| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | [2018] NZERA Wellington 13 |
| Hearing date | 15-Nov-17 |
| Determination date | 07 February 2018 |
| Member | M Loftus |
| Representation | J Bates ; S Meikle |
| Location | Napier |
| Parties | Pan Pac Forest Products Ltd v First Union Inc. & Anor |
| Other Parties | E Tu Inc. |
| Summary | DISPUTE – Parties disputed interpretation and operation of Collective Employment Agreement (“CEA”) – Applicant sought a determination that its proposal to restructure is lawful and in accordance with CEA – First respondent argued applicants should not be granted remedies sought and is seeking to advance a matter it chose to abandon during collective bargaining |
| Abstract | AUTHORITY FOUND – DISPUTE: Schedules of CEA specify applicable work schedules. The manning structure can be considered a work schedule. Manning structure includes both CS2 and CS2 Stacker positions. Where there is change to a work schedule the variation clause must be used. This means the manning schedule cannot be excluded from use of the variation clause. The ability to review a schedule is also limited to technological change and the imperative here is economical change. CEA between applicant and first respondent provide for a clear and express fetter on applicants ability to remove CS2 and CS2 Stacker positions by restructuring. |
| Result | Questions answered in favour of first respondent ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Dispute |
| Statutes | ERA s174E(b)(ii) |
| Cases Cited | Toll NZ Consolidated Ltd (formally Tranz Rail Ltd) v NZ Seafarers Union Inc and Maritime Union of NZ Inc [2004] 1 ERNZ 392 , Vector Gas Ltd v Bay of Plenty Energy Ltd [2010] 2 NZLR 444 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | 2018_NZERA_Wellington_13.pdf [pdf 113 KB] |