| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 140/05 |
| Hearing date | 26 Aug 2005 |
| Determination date | 26 October 2005 |
| Member | H Doyle |
| Representation | JA Burney ; P McBride, M Brewer |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Smith v New Zealand Post Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Whether applicant entitled to redundancy compensation under collective employment agreement - New retail team leader position developed and supervisor position disestablished - Under collective agreement redundancy only used when other options not clearly practical or appropriate - Applicant did not apply for retail team leader role because she did not want to work Saturdays - Respondent offered to re-deploy applicant in role of customer service representative on same grade as supervisor working Monday to Friday - Envisaged that applicant could carry on with training component of her supervisor role which she enjoyed - Applicant did not accept offer of redeployment - Redeployment offer was in some respects a backwards step for applicant but this was balanced against continuation of training component - Offer of redeployment practicable and appropriate - Collective agreement provided that if offer of redeployment not accepted then employment would be terminated without payment of redundancy compensation - Applicant not entitled to redundancy compensation - Another supervisor paid redundancy compensation after her unsuccessful application for retail team leader position and refusal to accept customer service representative role - Different circumstances between applicant and other supervisor as other supervisor was stressed by her unsuccessful application and applicant's redeployment offer contained training component - As circumstances different Authority not required to consider whether could be personal grievance in circumstances where no contractual entitlement to redundancy but two employees treated differently - Supervisor |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | Association of Marine Aviation & Power Engineers v Tasman Express Line Ltd [1990] 3 NZILR 946;Post Office Union Inc v NZ Post Ltd [1991] 3 ERNZ 68 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 140_05.pdf [pdf 39 KB] |