Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Wellington
Reference No [2016] NZERA Wellington 148
Hearing date 21-Nov-16
Determination date 21 November 2016
Member T Tetitaha
Representation R Ward ; R Nabney
Location Palmerston North
Parties Woodcock v Agrissentials New Zealand Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – PENALTY – Applicant sought penalty for respondent’s breach of good faith - Sales consultant
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Respondent admitted real reason for dismissal applicant’s poor performance, but concern not raised with applicant. No evidence that concern investigated prior to dismissal. No opportunity for applicant to respond to concern. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: 25 per cent contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant reimbursement of lost wages, quantum to be determined. $5,625 compensation appropriate.PENALTY: Respondent failed to provide applicant with information adverse to continuation of employment. Failure inadvertent and one-off. No penalty.
Result Application granted (unjustified dismissal) ; Contributory conduct (25%) ; Reimbursement of lost wages (quantum to be determined) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($5,625) ; Application dismissed (penalty)
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4(1A)(c) ; ERA s103A(2) ; ERA s103A(3) ; ERA s103A(5) ; ERA s124 ; ERA s128
Cases Cited Allen v TransPacific Industries Group Ltd (t/a Media Smart Ltd) (2009) 6 NZELR 530 (EmpC) ; Angus v Ports of Auckland Ltd [2011] NZEmpC 160, [2011] ERNZ 466 ; Finau v Carter Holt Building Supplies [1993] 2 ERNZ 971 (EmpC)
Number of Pages 7
PDF File Link: 2016_NZERA_Wellington_148_amended.pdf [pdf 1.1 MB]