Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2017] NZERA Christchurch 181
Hearing date 11-Apr-17
Determination date 26 October 2017
Member A Dallas
Representation J Horan ; C O'Connor
Location Timaru
Parties Wate v Talbot Agriculture Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Mechanic
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Applicant deemed employee during familiarisation period. Respondent did not raise concerns over work performance in manner to address issues sensibly with applicant. Respondent’s allegation of poor performance significantly undermined offer to re-employ applicant in same position at reduced pay-rate. Dismissal unjustified. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant three months gross pay reimbursement of wages. $10,000 compensation appropriate. ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY: Applicant entitled to payment for work over familiarisation period. Respondent to pay applicant $10,501 arrears of wages and $840 arrears of holiday pay.
Result Applications granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages (quantum to be determined) ; Arrears of wages ($10,501.50) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($840.12) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($10,000) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s67A;ERA s124;ERA s160(3);ERA s174C(3)(b);ERA s174C(4);ERA s174E
Cases Cited Edwards (Labour Inspector) v Topo Gigio Restaurants Ltd Auckland AEC109/95, 16 October 1995;Fagotti v Acme & Co Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 135;Hall v Dionex Pty Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 29;Ors v The Partners of International Football Academy of New Zealand [2016] NZERA Christchurch 65;PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808 (EmpC);Rodkiss v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 34;Salad Bowl Ltd v Howe -Thornley [2013] NZEmpC 152
Number of Pages 14
PDF File Link: 2017_NZERA_Christchurch_181.pdf [pdf 53 KB]