| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2016] NZERA Auckland 389 |
| Hearing date | 7 Nov 2016 - 8 Nov 2016 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 28 November 2016 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | N Carter ; L Petrou |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Norman v Canam Management Services Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Whether employment permanent or casual – UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Dismissal - Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed – PENALTY – GOOD FAITH – Applicant sought penalty for respondent’s breach of good faith - IT manager |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: Applicant continued to do similar tasks and work similar hours. Applicant expected to be available 5 days a week and took paid annual leave. No weekly check made of availability for work. Mutual expectation that there was work for applicant to do. Respondent did not try to replace applicant and did not record in writing change in terms and conditions of employment. Respondent did not refer to employment as casual after supposed change. Applicant permanent employee.UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Manner in which applicant dismissed did not meet requirements of procedural fairness. Giving applicant notice once replacement arrived not what fair and reasonable employer could have done. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $12,026 reimbursement of lost wages. $8,000 compensation appropriate.PENALTY – GOOD FAITH: Respondent breached duty of good faith but breach recognised in grievance remedies. No penalty. |
| Result | Application granted (unjustified dismissal) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($12,026) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($8,000) ; Application dismissed (penalty – good faith) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1A)(c) ; ERA s63A(1)(e) ; ERA s65 ; ERA s 66(1)(b) ; ERA s174 ; ERA 174B |
| Cases Cited | Fagotti v Acme Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 135, (2015) NZELR 1 ; Hall v Dionex Pty Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 29 ; Jinkinson v Oceana Gold (NZ) Ltd [2009] ERNZ 225 (EmpC) ; PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 (EmpC) ; Rush Security Services t/a Darien Rush Security v Samoa [2011] NZEmpC 75 ; Xtreme Dining Ltd v Dewar [2016] NZEmpC 136 |
| Number of Pages | 18 |
| PDF File Link: | 2016_NZERA_Auckland_389.pdf [pdf 228 KB] |