| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 421/04 |
| Determination date | 22 December 2004 |
| Member | L Robinson |
| Representation | H Thompson ; N Dines |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Pamich v Telecom Corporation of New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Applicant due to return from parental leave on 8 March - On 20 February informed that because position had not been backfilled" while on parental leave respondent was considering disestablishing it - Invited to provide feedback - Made redundant with last day of work 2 April - Not required to return to work during notice period - Reason given for redundancy was changes to functions and activities of business group - Genuine redundancy - Changes to functions and activities never discussed - No opportunity to provide feedback on justification for dismissal - Dismissal unjustified as redundancy not effected in fair and reasonable manner - OTHER MONIES - Parental leave payment policy provided for payment of four weeks' salary when employee returned to work - In case of redundancy prior to recommencing work employee forfeited payment - Redundancy did not take effect prior to date of intended return to work - Unable to return to work because respondent did not require her to - Entitled to parental leave payment - PENALTY - Penalty sought for delay in payment of redundancy compensation - Penalty only appropriate for wilful or deliberate breach - Penalty declined - Team Leader" |
| Result | Application granted ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($3,000) ; Other monies (parental leave payment)($5,153.84) ; Costs reserved |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |