| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 254/04 |
| Hearing date | 31 May 2004 - 1 Jun 2004 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 12 August 2004 |
| Member | M Urlich |
| Representation | P Pa'u ; A Sherriff |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Purcell v Ministry of Justice, formerly the Department for Courts |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Applicant failed to follow cash handling procedure and account for money collected from customer - Lied to team leader - Requested customer to lie on her behalf - Dismissed following disciplinary investigation - Undisputed key facts provided sufficient grounds for finding of serious misconduct - Respondent entitled to reject applicant's explanation and did so on reasonable basis - No evidence of poor training or ill treatment - Investigation carefully conducted according to policy - Adequate opportunity for comment - All submissions fully considered by decision makers - Dismissal justified - Collections officer |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s123(c)(i) |
| Cases Cited | Airline Stewards and Hostesses of New Zealand Industrial Union of Workers v Air New Zealand Ltd [1990] 3 NZLR 549;Morrell v AFFCO New Zealand Ltd unreported, Shaw J, 27 May 2004, AC 29/04 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |