| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 95/04 |
| Hearing date | 1 Jul 2004 |
| Determination date | 29 July 2004 |
| Member | D Asher |
| Representation | A Gallie ; J Holden |
| Location | Napier |
| Parties | Bills v Chief Executive of the Department of Corrections |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Prisoner escape - Dismissed for failure to follow written procedures - Handcuffs removed and prisoner out of sight for lengthy period of time - Whether disparity of treatment - Co-worker also responsible for prisoner only given final warning - Alleged failure by respondent to follow own procedures - Alleged bias and conflict of interest - Whether given opportunity to respond to preliminary findings - Sufficient opportunities to respond given - Applicant understood real prospect of dismissal - No conflict of interest, bias or failure to follow own procedures - No disparity of treatment - Mitigating factors - Co-worker less senior and had suggested applicant follow handcuff procedures - Adequately reprimanded with final warning - Dismissal justified - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Whether suspended - Sought to return to work - Message unclearly conveyed by applicant's union representative - Special leave was not suspension - No unjustified disadvantage - Corrections officer |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | Penal Institutions Regulations 2000 r39 |
| Cases Cited | Cooke v Tranz Rail Ltd [1996] 1 ERNZ 610;Riddell v Commissioner of Police [2003] 2 ERNZ 136;Samu v Air New Zealand Ltd [1995] 1 ERNZ 636 |
| Number of Pages | 15 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |