| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 32/06 |
| Hearing date | 5 Apr 2005 - 6 Apr 2005 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 01 March 2006 |
| Member | P Montgomery |
| Representation | C French ; R Cunliffe |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Murray v Access Homehealth Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Numerous problems in office including between applicant and manager - Decision made to restructure office - Applicant's position made redundant - Applicant on sick leave - Applicant's husband attended meeting - Applicant had not been provided with copy of proposal or draft employment agreement - Was treated differently from other staff - Difficult to see need for respondent's haste to make final decision - Respondent failed to ensure that it had required feedback from applicant before implementing proposal - Issue over respondent initially refusing to meet cost of repair to applicant's car put additional pressure on applicant - Applicant did not tell respondent that was suffering from stress at the time - If she had, respondent's approach may have been more mellow - No disadvantage by reorganisation of co-ordinator's tasks or alleged failure of respondent to resolve disharmony in office or by being treated unreasonably by manager - Unjustified dismissal - Remedies - No reimbursement for lost wages awarded since applicant would have been unlikely to have been able to alter proposal even if proper consultation - Length of service not specified - Home help co-ordinator |
| Result | Application dismissed (Unjustified disadvantage) ; Application granted (Unjustified dismissal) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($8,000) ; Costs reserved |
| Cases Cited | Telecom New Zealand Ltd v Nutter [2004] 1 ERNZ 315 |
| Number of Pages | 12 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 32_06.pdf [pdf 82 KB] |