Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 307/04
Hearing date 27 Jul 2004
Determination date 23 September 2004
Member D King
Representation D Fleming ; E Davies
Location Auckland
Parties Kerr and Anor v Coles Myer New Zealand Ltd t/a Kmart of New Zealand
Other Parties Tafa
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Applicants purchased items marked down to one tenth of original price without checking accuracy of discount - Dismissed for knowingly defrauding" respondent by unauthorised price discounting - Allegation of fraud required investigation commensurate with serious nature of allegation - Insufficient consideration of length of service, evidence that correct procedure previously followed, and explanation of failure to look at price before purchase - Allegation of previous pressure on colleague to mark items down not put to applicants - Allegation had significant impact on decision to dismiss - Investigation insufficient to allow conclusion that applicants defrauded respondent - Dismissal unjustified - REMEDIES - In light of respondent's policy applicants should have checked goods intended for purchase were appropriately discounted - Contributory conduct 10 percent - Merchandisers"
Result Applications granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages (To be determined)(12.6 months)(RK and KT) ; Medical insurance payments (To be determined)(RK) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($7,000 reduced to $6,300)(RK and KT) ; Costs reserved
Cases Cited Airline Stewards and Hostesses of NZ IUOW v Air New Zealand Ltd [1990] 3 NZLR 549;Glengarry Hancocks Ltd v Madden [1998] 3 ERNZ 361;NZ (with exceptions) Shipwrights etc Union v Honda NZ Ltd [1989] 3 NZILR 82;W & H Newspapers Ltd v Oram [2000] 2 ERNZ 448 ; [2001] 3 NZLR 29
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy.