| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 44/06 |
| Hearing date | 22 Feb 2006 |
| Determination date | 22 March 2006 |
| Member | G J Wood |
| Representation | G Manktelow ; A Gallie |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Kitchen v Farmers Transport Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL – Redundancy – No appearance by Executive Chairman (“Chairman”) but respondent had representation at investigation meeting – Applicant’s evidence preferred over respondent’s documents – Applicant was Branch Manager - Chairman wanted new Branch Manager but wanted applicant to stay on as Assistant Branch Manager – Applicant agreed when Chairman reassured him he “would not be thrown on the scrapheap” – Three months later respondent asked him to meeting at which applicant was told he was redundant – Paid three months in lieu of notice - Told there could be position with associated company – Applicant contacted associated company but declined position as unsatisfactory – Week after applicant left new manager appointed and applicant had not been informed of vacancy – Applicant given no choice other than to accept demotion to Assistant Branch Manager – Demotion meant respondent added another cost layer to running of branch when respondent performing badly – Deliberate decision to add extra cost and then remove it by making applicant redundant – Applicant relied on respondent’s undertaking so respondent’s decision to make him redundant could not be justified – Denying applicant right to work out his notice inconsistent with usual practice in redundancy situations – Failure to tell applicant what meeting about and offer right to representation – No consultation – Insufficient effort into trying to find new job for employee with applicant's length of service (18 years with respondent and 42 years with respondent and predecessor companies) – Unjustified dismissal on substantive and procedural grounds – Remedies – No reason to limit applicant’s loss to any particular period of time – In all circumstances including applicant’s age and length of service, applicant entitled to 19 months’ reimbursement of lost wages – No exact way of calculating loss given self-employment so level of $1,000 per month nominated – COSTS – 2ï¾½ hour investigation meeting - Applicant entitled to contribution to reasonable costs - Assistant branch manager |
| Result | Application granted ; Reimbursement of lost wages ($19,000)(19 months) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($8,000) ; Costs in favour of applicant ($3,000) |
| Cases Cited | Forest Park (NZ) Ltd v Adams [2000] 2 ERNZ 310;Humphrey v Telecom New Zealand Ltd [2002] 1 ERNZ 312;Rolls v Wellington Gas Co Ltd [1998] 3 ERNZ 116;Telecom New Zealand Ltd v Nutter [2004] 1 ERNZ 315;Wellington etc Caretakers etc IUOW v G N Hale and Son Ltd [1990] 3 NZILR 836 ; (1990) ERNZ Sel Cas 1024 |
| Number of Pages | 8 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 44_06.pdf [pdf 39 KB] |