| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 176/03 |
| Hearing date | 19 May 2003 |
| Determination date | 16 June 2003 |
| Member | K Raureti |
| Representation | E Mann ; L Murray, R Mrkusich |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Barnett v Order of St. John |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Medically unfit to return to work - Whether respondent breached duty to act as good employer during recruitment process by not providing complete and comprehensive description of role - During interview applicant made clear his target remuneration - Applicant had failed to achieve remuneration he wanted - Applicant alleged lack of clarity about position induced him to accept position - Respondent did not breach duty to act as good employer during recruitment process - Dismissed on grounds was medically unfit to return to work - Respondent not contractually required to arrange second opinion of applicant's condition - Dismissal not predetermined - Applicant aware of importance of meeting when dismissed - Dismissal justified |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | Sharp v Lawrence Family Trust t/a Sunhill Garden World unreported, BW Stephenson, 15 April 1994, AT 116/94;Lang v Eagle Airways Ltd [1996] 1 ERNZ 574;Motor Machinists Ltd v Craig [1996] 2 ERNZ 585 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |