Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No CA 121/05
Hearing date 25 Jul 2005 - 26 Jul 2005 (2 days)
Determination date 21 September 2005
Member J Crichton
Representation Q Stratford ; A Jones
Location Christchurch
Parties Lines v Ohau Snow Holdings Ltd
Summary PENALTY - Failure to provide written copy of individual employment agreement - However, respondent was waiting for applicant to produce bar manager's licence and frequently reminded him of this - Unfair and unreasonable for applicant to argue entitled to protection of law when it seemed more likely than not applicant knew that in holding himself out as person who had bar manager's licence, he was deliberately misrepresenting factual position - Erroneous representation of qualification allowed applicant to earn significantly more - No penalty ordered - ARREARS OF WAGES - Alleged unlawful deduction of $50 for cleaning chalet applicant lived in - Standard deduction in all respondent's employment agreements - However respondent could not prove applicant received house rules containing provision for deduction so unable to rely on that - Illegal deduction - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Poor performance - Discussions about respondent's anxieties could not reasonably be regarded as warnings - One warning letter but after that respondent took no steps to advise applicant of concerns - Client complaint about applicant - Meeting concluded with applicant storming off - One director of respondent believed applicant dismissed - At second meeting with other director applicant was handed dismissal letter - Inadequate information prior to meeting and no opportunity given to explain - Without giving applicant opportunity to explain himself or remedy alleged defaults, genuine concerns that respondent might have had were meaningless and could not be given weight - Unjustified dismissal - Remedies - Contributory conduct - Fact that applicant was paid over the odds" by claiming to have bar manager's licence taken into account - Unauthorised mural applicant painted on chalet wall also taken into account - Bar person"
Result Application dismissed (penalty) ; Applications granted (wages and unjustified dismissal) ; Arrears of wages ($50) ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($4,000)(2ï¾½ months) ; Compensation for humiliation ($3,000 reduced to $1,000) ; Costs reserved
Statutes ERA s62;Wages Protection Act 1983 s4
Cases Cited Wright v Te Tuinga Whanau Trust unreported J Scott, 4 April 2005, AA 117/05
Number of Pages 9
PDF File Link: ca 121_05.pdf [pdf 48 KB]