| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | [2017] NZERA Auckland 312 |
| Hearing date | 6-Oct-17 |
| Determination date | 09 October 2017 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | D Gelb ; J Hardaker |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Balasooriya v New Zealand Tertiary College Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Intermediate Applications Developer |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant could not provide sufficient evidence to support assertion of respondent’s ulterior purpose behind redundancy. Redundancy for genuine reasons. Process to implement redundancy flawed. Applicant not properly informed and given no opportunity to comment. Respondent did not allow applicant opportunity to consider alternative position. Respondent’s failure to consult and consider alternatives not what a fair and reasonable employer could have done. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. $7,000 compensation appropriate. |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($7,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Statutes | ERA s4(1A)(c);ERA s103A;ERA s124;ERA s174A;ERA s174E |
| Cases Cited | Fagotti v Acme & Co Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 135;Grace Team Accounting Ltd v Brake [2014] NZCA 541;PBO Ltd v Da Cruz [2005] 1 ERNZ 808 (EmpC) |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | 2017_NZERA_Auckland_312.pdf [pdf 197 KB] |