Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No [2017] NZERA Auckland 283
Hearing date 15 & 16 June 2017 (2 days)
Determination date 15 September 2017
Member Robin Arthur
Representation J Kay ; M Quigg
Location Whakatane
Parties Pool v San Remo Pasta Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Supermarket Merchandiser
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant treated unfairly when respondent relied on information transcribed from surprise phone call. Applicant not provided with opportunity to comment further on new evidence. No opportunity to respond to prejudicial allegations. Applicant not given reasonable opportunity to address concerns about interaction with another merchandiser. Respondent could not have justifiably reached decision to dismiss if proper inquiry carried out. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $2,158 reimbursement of lost wages. $12,000 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($2,158) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($12,000) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s103A;ERA s124;ERA s128;ERA s174E
Cases Cited Fagotti v Acme & Co Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 135;Irvine Freightlines Ltd v Cross [1993] 1 ERNZ 424 (NZEmpC);PBO Ltd (Formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 (NZEmpC);Ritchies Transport Holdings Ltd v Merennage [2015] NZEmpC 198;Quinn v Bank of New Zealand [1991] 1 ERNZ 1060 NZLabC
Number of Pages 16
PDF File Link: 2017_NZERA_Auckland_283.pdf [pdf 335 KB]