Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2016] NZERA Christchurch 60
Hearing date 23 & 24 Mar 2016 (2 days)
Determination date 12 May 2016
Member Helen Doyle
Representation P Churchman ; R Webster
Location Invercargill
Parties Kruskopf v South Pacific Meats Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by false accusation of serious misconduct, written warning and denial of right to representation – PENALTY – GOOD FAITH – Applicant sought penalty for breach of good faith – Labourer
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: Fair and reasonable employer would have been more careful not to make allegation that could be proved false by viewing CCTV footage. Allegation not mentioned in letter informing applicant of decision to suspend. Applicant disadvantaged. Applicant not consulted on decision to suspend. Pre-written letter indicated degree of pre-determination. Respondent refused to delay disciplinary meeting when applicant requested representation. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged. Respondent refused to delay disciplinary meeting when applicant requested representation. Applicant unjustifiably disadvantaged. Fair and reasonable employer could not have concluded applicant aware of policy about not pinning items to notice board. Fair and reasonable employer could not have concluded serious misconduct and given formal written warning. REMEDIES: Respondent ordered to remove warning from applicant’s file. No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $200 reimbursement of lost wages. $1,000 compensation appropriate.PENALTY – GOOD FAITH: Respondent failed to respond to applicant’s representative about applicant’s concerns. Applicant raised concerns in accordance with employment agreement. Respondent breached good faith. Breach intended to undermine employment relationship. $2,500 penalty appropriate.
Result Applications granted ; Orders made ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($200) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($1,000) ; Penalty ($2,500)(payable to applicant) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4 ; ERA s4(1A)(b) ; ERA s4A ; ERA s103A ; ERA s103A(3)
Cases Cited Murray v South Pacific Meats [2016] NZERA Christchurch 59 ; Northern Distribution Union v BP Oil New Zealand Ltd [1992] 3 ERNZ 483 (CA)
Number of Pages 13
PDF File Link: 2016_NZERA_Christchurch_60.pdf [pdf 197 KB]