Restrictions OK
Jurisdiction Employment Relations Authority - Christchurch
Reference No CA 28/07
Hearing date 26 Oct 2006
Determination date 23 March 2007
Member P Montgomery
Representation D Goldwater ; R Upton
Location Christchurch
Parties Tufuga v Sleepyhead Manufacturing Company Ltd
Summary UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Summary dismissal - Applicant dismissed for removing company property without authorisation - Reinstatement sought - Removal of property serious misconduct under employment agreement - Senior co-worker (T") saw applicant load bed panels into vehicle and questioned whether authorised to take them - Told needed permission and applicant confirmed he understood - At end of shift T saw applicant drive away with panels and failed to stop him - Management advised - Union delegate told of situation and that meeting to take place - Applicant told of seriousness of matter and dismissal possible - Delegate represented applicant at meeting - Delegate did not act as agent of respondent, and not directed by it to represent applicant - Satisfied applicant accepted delegate's offer to represent him - Aware of policy regarding removal of property without authorisation - On two previous occasions, applicant sought and was granted permission to take property - Blatant disregard of policies - When advised dismissed applicant claimed returned panels - Evidence failed to show panels returned - English applicant's second language - No evidence applicant confused or did not understand at meeting - Language difficulties not significant factor in investigation - Full and fair inquiry and investigation process - Fair and reasonable employer would have dismissed - Dismissal justified"
Result Application dismissed ; Costs reserved
Main Category Personal Grievance
Statutes ERA s103A
Cases Cited Air New Zealand Ltd v Hudson [2006] ERNZ 415;Fuiava v Air New Zealand Ltd [2006] 1 ERNZ 806
Number of Pages 7
PDF File Link: ca 28_07.pdf [pdf 49 KB]