| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2016] NZERA Auckland 284 |
| Determination date | 23 August 2016 |
| Member | Rachel Larmer |
| Representation | D Prisk; M King |
| Parties | Honey v Lighthouse ECE Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Whether 90 day trial period valid – Early childhood teacher |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Trial period clause did not specifically state that trial period started at beginning of employment and did not cross reference to commencement date recorded elsewhere in employment agreement (“EA”). Commencement date not reasonably implied from other parts of EA. Applicant not effectively informed of start date of trial period. Clause did not meet requirements of s67A(2)(a). Trial period invalid. |
| Result | Application granted ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s67A ; ERA s67A(2)(a) |
| Cases Cited | Smith v Stokes Valley Pharmacy [2010] NZEmpC 111, [2010] ERNZ 253 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | 2016_NZERA_Auckland_284.pdf [pdf 147 KB] |