmpC 160, [2011] ERNZ 466;Chief Executive of Ministry of Maori Development v Travers-Jones [2003] 1 ERNZ 174 (EmpC);Northern Distribution Union v BP Oil New Zealand Ltd [1992] 3 ERNZ 483 (CA)
Number of Pages 10
PDF File Link: 2016_NZERA_Auckland_23.pdf [pdf 255 KB]