| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 122/06 |
| Hearing date | 11 Apr 2006 |
| Determination date | 11 August 2006 |
| Member | P Cheyne |
| Representation | Andrew McKenzie ; Penny Shaw |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Watt v Canterbury District Health Board |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISADVANTAGE - Alleged bullying and mobbing" behaviour by colleagues Applicant removed from "family therapy team" ("FTT") - Prior unsuccessful grievance concerning non-appointment to manager position - Estopped from asserting historical bullying claims dealt with in earlier determination - Being prevented from involvement in FTT by removal, and other roles, would have made work significantly less satisfying - Loss of work, even if restored after six months, disadvantaged applicant - Managers should have canvassed feelings of mistrust with applicant before removed him from FTT - Unjustified disadvantage - UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Dismissed for serious incompatibility - Conflict created significant barrier to performance of many of applicant's duties - Applicant's belief in truth of historical bullying claims powerful factor in explaining his behaviour - Failure to conduct himself with colleagues on basis historical claims wrong largely caused conflict - No evidence dismissal pre-determined or respondent withheld redeployment options - Dismissal justified - BREACH OF CONTRACT - No evidence applicant's career development suffered - Colleagues' refusal to work with applicant not breach of trust and confidence or any express term of employment - Clause in collective agreement required respondent to treat applicant fairly, properly and openly - Concerns causing respondent to remove applicant from FTT not put to him - Removal without consent express or implied breach - Disadvantage finding also amounted to breach of express and implied terms of employment agreement - Remedies - No pecuniary loss caused by breaches - Could not be double recovery of compensation and damages for same incident - Breach not material cause of irreconcilable conflict that resulted in dismissal, nor did it contribute in material way to applicant's stress, leading to three months of sick leave - Length of service 21 years with respondent and its predecessors - Psychiatric nurse" |
| Result | Application granted (Unjustified disadvantage, breach of contract) ; Damages ($5,000 for two breaches) ; Application dismissed (Unjustified dismissal) ; Costs reserved |
| Statutes | ERA s103(1)(b) |
| Cases Cited | Gilbert v Attorney-General [2002] 1 ERNZ 31;Hayward v Tairawhiti Polytechnic unreported, Travis J, 3 August 2005, AC 43/05;Mabry v West Auckland Living Skills Homes Trust Board (Inc) unreported, Travis J, 19 December 2001, AC 86/01;Watt v Canterbury District Health Board unreported, H Doyle, 19 February 2004, CA 18/04 |
| Number of Pages | 17 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 122_06.pdf [pdf 79 KB] |