| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 341/03 |
| Hearing date | 8 Aug 2003 |
| Determination date | 11 November 2003 |
| Member | K J Anderson |
| Representation | M McCarthy ; C Rhind, V Rhind (respondents in person) |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Belcher v Rhind |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Husband and wife employed on dairy farm - Wife withdrew grievance - Only husband referred to on written agreement but wife also employed - Written agreement failed to meet requirements of s65 Employment Relations Act 2000 - Wife allowed to do other work on condition still available to carry out duties for employers - Wife did not carry out duties for employers - Husband and wife given warnings and later dismissed - Justifiable to dismiss wife - Dismissing husband because wife unavailable to carry out duties unjustified - Would have been appropriate to have made it clear that dismissal of wife alone imminent - Remedies - Reimbursement of lost wages inequitable since received wages for wife though she did not perform duties - Counterclaim - Respondent sought wages paid to wife - No evidence of how wages to husband and wife allocated - Claim declined - Costs - Applicant sought costs of $1,500 - Contribution towards costs of $800 appropriate plus reimbursement of filing fee |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($1,500) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($800) ; Disbursements ($70)(Filing fee) |
| Statutes | ERA s6;ERA s65 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |