| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 198/01 |
| Hearing date | 5 Sep 2001 |
| Determination date | 27 November 2001 |
| Member | D King |
| Representation | G Finnigan ; P Swarbrick |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Dunn v Arrow Personnel Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Whether dismissed - Applicant told she was not competent of her position's new duties and that employment terminated - Termination by redundancy amounted to a dismissal - Mixed motives for redundancy - Predominant motive was poor performance - No consultation prior to decision to terminate - Procedurally unfair - No evidence of discrimination on basis of age - Applicant chose to leave work immediately - No failure to mitigate loss - Position did not cease to exist at time of dismissal - Entitled to lost wages - ARREARS OF WAGES - Told during interview that rate of pay was $16 per hour - Signed conditions of employment stated $15 per hour - Agreed rate was $15 - No wages due and owing - Secretary |
| Result | Application granted in part ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($8,832) ; Compensation for hurt and humiliation ($4,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | Baguley v Coutts Cars Ltd [2000] 2 ERNZ 409;Nelson Aero Club Inc v Palmer unreported, Shaw J, 7 March 2000, WC 10A/00;Rankin v Attorney-General in respect of the State Services Commissioner [2001] ERNZ 412 |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | PDF file not available for download, please contact us to request a copy. |