| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 135/05 |
| Hearing date | 7 Jul 2005 |
| Determination date | 23 August 2005 |
| Member | P R Stapp |
| Representation | M Andrews ; R Ratima, L Wade, T Gulbransen |
| Location | Palmerston North |
| Parties | Collis v Reihana Ratima t/a Havelock Bakery |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Applicant absent from work on a few occasions due to his partner having trouble with her pregnancy - Alleged he was dismissed by respondent - Alleged another baker was employed - No new baker was actually employed - Applicant asked to return keys - Accepted respondent's submission that asked for return of keys for security reasons - No dismissal - Respondent had issue with amount of time taken off - Respondent entitled to request medical certificate given his periods of absence - Applicant decided not to return to full-time employment - Did not reasonably make contact with respondent - Reasonable for respondent to consider abandonment - No unjustified dismissal - ARREARS OF WAGES AND HOLIDAY PAY - Applicant worked four hours but was not paid for time worked - Arrears of wages owing plus holiday pay on that amount - Applicant did not claim arrears and had written amount owing off as lost cause - PENALTY - No written employment agreement - Inconclusive as to whether agreement was discussed - Ignorance of the law and struggling in business no defence - Respondent now familiar with Department of Labour website and agreement builder - Not a matter for penalty - COSTS - Costs to lie where they fall - Respondent was employer - Credibility finding in favour of respondent - Baker |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Arrears of wages ($44) ; Arrears of holiday pay ($2.64) ; Costs to lie where they fall |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 135_05.pdf [pdf 47 KB] |