| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 396/05 |
| Hearing date | 25 Aug 2005 |
| Determination date | 05 October 2005 |
| Member | M Urlich |
| Representation | R France ; K Thompson |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Davenport v Air New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Applicant dismissed for serious misconduct after investigation of complaint by co-worker that applicant had directed unwarranted abuse at him - Applicant alleged respondent obliged to follow disciplinary procedure and treat conduct as poor performance which warranted final written warning if complaint upheld - Applicant advised at outset that alleged conduct potentially amounted to misconduct and outcome could be dismissal - Prior warning for unacceptable behaviour involving threatening language did not lock respondent into disciplinary course of performance management for any future similar conduct - Alleged conduct could not amount to serious misconduct given nature of workplace and applicant's known propensity to swear - No evidence conduct acceptable in workplace - Respondent's conclusions open to it - Alleged applicant had no opportunity to comment on allegation that applicant was not truthful in his account of events - Allegations of verbal abuse and investigation of allegations necessarily intertwined - Finding of untruthfulness not separate allegation but element of applicant's conduct which was weighed properly in decision-maker's consideration - Dismissal justified - Diesel mechanic |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s103A |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 396_05.pdf [pdf 51 KB] |