| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch |
| Reference No | CA 159/06 |
| Hearing date | 7 Nov 2006 |
| Determination date | 20 November 2006 |
| Member | J Crichton |
| Representation | L Burrows ; J Henning (in person) |
| Location | Christchurch |
| Parties | Kenton v Labour Inspector (J Henning) |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE - Objection to demand notice issued by respondent Labour Inspector - Demand notice properly served and respondent met all obligations under statute - Demand notice sought holiday pay, pay for alternative holidays and penal payments for work performed on pubic holidays - Applicant agreed holiday pay owing but disputed other two sums - Applicant conceded had difficulty because proper records not kept - No written employment agreement - Diaries applicant claimed were time records were operational in nature and did not deal with time keeping with sufficient particularity - Using diaries, applicant produced different calculation from respondent - Authority satisfied respondent's calculation more robust and more consistent with principles that ought to apply - No evidence to support contention diaries were manufactured evidence - Respondent's calculation as robust as circumstances allowed - Applicant to pay whole of monies specified in demand notice |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Arrears of wages and holiday pay ($2,709) ; Costs to lie where they fall |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s224;ERA s225;ERA s226 |
| Number of Pages | 3 |
| PDF File Link: | ca 159_06.pdf [pdf 18 KB] |