| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 274/05 |
| Hearing date | 15 Jul 2005 |
| Determination date | 18 July 2005 |
| Member | A Dumbleton |
| Representation | K Kaur ; no appearance |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Hughes v Instant Office Products Depot Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Poor performance - No appearance for respondent - Was told respondent not interested in any explanations regarding allegations in dismissal letter and that general manager had made up his mind - Predetermination - Allegations did not provide sufficient information - Warning letters did not comply with requirements in employment agreement - All letters were written by previous employer - Generally a subsequent employer could not simply adopt as its own warnings given by an earlier employer assuming they were valid - Generally an employee's record remained personal and private to parties in employment relationship - At first GM had allowed applicant to work out one week but then changed his mind and told him he was not wanted at work - Letters written nearly a year before dismissal - Could be assumed performance had not been a continuing concern - Dismissal unjustified - COSTS - Costs of $1,500 in favour of applicant -Storeman-driver |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($13,260)(6 months) ; Interest (9 percent) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($11,500) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($1,500) ; Disbursements ($70)(Filing fee) |
| Statutes | ERA Second Schedule cl 12 |
| Cases Cited | Trotter v Telecom Corporation of NZ Ltd [1993] 2 ERNZ 659 |
| Number of Pages | 4 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 274_05.pdf [pdf 22 KB] |