| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 38/04 |
| Hearing date | 18 Nov 2003 |
| Determination date | 02 April 2004 |
| Member | P Montgomery |
| Representation | L McLay ; N Soper |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Sherborne v Spotless Services (NZ) Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Employed by respondent cleaning contractor as longstanding caretaker at school - School requested review of caretaking and grounds duties as part of general cost cutting measures - Respondent notified applicant of review and possible change to hours and duties - Applicant offered to restrict work to term time - Meeting to notify applicant position to change significantly and to be advertised - Did not reapply for position - No redeployment options found - Dismissed on grounds of redundancy - Advertised position different in some ways but not completely new - Proposed alterations not put to applicant for comment prior to confirming new role and commencing advertising process - No genuine redundancy - Process followed in meeting seriously flawed - Dismissal unjustified - Not constructive dismissal as employment did not end at applicant's initiative - Caretaker |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($10,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |