| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 11/05 |
| Hearing date | 11 Jan 2005 |
| Determination date | 19 January 2005 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | T Gallagher ; G Norton |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Service & Food Workers Union Inc v Air New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | BARGAINING - Reference for facilitation in collective bargaining - Applicant alleged alternatively that bargaining unduly protracted, or strike had been acrimonious, or further strike proposed likely to substantially affect public interest - Respondent not opposed to reference for facilitation - Each ground intended to be stand-alone - Initial role of Authority as gatekeeper to see whether any grounds existed - Issue arose during negotiations over applicant's entitlement to information about pay settlements made to other employees - Application to Authority to resolve issue as employment relationship problem - Relations deteriorated - Respondent accused applicant of acting in breach of good faith and suggested strike would not be lawful - 22 hour strike constituting full withdrawal of labour - Unsuccessful bargaining meetings with mediator, faciliatory meetings and considerable correspondence - Future strike planned - Authority accepted strike was acrimonious - Acrimonious defined as bitter in manner or temper - ERA required display of bitterness by words or conduct not merely experiencing feelings of bitterness - Respondent notified applicant before strike that staff travel privileges would be withdrawn which although lawful seemed bitter response - Respondent published notice to staff saying it was not prepared to enter into negotiations with gun held to its head in form of strike notice - Words attempted to convey that applicant was somehow bargaining illegally or even with threats of violence - Respondent commenced disciplinary investigations into three members of applicant after strike, leading to employees raising personal grievances, which indicated acrimony - On this ground Authority accepted reference to facilitation - Other grounds not present - Comment that amendments to ERA had not altered rights of parties to challenge de novo Authority's decision to accept reference |
| Result | Application granted ; No order for costs |
| Statutes | ERA s50A;ERA s50B;ERA s50C;ERA s50C(1);ERA s50C(1)(b);ERA s50C(1)(c);ERA s50C(1)(d);ERA s50C(2) |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 11_05.pdf [pdf 53 KB] |