| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 39/04 |
| Determination date | 05 April 2004 |
| Member | D Asher |
| Representation | D Robb ; D Fleming |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Heinz Wattie's Ltd v National Distribution Union |
| Summary | DISPUTE - Interpretation of collective employment agreement - Agreement provided changes to stable hours of work patterns" required specific variation process - Applicant expanded production by implementation of new 12 hour night shift beginning at 3am - Existing 12 hour shifts began at 3pm - Both shifts worked Monday to Thursday - Full consultation with employees over proposed change - New shifts staffed in part by transferring existing staff - Collective agreement provided for shift work and night shift patterns - 3pm start time integral feature of stable hours of work pattern - Change to start time required correct variation process even though no change to general pattern of four 12 hour shifts Monday to Thursday - Consultation by itself insufficient - Correct variation process required agreement by 75 percent of employees and record of agreed variation in writing signed by parties - All employees bound by variation made in accordance with correct process - In absence of correct variation process employees could have refused to change shifts - Applicant failed to comply with correct variation process" |
| Result | Questions determined in favour of respondent ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s129(2);ERA s157 |
| Cases Cited | Lowe Walker Paeroa Limited v Bennett [1998] 2 ERNZ 558 |
| Number of Pages | 11 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |