| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2016] NZERA Auckland 36 |
| Determination date | 09 February 2016 |
| Member | James Crichton |
| Representation | M Whitehead ; M McGoldrick |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Wright v West Auckland Aquatics Inc and Anor |
| Other Parties | Turner |
| Summary | COMPLIANCE ORDER – Applicant sought compliance with Record of Settlement (“ROS”) – PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for failure to pay holiday pay on termination of employment, breach of employment agreement (“EA”) and breach of ROS – COSTS – Parties sought contributions to costs |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;COMPLIANCE ORDER: Delay in payment of holiday pay but payment made in full. Applicant estopped from claiming more holiday pay owed since applicant accepted earlier amount. Application dismissed.;PENALTY: Only Labour Inspector able to bring claim for penalty under section 75 Holidays Act 2003. No wilful breach of EA. ROS only required payment of holiday pay. No breach of ROS. No penalty.;COSTS: No investigation meeting. Amount of effort by representatives to prepare for matter equivalent to less than half day investigation meeting. Applicant unsuccessful in claims. Respondent entitled to seek costs. Respondent sought uplift in notional daily tariff to reflect applicant’s ill-conceived claims that unnecessarily increased costs. Appropriate to apply uplift in tariff. Applicant to pay respondent $2,000 contribution to costs. |
| Result | Applications dismissed ; Costs in favour of respondent ($2,000) |
| Main Category | Compliance Order |
| Statutes | ERA s134;ERA s226;Holidays Act 2003 s75;Holidays Act 2003 s84;Wages Protection Act 1983 |
| Cases Cited | Ruapehu District Council v Northern Local Government Officers Union EmpC Wellington WEC54/92, 16 November 1992 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | 2016_NZERA_Auckland_36.pdf [pdf 165 KB] |