| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 145/04 |
| Hearing date | 10 Nov 2004 |
| Determination date | 30 November 2004 |
| Member | P Cheyne |
| Representation | A McKenzie ; PD Zwart |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Austin v Fonterra Cooperative Group |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Dismissed because respondent believed that applicant had removed its property from site without approval, sold property and withheld proceeds - Applicant removed scrap ring feeders from work site and sold them to mechanic - Allegedly realised this was wrong when co-worker disciplined for taking scrap ring feeder - Alleged he intended to give proceeds to work social club - Respondent did not need to prove theft to show it had reasonable grounds on which to believe misconduct occurred - Sufficient grounds for respondent's belief after full and fair inquiry - Disparity - Co-worker made admissions promptly - Applicant did not admit to selling ring feeders on two timely occasions - Different outcomes adequately explained - Dismissal justified - Mechanic |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | Airline Stewards and Hostesses of NZ IUOW v Air New Zealand Ltd [1985] ACJ 952;Honda NZ Ltd v NZ Shipwrights Union [1991] 1 NZLR 392;Kanda v Government of Malaysia [1962] AC 322;Quinn v Bank of New Zealand [1991] 1 ERNZ 1060;Strachan v Mainland Products Ltd unreported, N Taylor, 15 May 2001, CA 14/01;W & H Newspapers Limited v Oram [2000] 2 ERNZ 448 ; [2001] 3 NZLR 29 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |