| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Wellington |
| Reference No | WA 84/07 |
| Hearing date | 8 Feb 2007 |
| Determination date | 25 May 2007 |
| Member | G J Wood |
| Representation | D Vincent ; P Swarbrick |
| Location | Wellington |
| Parties | Tauhore v Farmers Trading Company Ltd |
| Summary | UNJUSTIFIED DISMISSAL - Serious misconduct - Summary dismissal - Applicant dismissed for assaulting co-worker outside workplace during work hours - Following incident sent co-worker abusive text message - Co-worker made formal complaint - Applicant advised of allegations and disciplinary meeting - Following another text message co-worker made complaint to Police - Applicant denied assault and that messages referred to assault - Applicant declined representation at meeting - Respondent rejected explanations and concluded applicant committed assault, sent texts, and made threatening statements to manager - Applicant trespassed from respondent's stores - Subsequently acquitted of criminal charge based on same events - Co-worker's evidence at trial inconsistent - Respondent claimed conducted full and fair investigation and concluded applicant committed assault - Respondent's evidence preferred - Authority rejected applicant's explanations not given prior to dismissal - Summary dismissal penalty open to respondent if serious breach of work rule found - Simply because dismissed for reasons later subject of criminal trial at which acquitted, did not follow that must have been unjustified dismissal - Fair and reasonable employer would have concluded applicant had on balance of probabilities assaulted co-worker - Seriousness of allegations taken into account - Together with applicant's subsequent actions, conduct justified summary dismissal - Decision-maker not required to approach task untainted by preconceptions - No predetermination or bias - Not required to run investigation in nature of criminal trial or adopt criminal standard of proof - Respondent's disciplinary guidelines followed - Failure to give witness statement to applicant not sufficient to make way respondent acted not substantially fair - Dismissal justified |
| Result | Application dismissed ; Costs reserved |
| Main Category | Personal Grievance |
| Cases Cited | Airline Stewards & Hostesses of NZ IUOW v Air New Zealand Ltd [1983] ACJ 711;The Chief Executive of Unitec Institute of Technology v Henderson unreported, Colgan CJ, 19 March 2007, AC 12/07;MacPherson v Chloride Batteries NZ Ltd [1983] ACJ 219;NZ (with exceptions) Food Processing etc IUOW v Unilever NZ Ltd [1990] 1 NZILR 35 ; (1990) 3 NZELC 97,567 ; (1990) ERNZ Sel Cas 582;Peters v Collinge [1993] 2 NZLR 554;X v Auckland District Health Board [2007] ERNZ 66 |
| Number of Pages | 9 |
| PDF File Link: | wa 84_07.pdf [pdf 35 KB] |