| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 20/06 |
| Hearing date | 23 Nov 2005 |
| Determination date | 14 February 2006 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | S Fairclough ; S Turner |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Barnes v Telecom New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Whether person intending to work - Applicant alleged she was unjustifiably dismissed when respondent withdrew unconditional offer of employment - Respondent alleged employment was conditional on second satisfactory reference check and there was never a concluded employment relationship - Respondent used recruitment agency - Conflict of evidence over how recruitment agent (B") explained respondent's recruitment process to applicant - Risky strategy for complicated recruitment patterns to be managed exclusively with verbal communication - Applicant would have been excited when process first explained and may simply have misheard what she was told - Having misheard process the first time, it was easier for applicant to confuse the process when there were further discussions about it - Difficult to see how experienced professional person such as B could have got process so wrong as to make mistake in conveying information to applicant - More likely that applicant simply did not hear that there were two points at which reference checking came into question - Employment relationship never created" |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 20_06.pdf [pdf 39 KB] |