| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 160/06 |
| Hearing date | 9 Mar 2006 - 10 Mar 2006 (2 days) |
| Determination date | 08 May 2006 |
| Member | J Wilson |
| Representation | D Allan ; J Forret |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | De Souza v Waikato Students' Union |
| Summary | RAISING OF PERSONAL GRIEVANCE – Whether personal grievance raised within 90 day period – Initial letter of complaint concerning bullying adequately raised grievance concerning failure to provide safe workplace despite absence of those exact words – Concern for safety clearly spelt out as part of overall grievance – Grievance raised within 90 day period - UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE – Alleged bullying by respondent's President – President unhappy that applicant employed by respondent while also member of executive – Circulated letter to executive concerning that “reprehensible” circumstance – Letter leaked to media – Made applicant’s working life difficult in other ways such as requesting written opinion at short notice and removing applicant as secretary to particular committee – Applicant took stress leave – President’s letter amounted to unjustifiable action in itself – Evidence also suggested behaviour generally was deliberate and sustained attempt to cause stress and humiliation – Subsequent departure of President from respondent did not remove respondent’s responsibility for his actions – Respondent failed in duty to provide safe workplace – Unjustified disadvantage - GOOD FAITH – While on stress leave applicant notified of possible redundancy – Redundancy confirmed after review process – Applicant sought mediation as believed redundancy a sham manipulated by President to remove her from position – Mediated partial settlement required respondent’s representatives to “recommend” partial settlement proposal to respondent at next executive meeting – Signed by President elect – At next executive meeting President elect used casting vote to defeat proposed partial settlement – Alleged breach of good faith by failure to recommend and ratify proposal – Applicant accepted at investigation meeting that redundancy not sham - Authority accepted assurance from President elect that settlement signed in good faith but later voted against in light of additional information – Even if settlement approved would almost certainly not have resulted in long-term retention of applicant’s position – No breach of good faith – Length of service approximately one year – Advocacy coordinator |
| Result | Application granted (Unjustified disadvantage) ; Compensation for humiliation etc ($10,000) ; Application dismissed (Breach of good faith) ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s124 |
| Number of Pages | 7 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 160_06.pdf [pdf 38 KB] |