| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | [2017] NZERA Christchurch 42 |
| Hearing date | 28-Feb-17 |
| Determination date | 23 March 2017 |
| Member | D Appleton |
| Representation | B Lautogo ; P McBride |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Thomas v Idea Services Ltd |
| Summary | RAISING GRIEVANCE - Whether respondent consented to grievance being raised out of time - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Applicant claimed unjustifiably disadvantaged by respondent’s response to client’s (Ms X) complaint and by being placed on a performance improvement plan (“PIP”) - Support Worker |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND -;RAISING GRIEVANCE: Respondent gave implied consent for applicant to raise grievance out of time by addressing applicant’s allegation substantively in its brief of evidence.;UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE: Applicant’s embarrassment and discomfort was integral part of transferring her to other facilities and applicant agreed to transfer. Applicant did not have opportunity to comment on colleagues’ feedback before placing her on PIP. Reasonable for respondent to canvass views of applicant’s colleagues. Disadvantaged caused to applicant was justified. Applicant accepted coaching was reasonable way forward. PIP was actually coaching plan and not disciplinary in nature. Evidence suggested applicant did not object to coaching plan but welcomed it. No unjustified disadvantage. |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s103A ; ERA s114(1) ; ERA s114(3) ; ERA s114(4) |
| Cases Cited | Commissioner of Police v Hawkins [2009] NZCA 209, [2009] 3 NZLR 381;Twentyman v The Warehouse Ltd [2016] NZEmpC 172 |
| Number of Pages | 16 |
| PDF File Link: | 2017_NZERA_Christchurch_42.pdf [pdf 198 KB] |