Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No [2017] NZERA Christchurch 210
Hearing date 14-Feb-17
Determination date 04 December 2017
Member A Dallas
Representation J Cuttance ; D Browne
Location Dunedin
Parties Smith v McCreanor t/a Sweet As A Nut
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Serious Misconduct – Applicant claimed unjustifiably dismissed by respondent – Caf� Assistant
Abstract AUTHORITY FOUND –;UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL: Respondent failed to substantiate basis to support three allegations against applicant. Allegations relied on by respondent could not justify dismissal. Dismissal unjustified. Fair and reasonable employer could not have concluded applicant’s actions amounted to serious misconduct. REMEDIES: No contributory conduct. Respondent to pay applicant $2,688 reimbursement of lost wages. $7,000 compensation appropriate.
Result Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($2,688.99) ; Compensation for humiliation ets ($7,000) ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A;ERA s103A(3)(a);ERA s103A(5);ERA s124;ERA s160(3);ERA s174C(4);ERA s174C(3)(b);ERA s174E;Health and Safety in Employment Act 1992;Health and Safety in Work Act 2015
Cases Cited Click Clack International Ltd v James [1994] 1 ERNZ 15 (EmpC);Fagotti v Acme & Co Ltd [2015] NZEmpC 135;Health Waikato v Tabbutt [2003] 2 ERNZ 398 (EmpC);PBO Ltd (formerly Rush Security Ltd) v Da Cruz [2005] ERNZ 808;Stormont v Pebble Thorp Aiken Ltd [2017] NZEmpC 71;W & H Newspapers v Oram [2000] 2 ERNZ 448 (CA)
Number of Pages 18
PDF File Link: 2017_NZERA_Christchurch_210.pdf [pdf 208 KB]