| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 93/05 |
| Hearing date | 4 Jul 2005 |
| Determination date | 07 July 2005 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | P Cranney ; K Sagaga |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Wilson and Ors v NZCCS Marlborough Inc |
| Other Parties | Clark, McLean |
| Summary | DISPUTE - First matter of interpretation whether first applicant covered by individual or collective employment agreement - Originally employed on individual agreement in 2002 but joined union in 2004 - Section 56(1)(b) Employment Relations Act 2000 applied and collective agreement in force by consent - Only issue whether first applicant's work within coverage of collective agreement - Clause stated that collective agreement did not apply to team leader who by agreement accepted duties they performed were substantially management - Applicant's position not described as team leader and paid less than minimum hourly rate specified for team leader - Respondent could not identify any agreement as required by clause - Applicant covered by collective agreement - Second matter of interpretation whether applicants entitled to redundancy pay and payment in lieu of notice pursuant to collective agreement - Respondent alleged applicants not redundant because they were offered alternative employment which they refused - Applicants' positions disestablished - New positions offered materially different from old positions - Explicit provision in employment agreement required for employee to be denied redundancy compensation where employee had not accepted alternative position - Applicants entitled to redundancy compensation and four weeks' pay in lieu of notice - If this was wrong, and applicants were not redundant, they had suffered an unjustified disadvantage by reason of process used by respondent - Would have been awarded compensation under ERA in same sum provided for redundancy under collective agreement - Leave reserved for parties to return to Authority for further assistance |
| Result | Questions answered in favour of applicants ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s56(1)(b) |
| Cases Cited | Auckland Chemical etc IUOW v Morrison Printing Inks and Machinery Ltd [1991] 2 ERNZ 879;Auckland Regional Council v Sanson [1999] 2 ERNZ 597;NZ Engineering, Coachbuilding, Aircraft, Motor etc IUOW v Dunlop NZ Ltd [1986] ACJ 848;Watties Frozen Foods Ltd v United Food & Chemical Workers Union [1992] 2 ERNZ 1038 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 93_05.pdf [pdf 29 KB] |