| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 14/06 |
| Hearing date | 16 Jan 2006 |
| Determination date | 07 February 2006 |
| Member | D Asher |
| Representation | G Davenport ; A Scott-Howman |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Denbee and Anor v United Group Rail (NZ) Ltd (formerly Alstom Transport New Zealand Ltd) |
| Other Parties | Rail & Maritime Transport Union |
| Summary | DISPUTE - First applicant sought finding that she was covered by terms of relevant collective employment agreement – Alleged respondent’s refusal to apply CEA breached s56 and s62(2) Employment Relations Act 2000 – Alternatively argued she was being unlawfully discriminated against on basis of union membership – Applicant employed in position of “Contract Support” – CEA stated that it applied to all employees except certain positions, including executive support functions – When applicant tried to join union, was told her position was not covered by CEA (for reasons of confidentiality and the inherent nature of the support provided to management) – Whether applicant entitled to CEA coverage – Applicant alleged that notwithstanding her position profile, she had never been asked to undertake executive support functions – Respondent did not challenge applicant’s claim that she did not and had never been asked to perform executive support functions – Respondent instead relied on position description ”to keep [applicant] on the reserves’ bench, on a just in case basis, in the event it might require her to perform that work” – Not a fair and reasonable position – Not good faith for respondent to rely on potential that applicant might some day undertake executive support functions – Applicant entitled to CEA coverage – From commencement of employment, applicant was denied statutory benefits of ss62 & 63 – No evidence of discrimination against applicant – Parties to address and resolve damages – Preliminary view made that penalty not appropriate in this instance |
| Result | Question answered in favour of applicant ; Orders accordingly ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s56;ERA s62;ERA s62(2);ERA s63 |
| Cases Cited | ASTE Te Hau Takitini O Aotearoa Inc v Hampton, Chief Executive of the Bay of Plenty Polytechnic [2002] 1 ERNZ 491 |
| Number of Pages | 10 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 14_06.pdf [pdf 40 KB] |