| Restrictions | OK |
|---|---|
| Jurisdiction | Employment Relations Authority - Auckland |
| Reference No | AA 175/07 |
| Hearing date | 25 May 2007 |
| Determination date | 13 June 2007 |
| Member | R Arthur |
| Representation | S Langton & A Clements ; R McIlraith & G Service |
| Location | Auckland |
| Parties | Manning & 29 Ors v Hewlett Packard NZ Ltd |
| Summary | PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Application for removal to Employment Court – Respondent opposed application - Matter concerned dispute and personal grievance applications - Whether respondent could stop paying superannuation contributions and withdraw Retirement Plan (“Plan”) without compensating applicant employees for loss of contributions – At issue was whether parties arrangements regarding Plan and contributions amounted to condition of employment and, if so, extent of obligation created where such condition not express contractual term – Also at issue was what phrase “change and modify”, used in documentation about Plan, allowed respondent to do – Both questions not simply of fact but law, and did not need to be novel or complex – Rather, statutory test of importance required answers to questions to be decisive or strongly influential of matter, as they plainly were in present case - Authority satisfied questions of law more than incidental to case – Questions really what case all about – Answers important not only on outcome for parties, but also for employment law generally – Also, issue of making changes to employer-provided superannuation schemes had heightened interest beyond immediate parties – Introduction of KiwiSaver scheme likely to result in many workers and employers looking at changes, modification or closure of existing arrangements – With so much at stake would inevitably be disputes – Whatever guidance Court could give on how to approach provisions for change or modification would be of keen interest – No good and sufficient reasons to exercise discretion not to order removal – Removal ordered |
| Result | Application granted ; Removal ordered ; No order for costs |
| Main Category | Practice & Procedure |
| Statutes | ERA s103(1)(b);ERA s178(2)(a) |
| Cases Cited | ANZ National Bank Ltd v Doidge unreported, Colgan J, 1 August 2005, AC 4/05;Andrew v Commissioner of Police unreported, Colgan J, 31 July 2003, CC 21A/03;Auckland District Health Board v X unreported, Colgan J, 29 June 2005, AC 33/05;Cuttriss v Carter Holt Harvey Ltd [2007] ERNZ 233;Hanlon v International Educational Foundation (NZ) Inc [1995] 1 ERNZ 1;McAlister v Air New Zealand unreported, Shaw J, 11 May 2005, AC 22/05 |
| Number of Pages | 6 |
| PDF File Link: | aa 175_07.pdf [pdf 25 KB] |