| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 278/05 |
| Hearing date | 19 Jul 2005 |
| Determination date | 22 July 2005 |
| Member | D King |
| Representation | M Dawson ; R Harrison |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | The Association of Staff in Tertiary Education (ASTE): Te Hau Takitini o Aotearoa v Waiariki Institute of Technology |
| Summary | INJUNCTION - Applicant sought injunction preventing respondent from proceeding with four notified reviews – Alleged notified reviews breached clause of collective agreement (“CA”) and section 4 Employment Relations Act 2000 – Improvement project involving looking at personnel costs – When obligation to notify a review arose? - Arguably respondent had moved to notification of redundancy stage without following proper process –– CA provided union must have been involved in any review – Contractual provision more stringent that statutory one – At point report to SMT was prepared was evident that if parts of the report were actioned would be significant effects on staff – At that stage obligation to notify union about review and allow union to be involved in it - Once matters progressed to point where recommendations were accepted and couched as decisions that were to be implemented, the time for consultation had clearly passed – In interests of fairness, employees had to be put back into situation would have been in had respondent followed agreement – Injunction made restraining respondent from proceeding with reviews |
| Result | Injunction granted ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s4(4)(b);ERA s4(4)(c);ERA s4(4)(d);ERA s4(4)(e) |
| Cases Cited | Auckland City Council v The New Zealand Public Service Association and Anor [2003] 2 ERNZ 386 ; [2004] 2 NZLR 10;New Zealand Public Service Association Inc v Auckland City Council [2003] 1 ERNZ 57 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 278_05.pdf [pdf 42 KB] |