| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 406/04 |
| Hearing date | 16 Nov 2004 |
| Determination date | 10 December 2004 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | S Mitchell ; K Thompson |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | New Zealand Amalgamated Engineering Printing and Manufacturing Union v Air New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | DISPUTE - Applicant sought rectification of provision in 2000 and 2002 collective agreements by removal of provision - Aircraft cleaning allowance – Provision included “Note” that allowance did not apply to new employees after specified date – Alleged “Note” overlooked when 2000 CA signed, and that bargaining continued for 2002 CA on basis that issue dealt with by present proceedings – Authority accepted submissions that applicant not seeking to change bargain between parties but sought correction of error and that “varying” in s163 Employment Relations Act 2000 should not be given such broad meaning as to include correction of such error – Issue over whether jurisdiction under Employment Contracts Act 1991 in respect of 2000 CA since Tribunal had no power to make order – Terms of 2000 CA primary evidence of parties’ common intention – Evidence did not persuade Authority that parties had common and continuing intention to retain aircraft cleaning allowance without grandfathering it – If Authority had jurisdiction to have done so would not have made order for rectification of 2000 CA – Since rectification of 2002 CA on same set of facts also declined to make order rectifying that CA |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | Contractual Mistakes Act 1977 s5;ERA s161(1)(r);ERA s162;ERA s163;ERA s192 |
| Cases Cited | Merbank Corporation Limited v Cramp [1980] 1 NZLR 721;Wellington City Council v New Zealand Law Society [1988] 2 NZLR 614` |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |