| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 125/04 |
| Hearing date | 27 Feb 2004 |
| Determination date | 15 April 2004 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | G Norton ; R Webby |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Sandifer v Plumbers Gasfitters & Drainlayers Board NZ |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Respondent reviewed structure for provision of services - Certain duties removed from applicant over period of year - Grievance raised outside 90 day limitation period - No exceptional circumstances - Applicant thoroughly read new unsigned employment agreement containing problem resolution provision - Even if grievance in time removal of duties justified - No unjustified disadvantage - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Final plan involved contracting out applicant's role - Redundancy genuine and imposed for business reasons - Full and fair consultation process - Union fully argued all issues - Applicant member of union at time of consultation process despite later claims to contrary - Applicant clearly capable of expressing concerns about employment - Manner of effecting termination fair - No unjustified dismissal - Gas auditor |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s64(2);ERA s114(1);ERA s114(4);ERA s115(c);ERA s133;Plumbers Gasfitters and Drainlayers Act 1978 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |