Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Auckland
Reference No AA 34/06
Hearing date 20 Sep 2005
Determination date 13 February 2006
Member Y S Oldfield
Representation S Mitchell ; SR Fraser
Location Auckland
Parties Castle v New Zealand Fire Service
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Instruction - Respondent concerned that applicant had sent client a report criticising private sector fire engineer - Instructed applicant he was not to send out any reports to outside agencies that were controversial, challenging or critical of third party without having cleared them first - Subsequently respondent received complaint about email applicant had forwarded from another staff member - Letter commencing disciplinary proceedings indicated alleged conduct could amount to breach of earlier instruction and respondent's Standards of Conduct - Earlier instruction described as advice not to send out any further advisories to external stakeholders without prior consultation with Chief Fire Safety Officer - Applicant felt original instruction was being held out as something other than it had been, and that scope of direction now made it impossible for him to do job - Just over a month after letter respondent formally rescinded instruction - Respondent justified in commending disciplinary proceedings in relation to Standards of Conduct and original instruction, but not in relation to instruction as re-expressed - Additional disciplinary risk for applicant - Instruction of wider scope not justified - Unjustified action - Applicant went on sick leave and was distressed by limits placed on his autonomy - Once grievance lodged respondent remedied it in timely way and although applicant suffered some distress in interval he contributed in major way by prevarication and obfuscation - No award of compensation warranted - Fire Safety Officer
Result Application granted ; Costs reserved
Number of Pages 5
PDF File Link: aa 34_06.pdf [pdf 28 KB]