| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 159/06 |
| Hearing date | 14 Feb 2006 |
| Determination date | 08 May 2006 |
| Member | R A Monaghan |
| Representation | AJ Patel (in person) ; S Gupta |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Patel v Skylounge New Zealand Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Whether dismissed or resigned - Significant dispute over facts and conditions of employment - Applicant claimed employed full time, including daily lunch shift - Respondent claimed employed part time and bar never offered lunches - No written employment agreement or reliable record of hours - Respondent claimed going to arrange agreement after two or three weeks as wanted to see how everything worked out - Applicant denied discussing this with respondent - Key event was meeting at end of third week - Applicant's version was respondent told him kitchen was not making money, he should find another job and was not entitled to notice because of short employment period - Respondent alleged conversation was about his concern applicant was looking for another job - Claimed applicant said he was leaving and asked for final pay - Respondent said he agreed reluctantly and did not require applicant to give notice because of brevity of employment - Question was whose account to accept - One person's word against another with no supporting witnesses and minimal supporting documentation - After final wages paid respondent had sought letter from applicant confirming no money was owed - Unable to characterise resulting letter as a resignation - Applicant's evidence materially consistent and account credible - Jarring note in respondent's evidence - Not providing written agreement to see how things worked out" was wrong approach - Comment concerning giving of notice struck Authority as granting unusually easy release to someone whose services were still required - Doubtful that either party gave full or accurate account, but by small margin applicant more credible - Applicant dismissed - Dismissal unjustified as did not meet minimum requirements of fair procedure - Remedies - Entitled to reimbursement of lost remuneration for three weeks before started new employment - No order for compensation as no evidence of injury to applicant's feelings - Length of service three weeks - Chef" |
| Result | Application granted ; Lost remuneration ($1,680)(3 weeks) ; Costs reserved |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 159_06.pdf [pdf 18 KB] |