| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 136/06 |
| Hearing date | 1 Feb 2006 |
| Determination date | 26 April 2006 |
| Member | K J Anderson |
| Representation | M Ward-Johnson ; M Beech |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Gauld v Bay of Plenty District Health Board |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Redundancy - Applicant alleged lack of proper consultation prior to decision to make his position redundant - At first glance seemed odd that applicant not more closely involved with review of department - However when tension between applicant and General Manager and applicant's generally negative attitude taken into account it was hardly surprising that Chief Operations Officer proceeded as he did - Authority viewed with some incredulity applicant's allegation that he did not discover review document until two weeks after he received it - Little would have been gained by allowing applicant to take more inclusive role in review given his pessimistic approach - Nothing unfair or unreasonable about procedure adopted - Applicant alleged redundancy not genuine but created in order to remove him due to relationship between him and General Manager becoming untenable - Applicant's position and new position significantly different - Substantial strategic reasons for respondent to create new position rather than simply conflict between applicant and General Manager - No personal grievance - Length of service approximately three years - Estate and Engineering Manager |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Number of Pages | 5 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 136_06.pdf [pdf 33 KB] |